2001 - James McEvoy - Narrative or History. A False Dilemma. The Theological Significance of the...

7/27/2019 2001 - James McEvoy - Narrative or History. A False Dilemma. The Theological Significance of the Historical Jesus

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2001-james-mcevoy-narrative-or-history-a-false-dilemma-the-theological 1/20

http://paa.sagepub.com/ Theological StudiesPacifica: Australasian

http://paa.sagepub.com/content/14/3/262The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/1030570X0101400302

2001 14: 262Pacifica

James McEvoythe Historical Jesus

A False Dilemma : The Theological Significance of−−Narrative or History?

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Pacifica: Australasian Theological Studies Additional services and information for

http://paa.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://paa.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?

- Oct 1, 2001Version of Record>>

by guest on February 9, 2013paa.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://paa.sagepub.com/



http://paa.sagepub.com/content/14/3/262


http://www.sagepublications.com/

http://paa.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts


http://paa.sagepub.com/subscriptions


http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav


http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml


http://paa.sagepub.com/content/14/3/262.full.pdf







http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav




http://www.sagepublications.com/





2 6 2 P A C I F I C A 1 4 ( O C T O B E R 2 0 0 1)

Narrative or History? - A False DilemmaThe Theo log ical Significance of th e Historical Jesus

J a m e s M c E v o y

Abstrac t : The twen t ie th cen tu ry saw a par ad i gm sh if t in ch r is to logy f rom achr is to logy determined by the termino logy o f the Chalcedon ian doct r ine toone wi t h a focus on Jesus in the con tex t of h is t ime. A com m on un de rstanding of the theological significance of the historical Jesus, however, isyet to be ach ieve d . In the las t de ca de th ree scho lars — Wi l l iam L o ew e ,B r e n d a n B y r n e a n d L u k e T i m o t h y J o h n s o n - h a v e a r g u e d t h a t t h ehisto rical Jesus ha s l im ited theologica l significance. This art icle exam inest h e w a y i n w h i c h t h e s e a u t h o r s u n d e r s t a n d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e nn a r r a t i v e a n d h i s t o r y a n d a r g u e s f o r a n i n t e r p r e t i v e v i e w o f t h a tre la t i onsh ip . Th e v iew s o f Loew e, Byrne and Johnson are cr i t iqued f romth is perspect ive .

IN THE EARLY 1980S I joined a group of keen individuals to studyEdward Schi l lebeeckx 's newly publ ished Jesus: An Experiment inChristology. It was my first serious encounter with historical Jesusstud ies an d it pro ve d to be significant for both m y sp iritual life and m ylife as a pa sto r and prea che r. Jesus leapt off the pa ge for m e in a waythat he ha dn 't before. Th rou gh Schillebeeckx's account of Jesus ' mea ls,for exam ple, I had to consider m eals as more th an just a daily necessity;they had greater significance than might appear from the occasionalreferenc es afforded them in the gosp els. Ac cording to Schillebeeckx,Jesus' me als com mu nicated both his character - Jesus' dealings withpeople liberate them and make them glad 1

- and his me ssage: M eal-sha ring in fellowship...is a fund am ental trait of the historical Jesus. Inthat way Jesus shows himself to be God's eschatological messenger,conveying the news of God's invitation to all...to attend the peaceful

*I w ou ld l ike to th an k Denis Ed w ar ds an d Beth Prior for fruitful c onve rsatio ns abou t th isissue and a lso the fo l lowing who responded to an ear l ier d raf t : S tephen Downs, AndrewDutney , Lorna Hal lahan , Bernadet te Ki ley , Kathy McEvoy , Ph i l ip Marshal l and MichaelT ra in o r . My th an k s a l so to Pacifica s rev iewers , par t icu lar ly to Brendan Byrne, fo r h isg rac io u s r e sp o n se to m y a rg u m en t

1. Ed w ar d Schil lebeeckx, Jesus: An Experiment in Christology (New Y ork : The SeaburyPress , 1979) 200.







M C E V O Y : N A R R A T I V E O R H I S T O R Y ? 2 6 3

occasion of God's rule.2 W hen studied against the back grou nd of

Jesus' life and time, what had previously seemed passing references in

the gospels added an extraordinary richness to the understanding ofJesus. Schillebeeckx's historical study situated Jesus against a background which was assumed by the gospel writers but which, throughdistance from Jesu s' wo rld, was not mine and n ot imm ediately availableto me. And m ore than simply increasing my know ledge of the patternof life in first-century Palestine, or adding detail to an already-formedimage of Jesus, Schillebeeckx's stud y of Jesu s' mea ls took m e to the hea rtof the matter - a renew ed and d eeper un ders tand ing of the mean ing ofJesus ' life. In turn, my new un der stand ing of Jesus ' meals brou ght

about a m uch richer read ing of the gospels.Schillebeeckx's Jesus is one contribution to a m ovem ent that John

Galvin rega rds as a para digm shift in Roman Catholic theology .3 Alsocontributing to this shift in the 1970s we re, amo ngst o thers, Karl Rahn er,W alter Kasper and H ans Kün g.4 Their attention to the Jesus of historystrongly contrasts with the christology of the first two thirds of thecentury, which was narrowly focussed on the content and implicationsof the doctrine of the early ecumenical councils, with an almostexclusive stress on the divinity of Chr ist.5 Some prom inent theologians

of this earlier period, such as Karl Ad am and R om ano Gu ardin i, urge d agreater emphasis on the humanity of Christ, but, according to Galvin,this emphasis was taken up in earnest only during the 1950s and 60swith the debate about the knowledge and self-consciousness of Christ.6

Yet even in that extensive debate, the terminology employed was speculative rather than historical - using philosophical concepts to articulatethe l imited nature of Jesus ' hu m an kno wled ge. Galvin summ arises:

Even the more innovative Catholic dogmatic theology of this periodnot only affirmed the dogma of Chalcedon but also took the

terminology of that council - one person, two natures - as the referencepoint for its own further reflections on Christological topics. 7

With the works of Schillebeeckx, Rahner, Kasper and others in the1970s, the em pha sis moved from philosophical discussion abou t C hrist's

2. Schillebeeck x, Jesus, 218.

3. John Galvin , Fro m the Hu m an ity of Chr ist to the Jesus of History: A Pa rad igm Shiftin Catho l ic Chr is to logy , Theological Studies 55 (1994) 252-73.

4. Kar l Rahn er , Fou ndations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity

(London: Dar ton , Lo ngm an & Tod d , 1978) ; Wa l ter Kaspe r , Jesus the Christ (Mah w ah , N Y :

Pau kst P re ss , 1976); Ha ns K üng , On Being a Christian (Lond on: Coll ins, 1977).5. While theo log ians o f th is per iod we re no do ub t o r tho dox in thei r af f i rmat ion o f the

Cha lcedon ian creed (Chr is t bein g fu lly h um an a nd fu lly d iv ine ) , Galv in po in t s ou t that thefull reali ty of Jesu s ' hu m an ity w as n eglec ted.

6 . See , fo r exam ple: Kar l Rahner , Do gm at ic Ref lections on the Kn ow ledg e an d Self-co n sc io u sn ess o f C h r i s t , Theological Investigations Volume 5: Later Writings (L o n d o n :Da r ton , Long ma n & To dd , 1966) 193-215; an d Ra ym on d E . Bro wn, Jesus God and Man

(London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1968).

7 . Galvin , Fro m the Hu m an ity of Chris t , 253-4.by guest on February 9, 2013paa.sagepub.comDownloaded from






2 6 4 P A C I F I C A 1 4 ( O C T O B E R 2 0 01 )

human na ture to a focus on Jesus in the con tex t o f h is t ime - the

h is to r ica l Jesus . In th is ne w pa rad igm , the Ch a lcedo nian doc t r ine of one

pe rso n an d tw o na tu re s i s s ti ll a f f i rmed , ye t the f i f th -cen tury te r m in

o logy no longer governs the deba te .

S ince the 1970s , resea rch in to the h is to r ica l Jesus has p roceeded a t

such a pace tha t keep ing up w i th ne w pub l ica t ions in the fie ld w ou ld be

more tha n a fu l l - t ime oc c upa t ion . 8 T he cease less act iv i ty of b ibl ica l

scho la rs and the incorpora t ion of the i r work by sys temat ic theo log ians

ra ises the impor tan t ques t ion : What s ign i f icance does the tu rn to the

his torica l Jesu s ha ve for chris tolo gy? M y ar gu m en t in th is essay is that

the turn to the his torical Jesus is of crucia l s ignif icance for chris tology.

Put ra the r ba ld ly : the pe rson and work of Jesus i s a t the ve ry hear t o f

Ch r is t ian fa i th . Ch r is t ia ns c la im tha t in th is pa r t icu la r pe rso n Go d is

defin itively re ve ale d. If Je su s ' l ife rev eal s G od , faith in th e G od of Jesu s

Chris t must be in t imately connected with the facts of h is l i fe - a t leas t

his m ess ag e and m an ne r of l ife ( to use Schil lebeeckx 's ph rase ) . T hr ou gh

a t tend ing to the pa t te rn o f Jesus ' l i fe we come to unders tand wha t God

is l ike . M y earl ier exa m ple of Schil lebeeckx 's portr aya l of Jesus ' me als is

useful here . Not only does Schil lebeeckx 's account of Jesus ' meals bring

us a c lea re r v is ion of Jesus ' charac te r and message , i t a l so b r ings us

closer to the G od of Jesus Ch ris t as a ge ne ro us host , ope n to s inn ers . In

th e f ina l sec t ion of th is essay I w an t to a r gu e tha t a t t en d i ng to the

pa tte rn of Jesu s ' l ife requ ires an his torical s tu dy .

The s ign i f icance of h is to r ica l Jesus resea rch fo r chr is to logy is re

in forced by deve lopments in modern b ib l ica l exeges is . The chr is to logy

of the ea r ly pa r t o f the twent ie th cen tury re l ied on s ta tements such as

tho se in Jo hn 's Go spe l I and the Fa the r a re on e (10 :30) and no one

com es to the Fa ther , bu t by m e (14 :6) to es tab l ish the found a t ion s o f

Chr i s to log ic a l doc t r ine . The s e ke y J oha nn ine s t a t e me n ts we re unde r

s tood by theologians of that earl ier period as express ions of Jesus ' ownunde rs ta nd ing o f h i s p re a c h ing , he a l ings a nd mi ra c le s , a nd a l s o a s

exp ress io ns of h is un de rs ta nd in g of h is sa lv i fic charac te r . A p ers on 's

se l f -un ders tan d ing is cen t ral to any ade qua te por t raya l of the pe rson . In

the wo rd s of the c on te mp ora ry ph i lo s op he r Cha r le s Ta y lo r, hu m a n s a re

se l f -de f in ing an imals . 9 T h e w a y i n w h i c h w e u n d e r s t a n d o u r s e l v e s

s ha pe s bo th ou r ow n hum a n i t y a nd the wo r ld a roun d u s . Bu t mo de rn

8. A few of the major w or ks on the historical Jesus in the last twe nty yea rs are: Ben F.

Mey er , The Aims of Jesus (London: SCM Press, 1979); Marcus Borg, Jesus a New Vision (SanFrancisco : Har pe r & Row, 1987); John Dom in ic Cross an , Th e H istorical Jesu s: The L ife of a

Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (N ew York : Ha rper San Fra ncis co , 1991); John P . Meier , A

Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus: Volume One: The Roots of the Problem and thePerson (N ew York: Do uble day , 1991); John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical

Jesus: Volume Two: Mentor, Message, and Miracles (N ew York : Do ubl eda y , 1994) ; N. T .Wr ig h t , Jesus and the Victory of God (London: SPCK, 1996).

9 . Cha r les Tay lo r , In terp re ta t ion and the Sciences o f Ma n , Philosophy and the Human

Sciences: P hilosophical Papers 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge Universi ty Press, 1985) 15-57.








biblical scholars warn against ascribing to the historical Jesus statementssuch as those quoted above, arguing that Jesus preached the kingdom

and not himself and that these statements reflect more the theology ofthe Johann ine autho r than the actual preaching of Jesus.10 If we take this

finding of biblical scholarship seriously, we need to seek the foundationof Christological doc trine in the imp licit chr istology of Jes us ' life. Ingeneral term s this mea ns exploring the link betw een th e perso n of Jesusand his proclamation of the kingdom of God in word and deed .

11 And

that is precisely the task for christology envisaged by Schillebeeckx andothers.

CAUTIONARY ADVICE

Change on the scale of a paradigm shift inevitably produces difficulties - som etimes ch aos. So, even tho ug h research into the historicalJesus has given rise to a rich and extensive body of theologicalreflection, it is hardly surprising that some theologians and biblicalscholars warn about the dangers of simply replacing an emphasis on thehu m anity of Christ with an em pha sis on the historical Jesus. T hey arg uethat there are problems inherent in the quest for the historical Jesus,particularly in the way its findings are incorporated into christology.This is the issue of the theological significance of the historical Jesus.David Tracy and Elizabeth Johnson addressed it nearly two decadesago,

12 and in the last couple of years it has been taken up with renewedvigour by three scholars: William Loewe, Brendan Byrne and LukeTimo thy Johnson. It is to their cautionary voices that I now turn .

WILLIAM LOEWE

In a recent article in Theological Studies13 Loewe concurs with G alvin's

judgem ent tha t there has been a para digm shift in Catholic christologyand arg ues that the theological significance of the historical Jesus is nowa partic ularly acu te issue for two reaso ns. First, since its inception in1985, the Jesus Sem inar has successfully attracted bro ad pub lic interestthrou gh a strong me dia cam paign. Foun ded by Robert Funk and agroup of North American scholars , the seminar drew part icularattention to itself by its use of variously coloured marbles to vote on theauthenticity of the sayings of Jesus.14 Loew e fears that the Jesus Seminar

10 . Galvin, Fro m the Hu m ani ty of Chr is t , 262-66.11 . Galvin, From the Hu m ani ty of Chr is t , 263.12 . Dav id Tracy, The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism

( L o n d o n : SCM Pr e s s , 1981) from p. 238 passim; E l i zabe th Johnson , 'The Theolog i ca lRelevance of the Historic al Jesus: A Deba te and a Thes i s , Thomist 48 (1984) 1-43.

13 . Wil l iam P . Loew e, From the Hu m ani ty of Chr is t to the Histor ical Jesus , TheologicalStudies 61 (2000) 314-31.

14. An acco unt of the wor k of the Jesus Sem inar can be found i t i t s journ al , Foundationsand Facets Forum. For cri t iques of the sem ina r see N. T. W right , Jesus and the V ictory of God ,








may fol low the success of i ts media campaign with success in i ts s ta ted

a im o f s e pa ra t ing J e s us f rom s c r ip tu ra l a nd c re da l unde rs t a nd ings o f

h im, w i th the e nd re s u l t o f ma k ing h i s to r i c a l r e c ons t ruc t ions the

m e a s u re of pop u la r un de rs t a nd ings of J e s us .1 5 Secondly, whereas i t was

po ss ib le in the early 1980s to speak ac curate ly a bo ut the co ns en sus of

b ib l i c a l e xe ge te s on J e s us ' me s s a ge a nd pe r s on , tha t c ons e ns us ha s

co l lapsed .1 6 The wide range of his torical images of Jesus on offer from

s c h o l a r s n o w i n c l u d e s t h e w o n d e r - w o r k i n g c h a r i sm a t i c hasid the

e s c ha to lo g ic a l p ro ph e t , t he J e w is h s a ge , the h ipp ie - l ik e w a n de r in g

peasan t Cynic , one who combines and exceeds the ro les o f E l i jah- l ike

prophe t , teacher o f Torah , and wonder-worker , e tc .1 7

So, un de r a t tack

from th e Jesus Seminar , and w i th a sm orga sbord of com pet ing im ages of

the h is to r ica l Jesus , Loewe a rgues tha t theo log ians mus t cons ider wha t

significance the historical Jesus has for christology.

To f rame the ques t ion about theo log ica l s ign i f icance , Loewe re fe rs

back to the deba te be tween David Tracy and El izabe th Johnson in the

early 1980s . Tracy argues in The Analogical Imagination that the historical

Jesus has l imited theological s ignif icance for chris tology. The event and

person of Jesus is normative for the Chris t ian tradit ion, he says , but that

e ve n t oc c u rs in the p re s e n t th r ou gh the m e d ia t ion of the c om mu n i ty

founded on the o r ig ina l apos to l ic wi tness to tha t even t .

1 8

T h e n o r man d foun da t io n of chr is to logy , then , i s the Jesus rem em be red by the

t r a d i t i o n a n d c o m m u n i t y a s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f G o d ' s o w n p r e s e n c e

a m o n g u s .1 9

For Trac y, c la im s tha t the his torical Jesus is the no rm for

the tradit i on are confused . In his w or ds : The 'h is torical Jesu s ' is a t bes t

a r e l a t ive ly e x te rna l a nd s e c onda ry c r i t e r ion o f a pp rop r ia t e ne s s fo r

c e r t a in ne c e s s a ry a s s umpt ions o r p re s uppos i t ions o f tha t w i tne s s to

Jesus . 2 0 H e is s im ply pre pa re d to gra nt that , in th is secon dary function,

his torical Jesus resea rch is useful as a con tem po rar y theological w ay to

ke e p a l ive a nd re fo rmu la te the ' d a nge rous ' o r ' s ubve rs ive ' me mory o fJesus for the present community in f idel i ty to the original Jesus-kerygma

a nd Chr i s t -ke ry gm a of the s c r ip tu ra l c om mu n i t i e s . 2 1

In a 1984 a r t ic le pub l ished in The Thomist, J o h n s o n r e s p o n d e d t o

Tracy 's s tance on the theological s ignif icance of the his torical Jesus . 2 2

Agains t Tracy 's po in t about the h is to r ica l Jesus be ing the wrong norm

for chr is to logy , Johnson a rgues tha t the New Tes tament concerns i t se l f

29-35; L u k e T im o th y Jo h n so n , The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Histoncal Jesus and

the Truth of the Traditional G ospels (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 19%) 1-80.15 . Loe we , Fro m the Hu m an ity of Chris t , 317-18.16 . Loe we , Fro m the Hu m an ity of Chris t , 324-26.

17 . Loewe , From the Hu ma ni ty of Chr is t , 330-31.

18 . Loewe , From the Hu ma ni ty of Chr is t , 320.19 . Tracy , The Analogical Imagination, 239.20. T racy , The Analogical Imagination, 238.21. Tracy , The Analogical Imagination, 239.

22. Johnson , 'Theo log ica l Relevance .







M C E V O Y : N A R R A T I V E O R H I S T O R Y ? 2 67

with the his tory of Jesus as one of the cri ter ia of i ts own validi ty , and

theref ore theolo gy sho uld fa ithful ly d o l ikew ise . 2 3 Johnson a rgues tha t

because the Church confesses Jesus as the Chris t , the his torical Jesus istheological ly s ignif icant . She sum m ari ses her posi t ion in a thes is :

The recons t ruc ted image of the h is to r ica l Jesus no t on ly func t ions

today as the equ iva len t o f the memory impress ion of Jesus in the

early Ch urc h, bu t ac tual ly is the equi vale nt of i t, i .e . is the m ea ns by

which s ign i f ican t segments o f the p resen t genera t ion of be l ievers

rem em be r Jesus w h o is confessed as the Ch r is t . As such , i t i s an

element of the l iv ing tradit ion of the present Church. 2 4

Joh nso n su m m ar ise s the functions of his torical Jesu s resea rch. Firs t ,

h is to r ica l knowledge has a l ready en te red in to be l ievers ' fa i th - image of

Jesus . Secon dly , h is to r ica l kn ow led ge has a c r it ica l func t ion w he n i t

p u r i f i e s t h e C h u r c h ' s f a i t h -i m a g e o f J e s u s f r o m i d e o l o g i c a l m a n i p

u la t ion . A nd th i rd ly , the g r ow th in h is to r ica l un de rs ta nd in g of Jesus

coun te rs the doce tic im pul se in the Chr is t ian com m uni ty , wh ere Jesus i s

t rea ted as a m ytho log i ca l o r ideo log ica l f igure , an d the sha pe of h is

hu m an i ty i s reg ard ed as pe r iph era l to h is iden t i ty .2 5

In the context of the s trong influence of the Jesus Seminar and the

co l lapse o f the exege t ica l consensus about Jesus ' message and person ,

Loewe s tands wi th Tracy , a rgu ing tha t Johnson 's c la im for the s ign i f i

cance of the h is to r ica l Jesus i s p rob lemat ic . 2 6 Fo r Lo e w e i t i s p r ob

lematic , in f irs t ins tance, because the apostol ic witness , ra ther than the

his torical Jesus , pr ov id es the no rm for fa i th . I t is further pro ble m atic in

tha t h is to r y i s such a com plex ac t iv i ty . In respe c t to Jesus , h is to ry

inc ludes (a ) loca t ing re levan t sources , (b ) ex t r ica t ing fac ts f rom these

sources , and (c) se t t l ing on an his torical ly in te l l ig ible image of Jesus

from t he facts so ascert a ined . Lo ew e p ut s it th is wa y:

' T h e his torical Jesus th us refers to a com plex construct that res ts ona se t o f more o r le ss p robab le judgements about which sources a re

r e l e v a n t a n d t o w h a t d e g r e e . F o l l o w i n g u p o n t h o s e j u d g e m e n t s

the re fo l lows a no the r s e t , e a c h one a ga in o f g re a te r o r l e s s e r

p roba b i l i ty , de te rm in in g wh a t J e s us a c tua lly s a id a nd d id . Th os e

j u d g e m e n t s i n t u r n s u p p l y t h e d a t a f o r y e t a n o t h e r j u d g e m e n t

concern ing which image or images bes t render the fac ts cons t i tu ted

by the second se t of ju dg em en ts his torical ly in te l l ig ible .2 7

23. Loewe , From the Hu ma ni ty o f Chr is t , 322; Johnson , 'Theo lo g ical Relevance , 19.

24. Loewe, From the Hu ma ni ty o f Chr is t , 322 ; Johnson , 'Theo log ical Relevance , 25 .25 . Loew e, Fro m the Hu m an ity of Chris t , 323; Johns on, Theological Relev ance , 32

34.

26. Loewe, From the Hu ma ni ty of Chr is t , 327.27. Loew e, From the Hu m an ity of Chris t , 328-29.








Because of this complexity, Loewe argues, the historical Jesus is toofragile and tenuous a construction to be the foundation of Christianfaith.

In assess ing th e theological significance of the historical Jesus, Loew econcludes with Tracy that due to the nature of both faith and history,

The historical Jesus ' consti tutes neither the ground nor basis forChristian faith, nor is it the norm for faith. 28 He add s, however, thatthe historical Jesus and the Christ of faith are not disp arate realities andthat w he n historical Jesus constructs are dr aw n into the horizon of faith,

these historical images and narratives may provide the material fornew christological symbols...disclosive of both Jesus' status as God'sself-presence in the present and of the values inherent in the faith respon se to this Jesus the Christ .29 The re may, therefore, be some use forhistorical Jesus research, says Loewe, but 'th e historical Jesus' is neitherthe founda tion of christology nor its prim ary norm .

30

In the conc luding section of this essay I will addre ss the tw o p rima ryarg um en ts offered by Loew e to supp ort h is judg em ent tha t the historicalJesus has limited theological significance: first, that the apostolicwitness, not the historical Jesus, is normative for Christian faith; andsecondly, that the historical Jesus is too fragile and tenuous to be the

foundation of Christian faith.

BRENDAN BYRNE

Byrne addresses the issue of the theological significance of thehistorical Jesu s in an article in this journ al entitled Go spel N arra tiveand the Jesus of History: Where Should Christology Begin? 31 In thisarticle Byrne strives to hold two things in tension: he both values thenarrative nature of the gospels and at the same time recognises that thegospel narra tives point to some thing beyond them selves. Add ressing

the question: to w hat extent does the truth m ediated by the gospelsdepend upon the veracity of the history they appear to describe? 32 hevery cautiously respon ds, a bit, but not m uch .

33 In amplifying this

res po nse Byrn e says tha t this bit of history is essential, and he thenoffers seven principles for understanding the relat ionship betweenhistory and the gospel narrative.

As the start ing point of his argument, Byrne draws the reader 'sattention to a central line of thought in Hans Frei's The Eclipse of Biblical

28. Loe we , Fro m the H um an ity of Chris t , 329-30.

29. Loewe , From the Hu ma ni ty o f Chr is t , 330.

30. Loew e, From the Hu ma ni ty o f Chr is t , 331 .31. Gos pel Na rra t ive and the Jesus o f His to ry : W here Shou ld Chr is to logy Beg in? ,

Pacifica 13 (2000) 49-66;

32. Byrne, Gosp el Na rra t iv e , 56 .

33. Byrne, Gosp el Na rra t ive , 59 .







Mdü v oY : N A R R A T I V E O R H I S T O R Y ? 2 6 9

Narrative.34 According to Frei, biblical interpretation has been mis

shapen as a result of the preoccupation of the Enlightenment with

history. W hereas previously no strong dist inction had been ma debetween the meaning of a biblical text and its historical reference,following the Enlightenm ent, me aning and historical reference w eredistinguished in such a way that the latter became the measure of theformer: the question as to whether the events reported in biblical narratives really hap pe ned or not now entered essentially into the assessment of meaning .35 An d in Frei's view this is a major error bec ause itfails to respect the fundamentally narrative nature of the biblical text.Byrne summ arises:

The error in all this for Frei is the failure to discern that, whilebiblical narratives such as the gospels can be, and in fact are

history-like , this does not imply that their meaningfulness in aliteral sense de pe nd s up on their historical veracity. History-likenarratives have a meaning of their own that is simply irreducible tosomething beyond themselves - whether that something be anabstract idea or a particular historical reference.36

In the context of Frei 's narrat ive approach, Byrne proposes twocrucial questions about the relationship of history and na rrative: (1) To

what extent does the truth mediated by the gospels depend upon theveracity of the h istory they ap pe ar to describe?... [and] (2) To w ha textent should historical-critical reconstruction of the 'facts' concerningJesus bear upon theology?

37 In answer to these questions Byrne refers

to w orks by Da vid Kelsey and Francis W atson and argues that the biblical narrative cannot be understood as entirely self-referential. 38 Thebiblical nar rative po ints to a w orld bey ond the text and the reality ofthat world or certain events in it can reasonably be said to affect thetruth of the narrative .39

Byrne holds, therefore, to the narrative nature of the gospels whilerecognising that they cannot be separa ted from history. But how doeshe conceive of tha t relation ship? T o the first que stion qu ote d in thepa rag rap h above, Byrne replies a bit, but not mu ch .4 0 Given hiscriticism of Frei for neglecting the historical reference of the biblical text,Byrne 's a bit bu t not m uch is surprisin g - it seem s to minim ise the

34. Ha ns W. Frei , The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth

Century Hermeneutics (New Haven: Yale Universi ty Press, 1974).

35. Byrne, Gosp el Na rra t iv e , 53 .36. Byrne, Gosp el Na rra t iv e , 53 . Byrne refers to Frei, The Eclipse of iblical Narrative,

11-16.

37. Byrne, Gospe l Na rra t ive , 56 .

38. David Kelsey, The Uses of Scripture in Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975); FrancisW a t s o n , Text, Church and World: Biblical Interpretation in Theo logical Perspe ctive (G ran dRapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994).

39. Byrne, Gospe l Na rra t iv e , 58 .

40. Byrne, Gospel Na rra t ive , 59 .by guest on February 9, 2013paa.sagepub.comDownloaded from






270 PAC IFICA 14 (OCTO BER 2001)

pl ac e of hi sto ry . But if th e real ity of Jes us ' wo rld can affect the tru th of

the narra t ive (and B yrne a rgu es tha t it can) , un de rs ta nd ing the rea li ty of

h i s wor ld a c c u ra te ly wou ld s e e m to ma t t e r more tha n he s ugge s t s .

Jesus ' message, h is manner of l i fe , and his death are not incidenta l to the

gospe l na rra t ives , and unders tand ing them accura te ly requ ires h is to r ica l

inve s t iga t ion , s inc e the gos pe l wr i t e r s a s s ume a ba c kg round wh ic h i s

not ours but is crucia l for accurate in terpre ta t ion - as my early example

of Jesus ' mea ls a t tempts to make c lea r . The reason fo r Byrne 's cau t ion

becomes c learer in the next sect ion of the art ic le - seven principles of

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t e x p r e s s h is u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

be tween the gospe ls and h is to ry .

Byrne 's f i r s t two pr inc ip les o f in te rpre ta t ion enunc ia te the va lues o f

na r r a t ive a nd h i s to ry . In h i s w ord s , 1 . In te rp re ta t ion mus t r e c ogn i s e

an d re spec t the essentia l ly nar ra t ive ge nre of the gospels . . .. 2 . Th eolo gy

c a nn o t be unc o nc e rne d w i th the hu m a n h i s to ry of J e s us of N a z a r e th

s ince the na rra t ive t ru th con ta ined in the four gospe ls , upon which in

the area of chris tology i t principally re l ies , has essentia l reference to the

his torical rea l i ty of Jesus . 4 1 H is th i rd and four th p r inc ip les dea l wi t h

the re l a t ions h ip be tw e e n the s e tw o va lue s a nd he lp the re a de r to un de r

s t a n d h i s p r e v iou s s t a t e m e n t , a b i t, bu t no t m uc h . H e s t a t e s the s e

p r inc ip le s , 3 . But while 'h is tory-l ike ' , the gospels are ' l ikely-his tory ' in

a very re stri cte d sen se th at va rie s gre atly fro m text to text.. .. 4. T he litt le

tha t we do know c onc e rn ing J e s us w i th s ome th ing a pp roa c h ing c e r t i

tude is necessary and suffic ient to es tablish the bas ic credibi l i ty of the

gospels as narra t ives having a t leas t some reference to his tory as part of

the i r e ssen t ia l meaning . 4 2

In the art icula t ion of his th ird and fourth principles we begin to see

w ha t By rne m e a ns by the t e r m h i s to ry . Fo r Byrne , h i s to ry i s ve ry

ha rd to com e by in the gosp e ls . In ampl i fy ing h is four th p r inc ip le , he

says His to r ica l inves t ig a t ion - wh e th er based so le ly up on the gosp e ls

o r up o n e x t ra -c a no n ic a l l i t e ra tu r e be s ide s - c a n no t e s t a b l i s h ve ry

m u c h . 4 3 In the fo l lowing pa ra gr ap h Byrn e wri te s of the scan t res idue

of h i s to ry tha t c a n re l i a b ly be de te c te d be h in d a nd th r ou gh the

gos pe l s .4 4 I t see m s tha t by h is to ry , he re , Byrn e m ea ns even ts , facts o r

loc a ta b le in s ta nc e s , wh ic h c a n be ide n t i f i e d by h i s to r i c a l -c r i t i c a l

methods and separa ted f rom the au thor ' s in te rpre ta t ion of those even ts .

The gospe ls a re ce r ta in ly fu l l o f in format ion about Jesus o f Nazare th ,

bu t , accord ing to Byrne , near ly a l l o f th is i s no t h is to ry , p resumably

be c a us e o f the the o log ic a l in te re s t o f the a u tho r - the a u tho r ' s

in te rpre ta t ion .

41 . Byrne, Gospel Narrative , 60.42. Byrne, Gospel Narrative , 60-61.43. Byrne, Gospel Narrativ e , 61.44. Byrne, Gospel Narrativ e , 61.








I t i s th is v iew of h is to ry as even ts o r p rovab le fac ts tha t governs

By rne 's rep ly a b i t , bu t no t m uc h to the ques t ion : to w ha t ex ten t does

the t ru th me d ia te d by the gos pe l s de pe nd upon the ve ra c i ty o f theh is to ry they appear to desc r ibe? 4 5 Because there is so much in the l i fe

of Jesus and the gospel accounts of that l i fe that cannot be pinned down

to locatab le ins tan ces , By rne argu es that there is l i t tle h is to ry th ere . In

the fina l s e c t ion of my s tud y I w i l l fu r the r e xp lo re Byrn e ' s u n de r

s ta nd in g of h is to ry an d i t s e ffec t on the m in im al is t re l a t io nsh ip he

envisages between the Jesus of his tory and the gospel narra t ives .

LUKE TIMOTHY JOHNSON

What f i rs t s t r ikes the reader o f Luke Timothy Johnson 's wr i t ing on

the his torical Jesus is i ts s tr ident , polemical tone. 4 6 The title of his 1996

b o o k , The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the

Truth of the Traditional Gospels, ensures tha t the po lemic beg ins as ea r ly

as poss ib le : on the du s t jacke t . Even tho ug h h is chap te r pub l ish ed th ree

years la te r i s a l i t t le more gen t le , 4 7 he a s c r ibe s l e s s tha n s a lu b r io us

m otiv es to scholars of the his torical Jesus w hile not eve n quest ion ing hi s

ow n . W hi le one c an s ha re J ohn s on ' s a nnoya nc e , pa r t i c u la r ly w i th the

methods o f the Jesus Seminar , the tone of h is wr i t ing on th is i s sue i s

often u ns av ou ry . Th e result is a t t im es that crucia l theological issues ar e

s ide l ined and m uc h need ed c la r ity los t to the a rg um ent .

J ohns on ' s a rgume n t ha s tw in th ru s t s : he i s a rgu ing bo th against the

the o log ic a l r e l e va nc e o f h i s to r i c a l J e s us r e s e a rc h a nd for h i s o w n

prefe r red m eth od of in te rpr e t in g sc r i p tu re . To take f irst h is pos i t iv e

arg um en t . For Johnson , the resurrec t io n i s c rucia l to un de rs t an d in g the

pe rso n of Jesu s . W ha t he ca l l s the real Jesu s i s no t the p ro du c t o f

h is to r ica l recons t ruc t ion - the real Jesu s is Jesus r is en .4 8 In J oh ns o n ' s

words ,

Chris t ianity based i tse lf on bel ief in the resurrect ion, which means

that the response of faith is directed not to a set of facts about a man

of the pas t who had d ied bu t to a pe rson who had en te red in to the

l ife of God so ful ly that he continues to be present as l i fe-giving

spir i t .4 9

45. Byrne , Gos pel Na rra t ive , 59.46 . Luke T imo thy Johnson , The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and

the Truth of the Traditional Gospels (Ne w York : HarperSanFranc i sco , 19% ) ; Luke T imo thyJohnson , Ima gin ing t he W or ld Scr ip tu re Ima gines , Modern Theology 14 (1998) 165-180;L u k e T i m o t h y J o h n s o n , T h e H u m a n i t y of Jesus : What 's a t S take in the Quest for theHistor ical Jesus , in John Dom inic Crossan , Luk e Tim othy Johnson , an d W erner H. Kelber ,The Jesus Controversy: Perspectives in Conflict (ed . Gera ld P . McK enny; Ha r r i sb urg , PA:Trini ty P ress Internat io nal , 1999) 48-74.

47. Johnson , The Hu ma ni ty of Jesus .48. Johnson , T he Real Jesus, 133-40.49 . Johnson , The Hu ma ni ty of Jesus , 69.







272 PAC IFICA 14 (OCTO BER 2001)

The e xpe r ie nc e of the r e s u r re c t ion ha s s ha p e d the Chu rc h ' s m e m ory

of Jesus . A nd in tu r n , the C hu rc h 's m em ory of Jesus ha s been recor ded

in the Ch r is t ian sc r i p tu res , bo th the gos pe l s an d the le t te rs . So , for

Johnso n , correc t ly un de rs t an d in g the sc r ip tu res requ ire s a l i te ra ry ra the r

than an h is to r ica l s tudy in o rder to ge t to the fa i th exper ience o f the

ear ly com m un i ty . H e pu t s it th is w ay: 'T h i s por t ray a l of Jesus .. .i s found

in the gos pe l s , no t in the ind iv idua l s a y ings a nd s to r i e s bu t in the i r

na rra t iv e sh ap in g as suc h. I t is an im ag e of Jesus tha t is access ible no t

t h r o u g h h i s t o r i c a l a n a l y s i s , b u t t h r o u g h l i t e r a r y a n d r e l i g i o u s

a p p r e h e n s i o n . 5 0 J o h n s o n ' s real Jesus is no t s imply a f igure of the pa s t

but very much and above a l l a f igure of the present ,5 1

alive in the faith-

exper ience o f the con tem por ary com m uni t y o f h is fo l lowers .

Next , cons ider Johnson 's a rgument aga ins t the theo log ica l re levance

of research into the his torical Jesus . To se t the direct ion of his chapter ,

'T h e H um a n i ty of J e s us , J ohns on a s ks w ha t m o t iva te s r e s e a rc h in to the

h is to r ica l Jesus . H e la nd s on the ans w er : th e convic t io n tha t Jesus '

hu m an i ty i s in som e fash ion or o ther norm at ive for Chr is t ian iden t i ty . 5 2

Ce rta inly th is convic t ion is centra l to Ch ris t ian fa i th , and Johns on arg ues

tha t in h is ow n pos i t ion (wh ich I ha ve ske tched in the pa rag rap h above)

i t is tak en seriou sly . In con tras t to his ow n s tance, how eve r, he says that

Chris t ian scholars of the his torical Jesus art icula te the convic t ion in th is

w ay : w h a t Jesus sa id and d id before h is dea th , ind eed h is v is ion of

rea l i ty , i s normat ive fo r Chr is t ians because in those words and ac t ions

a n d p e r c e p t i o n s G o d w a s e x p r e s s i n g t h e n o r m fo r h u m a n l if e .5 3

Johnson correc t ly adds tha t th is i s a t rad i t iona l way of express ing the

doctr ine of the incarnation, but he says that what se ts Chris t ian scholars

of the his torical Jesus on their qu est is the ju dg em en t th at the gospels a re

in ad eq ua te his torical sour ces for the ' rea l Jes us ' ra th er tha n being seen

as w i tne sse s an d in te rpre ta t io ns of h i m in the l igh t of fa i th .5 4 Those

w ho pu rs ue the pa th of h is to ry , then , a t tem pt to ge t be h in d the gospe l

acco unt s to the facts of the m atte r .

This is the nub of Johnson 's cr i t ique of his torical Jesus s tudies , and

the re seem to be four s tep s . Firs t, tha t h istorical Jesus scholars jud ge the

gos pe ls to be in ad eq ua te h is to r ica l sources . Secondly , they d isca rd th e

na rra t iv e fram ew ork of the go spe ls as the pa t ter n of Jesu s ' l ife. Th irdly ,

us ing his torical-cri t ica l methods they dis t i l l h is torical fac ts from ins ider

an d ou t s ide r sources . A nd four th ly , they recon s t ruc t a h is to ry of Jesus

from the g round up us ing the d is t i l led fac ts . Johnson a rgues tha t once

the narra t ive s tructure of the gospels is d iscarded, the pieces can be put

to ge th e r in a ny nu m be r of w a y s , a n d the m e a n in g of J e s us ' l if e

50. Johnson, The Hum anity of Jesus , 72.51 . Johnson, The Real Jesus, 142.52. Johnson, The Hum anity of Jesus , 66.53. Johnson, The Hum anity of Jesus , 67.54. Johnson, The Hum anity of Jesus , 67.








witnessed to by the ea r ly communi ty i s los t .5 5 He n c e , he a rg ue s tha t

his torical Jesus s tud ies ha ve no theological s ignificance.

Th e r e i s a de g re e of ov e rs t a t e m e n t a nd c o n fus ion in s e ve ra l of

Joh nso n 's po in ts . For exam ple , the c la im tha t scho la rs of the h is to r ica l

Jesus reg ard the gosp e ls as ina de qu a te h is to r ica l sou rce s i s c ru de . I t

neg lec ts the va lue o f exp lor ing the background of Jesus ' l i fe and t ime ,

an d mis rep res en t s the a t t i t ud e of scho la rs to the gos pe ls . I t a lso doe s

no t a c c u ra te ly a c c oun t fo r the a t t e n t ion the gos pe l s r e c e ive f rom

his torical Jesus scholars , most of whom mine them as his torical sources .

Howe ve r , the c ruc ia l i s s ue wh ic h gove rns J ohns on ' s judge me n t a bou t

h i s to r i c a l J e s us r e s e a rc h i s h i s c onc e p t o f h i s to ry - a s w i th the

contr ibu t ions o f bo th Loewe and Byrne . Johnson con tras ts h is to ry wi th

na r ra t ive , a nd unde rs ta nds h i s to ry a s the p rova b le e ve n t s o r f a c t s

d is t i l led f rom bo th the gosp e l na r ra t i ve and o u ts id e r sources - w hic h

facts bec om e the bas is of h is torical reconstr uct io n. H e say s of the w or k

of histo rical Jesu s sch ola rs: H ist or y is p u t in serv ice of th e sea rch for a

pu re r e ve la t ion . 5 6 J ohns o n a rgue s tha t th i s c on t ra s t be tw e e n h i s to ry

and na rra t ive is pre sen t in the w or k of his torical Jesus scholars and do es

not a rgu e aga ins t th is un der s ta nd ing of h is to ry .

I t would be mis lead ing to charac te r ise Johnson 's v iew of h is to ry as

entire ly focu ssed on bru te facts - tha t is , as entire ly em piric is t . 5 7 In The

Real Jesus J o h n s o n a r g u e s a t l e n g t h t h a t h i s t o r y i s a l w a y s a n

in te rpre t ive ac t iv i ty . 5 8 T w o c ha p te r s - The L im i ta t ions of H is to ry

and W ha t ' s His to r ica l A bou t Jesus? - a re g iven over to deve lop in g h is

un de rs t an d i ng of h is to ry an d app ly ing i t to Jesus and E ar ly Chr is t ian i ty .

But in these tw o chap te rs , Johnso n swin gs f requent ly b e tw een a n in t e r

pre t ive an d an em piric is t v iew of his tory , often on the sa m e pa ge . For

e xa m ple , ha v ing s t a t e d tha t h i s to ry is in te rp re t ive , in the fo l lowing

pa ra gr ap h John son a rgu es tha t h is to ry m isses a g rea t dea l o f w ha t i s

m os t p rop e r ly h um a n , th ing s l ike a l i e na t ion a nd fo rg ive ne ss , c om pa s

s ion a nd de s pa i r , me a n ing a nd va lue , love a nd hope . 5 9 T h e s e are the

grea t themes of human ex is tence and wi thout them an account o f Jesus '

lif e w ou ld be m ind l e s s . W hy , the n , doe s J ohns o n a rgu e tha t h i s to ry

misses them ? Pres um ably because they cannot be ver i f ied as facts. A

s e c on d e xa m ple : in h i s c ha p te r , e n t i t l e d W ha t ' s H is to r i c a l Ab ou t

Jesus , Johnson d iscusses Jesus ' hea l ings f rom the perspec t ive o f the

h is to r i an . H e say s tha t w hi l e i t i s pos s ib le to ve r i fy tha t something

ha pp en ed , th er e is no way to verify his torical ly the essentia l c la im of

s uc h s to r i e s , na me ly , tha t i t wa s God ' s powe r me d ia te d th rough J e s us

tha t ef fec ted th e he a l in g . Suc h c la ims s im p ly li e ou t s id e h i s to ry ' s

55 . Johnson , The Real Jesus, 125-6.

56. Johns on, The Hu m an ity of Jesus , 67.

57. A cri t ique of the em piricist v iew of history is dev elo ped in the following section.58 . Johnson , The Real Jesus, 82.

59. Johnson , The Real Jesus, 82.







274 PAC IFICA 14 (OCT OBE R 2001)

competence .60 But theological interpr etatio ns of Jes us' healin gs canonly be ruled to lie outside of history's competence if, in the practice ofhistory, facts are split off from interpretation, particularly theological

interpretation.W hen it com es to judg em ent about historical Jesus research, Johnson,

in 'The Humanity of Jesus , does not pursue or even acknowledge aninter pre tive v iew of history. In the following section of this stud y I willfurther evaluate Johnson's view of historical Jesus research, arguing thatfact an d interpretatio n are always found together in the study of history.

Johnson's literary approach to interpreting the scriptures is not without theological prob lem s of its ow n. Because he make s such a strongdistinction betw een the historical Jesus and th e event of the resurrection ,

Johnson runs the grave risk of undervaluing the incarnation and regarding the resurrection as an event in which Jesus sheds his hum anityto achieve div ine status. Statem ents like the following a ppro ach anado ption ist un de rsta nd ing of the resurrection: after his death heentered into an entirely new form of existence, one in which he sharedthe power of God and in which he could share that power with othersand the resurrection means...the passage of the hu m an Jesus into thepower of God .61 John Galvin rem arks that in statements such as theseit is har d to avoid the impressio n that the earthly Jesus wa s not, in the

words of the Council of Chalcedon, ' truly God and truly man'. 6 2

Faithful a dhe renc e to the Christian creed m eans holding together Jesus'life, dea th an d resurrection rath er than op ting for one over the others.

I now propose to address the arguments of Johnson, Loewe andByrne against the theological significance of the historical Jesus in thelight of an interpretative view of history.

HISTORY INTERPRETATION AN D NARRATIVE

An insight that came to the fore through the Enlightenment was therecognition that history shapes experience. The cultural and politicalwo rld into which a person is bor n not only pro vides a context for action,it also shapes the way in which that person experiences the world andtherefore the w ay in which he or she acts. Exam ples abou nd, but anobv ious and strong illustration concerns the notion of personal iden tity.People in the seventeenth century would speak about identi ty bydescribing their status within the hierarchical structure of the society towh ich they belo nge d. Som eone in our centu ry and society wo uld

almost always speak about identity by describing an inward sense of

60. Johnson, The Real Jesus 110.61 . Johnson, The Real Jesus 134,136.62. John Galvin, Ί Believe...in Jesus Christ, His Only Son, Our Lord': The Earthly Jesus

and the Christ of Faith , nterpretation 50 (19%) 373-82, see p. 380.








self re la t ing tha t sense to wha t they encounte r ou ts ide o f themse lves . 6 3

We go inwa rd to ma ke s e ns e o f wha t i s ou twa rd , whe re a s in e a r l i e r

t ime s a pe rso n 's iden t i ty loca ted th em w i th in a soc ia l h ie ra r chy . Th ischange re f lec ts no t on ly d i f fe ren t unders tand ings o f the word iden t i ty

bu t a lso d i f fe ren t concep t ions o f human agency , and hence d i f fe ren t

ways of experiencing the world .

S inc e h i s to ry s ha pe s e xpe r ie nc e , we c o r re c t ly unde rs t a nd a pe r s on

and tha t pe rson 's words and ac t ions , on ly i f we s i tua te them wi th in the

context of their t ime. 6 4 There wi l l usua l ly be room for a sharper under

s t a nd ing o f tha t pe r s on ' s wor ld a nd he nc e o f the pe r s on h ims e l f o r

herself. But i f we place people in the wrong context , or imagine that we

c a n u n d e r s t a n d t h e m o u t s i d e o f t h e i r c o n t e x t , w e w i l l c e r t a i n l ymis unde rs ta nd the m, u s ua l ly by loc a t ing the m in ou r own c on te x t a nd

ascr ib ing ou r p re ju d ices to the m . Peop le can be correc t ly un de rs to od

on ly a ga in s t the ba c k g r ou nd of the i r w or ld . T o i l lu s t r a t e the p o in t

Ch ar le s Tay lor of fers a s im ple bu t s t r ik ing exam ple : You see a m an

waving h is hands wi ld ly . Then you look c lose r , and you see tha t some

nas ty fl ie s a re sw ar m in g a r ou nd h im . H is ac t ions bec om e in te ll ig ib le

a ga ins t h i s ba c kg roun d . 6 5 Th e fl ies m ay see m a m ere deta i l in the scen e

bu t tha t de ta i l m a k e s the m a n ' s a c tion in te ll ig ib le . A s t r a igh t ja c ke t

found thrown over the back of the man 's chair would lead to an entire lydifferent unders tanding, or a t leas t indicate the need for further enquiry .

Ga da me r ma ke s the s a me po in t a bou t s i tua t ing a pe r s on o r a n e ve n t

w he n he says : I f w e fai l to p lac e our se lv es in th is w ay w i th in t he

h is to r ica l hor izon . . .we sha l l misunders tand the s ign i f icance of wha t i t

has to say to us .6 6

Th e Co unc i l of Ch a lce do n taug ht tha t the pe rso n of Jesus i s t ru ly

G od a nd t ru ly m a n , a n d the re fo re th a t the r i s e n J e s us i s J e s u s of

N aza re t h . For thos e w ho ho ld to th is teach ing and seek to g r as p the

s ign i f icance of Jes us ' l ife , the i r sea r ch can no t be fu l f il led w i t ho uth is to r ica l exp lor a t ion of h is l ife and ba ck gro un d . Th e gos pe ls r eco un t

the l i fe of Jesus agains t the background of f irs t-century Pales t ine , but

because they are wri t ten forty to e ighty years after the death of Jesus , to

a ud ie nc e s tha t s ha r e d ma n y of h i s c u l tu ra l unde rs t a nd ing s , m uc h i s

63. F o r a d ev e lo p e d a rg u m en t ab o u t t h e ch an g in g u n d er s t a n d in g o f i d en t i ty , s eeC h ar l es T ay lo r , In w ard n ess an d th e C u l tu re of Mo d ern i ty , i n A x e l H o n n e th , T h o m asMcC ar th y , C lau s O f fe an d A lb rech t Wel lm er ( ed s . ) Philosop hical Interventions in theUnfinished Project of Enlightenment (Ca mb ridg e, MA : MIT Press , 1993) 88-110. See also , C.

Taylor, The Ethics of Authen ticity (Cam bridge, MA : Ha rva rd Univers i ty Press , 1991) . In h ismajor work Tay lo r t races the h is to ry o f the modern iden t i ty and the way in which i t hasbeen shaped by the momentous t ransfo rmat ions o f cu l tu re and socie ty over the las t th reeo r fo u r cen tu r i e s ; see T ay lo r , Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity

(Cam bridge: Cam bridg e U nivers i ty Press , 1989) .

64. See Tay lo r , Com par iso n , His to ry , Tru t h , Philosophical Arguments (Cam bridge, MA :Harvard Universi ty Press, 1995) 153.

65. Tay lo r , Com par ison , His to ry , Tru th , 153 .66. H an s -G eo rg G ad am er , Truth and Method (2d ed.; Lond on : Sheed & W ar d, 1979) 270.








a s s u m e d i n t h o s e d o c u m e n t s t h a t i s n o t o u r s a n d n o t i m m e d i a t e l y

availab le to us . T o further co m plicate the issue , the gos pels inclu de their

au thors ' agenda fo r the i r own par t icu la r communi t ies , and th is needs to

be recognised if not separated out .

Co r re c t ly s i tua t ing J e s us a ga in s t the ba c kg round o f h i s wor ld no t

on ly p rov ides us wi th g rea te r de ta i l o f h is l i fe and of f i rs t -cen tury

Pa le s t ine . M ore imp or ta n t ly , it a l lows u s to un de r s t a n d be t t e r h i s s ig

n i f icance . Th e exa m ple of Jesus ' m ea ls in m y opening p ara gr ap h ma kes

this point .

THE HISTORICAL JESUS AND THE NATURE OF HISTORY

I have a rgued immedia te ly above tha t i t i s on ly poss ib le to unders tand Jesus aga ins t the background of h is wor ld , and the re fore tha t any

effort to ma k e sense of his l ife m us t tur n to his to ry. In th is sect ion I

w an t to show , a t leas t in outl ine , that an his torical invest igat io n of Jesus '

l i fe (o r o f any o ther pe rson , ins t i tu t ion or even t , fo r tha t mat te r )

necessa ri ly inv olv es in te rpr e ta t ion . Th at is , that any his tory necessari ly

invo lve s the h i s to r i a n selecting in format ion and making sense o f tha t

in fo rma t ion th rough interpretation. Th is view of his tory run s cou nter to

a s t ron g tw e n t i e th -c e n tu ry c u r re n t of tho ug h t wh ic h ha s be e n ve ry

inf luen t ia l in shap ing the human sc iences . The empir ic is t o r pos i t iv is tv i e w of h i s t o r y a t t e m p t s t o g e t b e y o n d t h e c i r cl e of h u m a n

in te r p r e ta t io ns - to ge t be yo nd sub je c t iv i ty . Ta y lo r s u m s u p the

empir ic is t v iew in th is wa y: 'T h e a t tem pt i s to recons t ruc t know ledg e in

such a way tha t the re i s no need to make f ina l appea l to read ings o r

ju dg e m e n ts w h ic h c a nn o t be c he c ke d fu r the r . Tha t is w hy the ba s ic

bu i ld in g b lock is the imp ress ion or sense-d a tum . 6 7

H o w e v e r , a ll k n o w i n g r e q u i r e s h u m a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d c o m e s

f rom pe op le ' s pe r c e p t ion a n d re f l ec t ion . To ma k e th i s po in t , N . T .

W righ t use s the exa m ple of Pa u l ' s c la im, Ch r is t d ied fo r our s ins . 6 8

Th e ph ra se fo r ou r s in s i s c lear ly in te rp re ta t ive and so , in the sea rch

fo r p u re h i s to ry , i t c ou ld be de l e te d . Th e w or d Ch r i s t , t oo , i s

in terpre ta t ive , s ince i t ascribes messiahship to Jesus . So, we are down to

J e s us d ie d , bu t e ve n he re w e ha v e no t e s c a pe d in te rp re ta t ion . As

W righ t pu ts i t: th ree peopl e d ied ou ts id e Je rusa lem tha t a f te rnoon , and

w e have chosen to m ent io n on ly one . For tha t mat te r , thou san ds of Jews

were c ruc i f ied by the Romans in the v ic in i ty o f Je rusa lem dur ing the

same cen tury , and we have chosen to ment ion on ly one . 6 9 So w ha t a t

67. Tay lor, In ter pret at ion an d the Sciences of M an , 18-19.68. N . T . Wr ig h t , The New Testament and the People of God (Minneapo l is , MN: For t ress

Press, 1992) 84.69. Wr ig h t , The New Testament and the People of God, 84.








f irs t g lan ce cou ld seem a ba re his torical fac t reve als a w ho le com plex

of in terpre ta t ions . 7 0

That h is to ry comes f rom a perspec t ive , however , does no t mean tha t

i t i s a rb i t ra r y o r inaccura te , o r tha t the r e a re no fac ts. Som e in t e rp re t a t ions make be t te r sense o f the to ta l i ty o f the in format ion than o thers ,

open ing up deeper leve ls o f the meaning of a pe rson 's l i fe , o r the

m ean ing of an ins t i tu t ion or event . Tay lor ca lls th is the bes t a cco un t . 7 1

Som e in te rp re ta t ion s ge t in s id e the e ve n t be t t e r, e xp la in ing i t w i th

grea te r c la irvoyance . In sum m ary , W righ t de fines h is to ry :

His to ry i s p r im ar i ly the h is to ry of hu m an be ings , and i t a t te m pts to

p lo t , unc ove r , a nd unde rs ta nd f rom the in s ide the in te rp la y o f

hu m a n in te n t ions a nd m o t iva t io ns p re s e n t w i th in a g ive n f ie ld o fin i t ia l inve s t iga t ion . W hat a pos i t iv is t w ou ld cal l the fac ts a re

par t , an d an inse par ab le pa r t , of a m uc h la rger who le . Th e m ov e

from fac t to in t e rp re t a t io n i s no t a m ov e f rom the c lea r to the

unc le a r : e ve n t s a re no t me re b i l l i a rd -ba l l s c a nnon ing in to one

a no the r , to wh ic h d if fe re n t m e a n ing s o r in te rp re ta t ion s c a n be

a t tached qu i te a rb i t ra r ily , accord ing to w hic h gam e is be ing p lay ed .

S o m e m e a n i n g s o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w i l l b e . .. m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e

than o thers .7 2

His tory i s ne i the r b ru te da ta nor a rb i t ra ry in te rpre ta t ion .

The above d iscuss ion of the na ture o f h is to ry means tha t s tud ies o f

the h is to r ica l Jesus do no t tu rn up raw fac ts , bu t ra the r o f fe r an

in te rp re ta t ion of the pe r s o n of J e s us a ga i n s t h i s ba c k g r ou nd - a n

in te rp re ta t io n w hich wi l l m ak e mo re o r le ss sense of h is l ife tha n o ther

in te r pre ta t ions o n offer . A nd if h is to ry i s un de rs t oo d in the way th a t I

am advocating, h is torical s tudy of Jesus ' l i fe and minis try is crucia l for

an accura te und er s ta nd in g of the gosp e ls . I t i s u t te r ly s ign i f ican t for

theology.

Bre nda n Byrne ' s v ie w o f the na tu re o f h i s to ry c a n be he lp fu l ly

exa m ined in th is con tex t . A ga i ns t Fre i , Byrn e a rg ue s tha t the g ospe l

narra t ives po in t to a rea li ty bey on d them se lves . But he then a rg ues t ha t

the t ru th m e d ia te d by the gos pe l s de pe nd s a b i t bu t no t m uc h up on

the veraci ty of the his tory they appear to describe .7 3 Byrne ' s min ima l i s t

un de rs ta nd in g of the place of his tory - the scant re s id ue of his tory t ha t

70. Tony Kelly ma kes a s imi lar po in t abo u t the l imi ta t ions of empir ic is t und ers tan d ing s

of history in an art icle, The Historica l Jesus an d Hu m an Subjectivity : A Re spon se to JohnMeier , Pacifica 4 (1991) 212-14.

71. On Tay lo r ' s no t ion o f the BA pr incip le , see Sources of the Self 58 an d pass i m. O narg u in g f rom one acc oun t to a bet te r acc oun t , see Tay lo r , Exp lana t ion and Pract ica lR easo n , Philosophical Arguments, 34-60 . W righ t m ak es the sam e po i n t abo u t the c la ir voyanc e of in terp re ta t ions in The New Testament and the People of God 91.

72. Wrigh t , Th e New Testament and the People of God, 91.

73 . Byrne , Go spe l Na rrat ive , 56, 59.








can rel iably be detected behind and through the gospels 7 4 - seem sgov erne d by an assu m ption that history is bru te data. Yet I haveclaimed - only in outline, I acknowledge - that an understanding of

history as bare facts or brute data misrepresents the nature of history.History involve s interp retat io n. By rne's view of the relat ionshipbetw een h istory an d n arrative suffers be cause of his view of history.

Yet his is not a rough attempt to deny history a place in the task ofchristology. It is a nuan ced view that ho lds together the reality to whichthe gospels refer and their narrative nature . How ever, the way in whichByrne understands history, and therefore the way in which he framesthe relationship betw een history and narrative, results in history beingbalanced against or contrasted w ith the apostolic witness. He sees them

as separated by a ditch.75 A lthoug h the ability to recognise the dep th ofthe reality to which the gospels refer is always a gift (the gift of faith), Iam arguing that a better understanding of history itself and therefore ofi ts relat ionship with narrat ive sees history and narrat ive not asseparated in the way that Byrne does, but recognises their intrinsicrelationship.

I am not d eny ing that th e gospe ls reflect the faith an d practice of thecommunities to which they were addressed as well as the theologies ofthei r auth ors . The se factors even shap e the way in wh ich the

chronology of Jesus' life is presented - at times differently in thedifferent gospels. However, the gospels have significance for the earlycommunities and for us insofar as they relate the reader to the life ofJesus and e lucida te the m ean ing of his life. Com ing to grip s w ith thismeaning therefore engages us in literary, theological and historicalenquiry.

Luke Timothy Johnson's dismissal of historical Jesus studies alsosuffers be caus e of his judg em ent about the natu re of history. At the nubof Johnson's critique of historical Jesus studies is the view that these

scholars distill historical facts, and reconstruct a history of Jesus usingthe extracted facts. If this is the method ology ado pted by som e scholars,I ha ve arg ued above that it is not inheren t in the na ture of history, nor isit the me thod olog y of other pro m inen t scholars in the field, for ex amp leBen F. Meyer and N. T. Wright among others. 76 Against Johnson'sdismissal of historical Jesus studies, I want simply to restate myargument that any interpretation of Jesus' life which does not situatehim against the background of his world is necessari ly a misinterpre tation. An d th e task of situating Jesus w ithin his ow n world is a

task in history.

74. Byrne, Gospel Narrative , 61.75. Byrne, Gospel Narrative , 61.76. Ben F. Meyer, The Aims of Jesus; N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (see n. 8

above).








Loewe gets closer to the interpretative conception of history w he n heargues that it is a complex activity, involving the location of sources, the

discernment of facts from these sources, and settling on an intelligibleimag e of Jesus in the light of these facts. A ltho ug h his descr iption ofhistory better approximates the interpretative view of history than doJohnson and Byrne, there is more than the whiff of an empiricist viewhere, with Loewe's focus on sources and the search for facts, and thisinfluences significant dim ensio ns of his arg um en t. Yet Lo ew e's ju dg ement that, given the complexity of history, the historical Jesus haslimited theological significance, is itself problematic. The interpretativemethod is all that we have in any of the human sciences - including

theology. Because situating Jesus against his back grou nd is so im po rtant for an accurate understanding of him, history is a necessaryfoundation and it is far more robust than Loewe allows. 1 noted earlierthat Loewe sees some usefulness in historical Jesus research becausehistorical images of Jesus may provide material for new christologicalsymbols.77 But in gra nt ing this , Loew e does no t recognise thefundamental role of historical Jesus research in situating Jesus againstthe backg roun d of his time.

THE APOSTOLIC WITNESS AND THE HISTORICAL JESUS

Lo ew e's second a rgu m ent to establish the limited theological significance of the historical Jesus concerns the apostolic witne ss. FollowingTracy, Loewe arg ues that it is the apostolic witness and not the historicalJesus that is found ational and norm ative for Ch ristian faith.78 In Tracy 'sw ords , the no rm and founda tion of christology is the Jesus re m em bered by the tradition and community as representative of God's ownpresence amon g us .

79 Tracy adds that for that reason, claims that the

historical Jesus is the norm for the tradition are confused. H e sees the

historical Jesus as a relatively ex ternal and secon dary criterion.80

But the strong contrast between the tradition and the historical Jesusis a false dilem m a .81 That is the position for which Elizabeth Johnsonargues - one which I also hold, but for different reasons. The gospeltexts are accou nts of Jesu s' m essage an d m an ne r of life. They d o notclaim to be history in any contemporary sense of the word, but they do

77 . Loew e, From the Hu ma ni ty of Chr is t , 330.78. Tracy, The Analogical Im agination, 238-39. Step hen Duffy arg ues alon g similar l ines in

Ego Transcendence and Transfo rmat ion : The So ter io logy o f Sebast ian Moore , in Wil l iamP. Loew e and Ve rno n J. Gr egs on (eds.) , Jesus Crucified and Risen: Essays in Spirituality and

Theology in Honor of Dom Sebastian Moore (Collegevil le, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1998) 47-52.

79. Tracy , The Analogical Imagination, 239.80. Tr ac y, TJie Analogical Imagination, 239.

81 . El izabe th John son , Theo log ical Rele vanc e , 29 . John son says: I t seem s to m e,how eve r , that the s t r inge n t posing of suc h a def in i t ive con tras t be twe en the t rad i t ion andthe historical Jesus sets up a choice whic h is basically a false d ilem ma .








claim to be accurate inte rpretatio ns of Jesus' life and m inistry, dea th andresurrection . Th e early comm unities' respect for these texts and theirplacement in the Canon (as well as the exclusion of others) not onlyreflects the faith of those communities, it also inherently claims that theinclud ed texts are the best, most accurate interpretations of the m eaningof Jesus ' life. So, to m ak e a definitive con trast betwe en the historicalJesus and the apo stolic witne ss is self-contradictory, since the ap ostolicw itne ss is itself an inte rpr eta tion of the historical Jesus . Such adefinitive contrast would make sense for those who hold a positivistview of history but, as I have argued above, such a positivist view ofhistory is un tena ble . Certainly, the apostolic witness is a privilegedinterpretation in the Christian tradition, but removing it from the realmof history misrepresents Christ ian fai th, and grants victory to anuna ckn ow ledg ed historical portrait of Jesus.

For us who live at a distance of two millennia from him, historicalexploration of the life of Jesus is critical. To paraphrase Gadamer: If wefail to place ourselves in Jesus' historical horizon, we shall misun de rsta nd the significance of wh at he has to say to us.82

82. Gadamer, Truth and Method 270.

2001 - James McEvoy - Narrative or History. A False Dilemma. The Theological Significance of the...

Documents

Transcript of 2001 - James McEvoy - Narrative or History. A False Dilemma. The Theological Significance of the...