Il Gesù di Ratzinger. Fede versus storia. Valutazioni di un biblista
Journal title HISTORIA MAGISTRA
Author/s Armando Mons. Rolla
Publishing Year 2013 Issue 2013/11
Language Italian Pages 11 P. 152-162 File size 127 KB
DOI 10.3280/HM2013-011017
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation
click here
Below, you can see the article first page
If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits
FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.
The article aims to highlight how the reconstruction of the figure of Jesus, drawn by Joseph Ratzinger, don’t regard the results of recent historians and critics studies on the Gospel, favoring theological interpretation closer to the New Testament, the highest expression of pastoral catechesis. The "Jesus of faith" is opposed to "Jesus historical-real": it need to distinguish the real Jesus or historical, which is the pre-Easter Jesus reconstructed according to documents in our possession, and the post-Easter Jesus, who is the Jesus of the New Testament, the Jesus of the Christian faith and the Jesus of the Church. This position brightens the traditional contrast between theologians and biblical scholars. The distrust of Ratzinger against the historical and literary analysis, produced by the biblical scholars, gives rise to adverse criticism: a biblical scholar has difficulty in sharing many of his exegetical decisions, resolved in a manner far from the results of actual exegetes. According to the author, the trilogy about the life of Jesus is an operation to consolidate the current beliefs of the Church but by an exegetical point of view is outdated and not devoid of many contradictions.
Keywords: Jesus of Faith, the historical Jesus, Parousia, biblical scholars, theologians, exegesis, historicity.
Armando Mons. Rolla, Il Gesù di Ratzinger. Fede versus storia. Valutazioni di un biblista in "HISTORIA MAGISTRA" 11/2013, pp 152-162, DOI: 10.3280/HM2013-011017