He will return with his immense heart, with his heart of fire, his poor man's soul
and his smile. He will return! And the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph!

JESUS CHRIST, UNIVERSAL BROTHER

The answer to the survey carried out by La Croix: “What Future is there for Christianity” can be summed up in one word: there is none. From the human viewpoint to which the sociological analyses of the newspaper La Croix limit themselves, there is no future for Christianity.

Statistics are inexorable; “the future” belongs to Islam. This is true not only in the Arab world: even in France it is estimated that there are a minimum of 4.5 million declared Muslims. One must add illegal immigrants to this number, but by definition such people cannot be counted. They are now 4.5 million instead of the 2 million that they were in 1982. 85% of them make no secret of belonging to Islam, by their profession of faith or by their behaviour. This figure is ten times greater than the percentage of baptised practicing Catholics. Let us calculate well: 85 % of 4.5 million, that makes 3.8 million “faithful”… In sociology this is what we call « positive dynamics »…

How is it that the Catholic Church has lost her « positive dynamics »? The answer to this question is simple: when the Second Vatican Council proclaimed “religious freedom” as a right of the human person, it abolished the right of the divine Person of Jesus Christ to reign. It is like a “leak” opened in the side of the bark of St. Peter. Cardinal Ratzinger said it at the Coliseum during the Good Friday Way of the Cross in 2005: « Often, Lord, Your Church seems to us to be a bark on the verge of sinking, a bark that is leaking on all sides… »

Has Pope Benedict XVI forgotten his fear of that time? Purveyors of illusions believe that they reassure us by speaking of a « return of the religious ». But this cure is worse than the disease, for it does not mean a return to Christianity, in any case not to the Catholic Church, but rather it benefits all the “other evangelical” confessions and “other [non Christian] religions” like Islam…

Sociologists, it is true, explain to us that Muslims see their numbers increasing due to immigration, but there are also Christians among the immigrants, in particular, those coming from the Near East. Furthermore, a « positive dynamics » of the Catholic Church would tend towards converting the Muslims. Now, it is the opposite that is happening!

The very expression « return of the religious » conveys it well, by its abstract nature: this “return” favours all the “churches” and “sects” that the Catholic Church dominated and fought before the Second Vatican Council. This comes at the expense of the only true “religion” that has value… and in the name of “religious freedom”.

FAITH AND SCIENCE

Thus we must not be surprised that, according to Fr. Bernard Sesboüé, « a theologian on a visit to the building site of the faith » (La Croix, 25 October), « however prestigious the theology inherited from the twentieth century is, we have not seen everything ». In the book that he has just published with Desclée de Brouwer, “Theology in the Twentieth Century and the Future of the Faith”, « the dialogue between faith and science that was engaged long ago, remains a matter of urgency ». Thus, it seems that Vatican II, the greatest Council of all times, permitted no progress on this point.

« Our contemporaries, who have been formed to criticise, expect us to propose to them a verifiable “itinerary of faith” as much as content. »

It is as good as saying that everything remains to be done.

Now, in this regard, the Church has a cataleptic fit before the “proposal” that she receives:

« More than a hundred Muslim intellectuals and theologians write to Benedict XVI and invite the two religions to a “competition” in love of neighbour », La Croix informs us on 15 October.

They are impudent! As though the “competition” has not lasted thirteen centuries already, totally to the advantage of Christianity! A year after the letter of the thirty-eight Muslim intellectuals to Benedict XVI, which was an insolent reply to the discourse of Regensburg, they are a hundred and thirty-eight. A hundred more than last year. A remarkable “consensus”, rejoices Fr. Étienne Renaud from the Pontifical Institute of Arab and Islamology Studies. « Rather than broaching the theme of violence [implying: as Benedict XVI had “clumsily” done at Regensburg], the text starts off from love: love for God, love for men, principles that the two religions have in common. »

The good apostles! « It is all the more clever because the first encyclical of Benedict XVI (God is Love) concerned this same theme. The word “love” is, however, not used much in the Qur’an, and is not among the ninety-nine names given to God. » That is no obstacle:

« The message uses the term “love of God in Islam” for what is generally presented as obedience to God, as though the Muslims had wished to bring themselves closer to Christians in terms of vocabulary. »

It is a matter of words… Thus, we are made to get along together on the condition of taking into account the second concern of Fr. Sesboüé.

FAITH AND HISTORY

In fact, « the great question of the Jesus of history and the Christ of the Faith, that haunts theological research for two hundred years has become today a common question », it seems. How does it happen that we hear it asked about Christ and never about Mohammed? What strange inconsistency!

« It must be shown, even in catechesis and preaching that the Faith is not one myth among others, but that it is inscribed in history. If stress is not placed on the historicity of the Faith, incarnation and resurrection reduce to vague symbols. Then the meaning of existence is based on nothing. »

We are in complete agreement. This is precisely the case in Islam, and the Muslims are not far from realising it. This is why in the Letter that they sent to the Pope they take a surprising step towards Christian truth: « Another surprise, the Muslims examine how this love for God expresses itself in the Bible, the Old and the New Testament. They acknowledge that Christians also have one God, and thus do not repeat the accusation “of amalgamators” traditionally made against the Christians, who are criticised for a Trinitarian divinity.  »

So, they are not far from the Kingdom of God!

All the more because our truly scientific translation of the Qur’an permits us to discover in it the contribution of the Bible. Let us repeat here only one example. The words Yahweh said to Abraham: “Be perfect!” (Gn 17.1) are transcribed in Arabic (’aslim), from the Aramaean translation of the Bible (haweî ®elîm). The traditional translation, « Submit! », has nothing to do with the literal, real meaning. That meaning derives from the Hebraic origin of the word islâm; it designates the « perfect » religion. The word muslim designates the “perfect” believer, whose religion is islâm.

That « the author of the Qur’an is obviously imbued with the Bible. », as the Abbé de Nantes writes, is precisely what “the 138” are beginning to recognise:

« The message then passes to love of neighbour, quoting this sentence of Mohammed: “None of you are a believer as long as you do not like for your neighbour what you like for yourselves”. » Is it really a « sentence of Mohammed »? Attested by what witness? In any case, before being a « sentence of Mohammed », it is the golden rule of fraternal charity that Our Lord Jesus Christ taught: « Do to others whatever you would have them do to you. This is the law and the prophets. » (Mt 7.12)

The authors of the letter are also right when they affirm that « the prophet Mohammed did not bring anything fundamentally new » with regard to the message of Christ. He only succeeded, in all truth, in stealing the Revelation of the Jews and the Christians, which we would not criticise them for having done if they had not removed from it the divinity of Jesus Christ.

The message is received loud and clear, for our part, when the Letter asks Christians to consider Muslims as « not against them but with them », on the condition, however, that Christians « not declare war on Muslims because of their religion, not oppress them, and not expel them from their homes », as has happened in Palestine and Iraq.

Very well. So, let us talk seriously. Let us stare « the truth in the face », as the Abbé de Nantes advocated with a specific aim: giving back to the billion of Muslims who inhabit the planet, « the initial matrix of their religion, with a view to scholarly and fruitful controversy ».

What is « the initial matrix of their religion », in all truth? We have shown that Islam is a return to Judaism, but at the expense of the children of Israel and to the benefit of the children of Ismael, combined with a “Modernist” Christianity, according to which the affirmation of the divinity of Jesus Christ is only a « later interpretation », « untruthful », because « Jesus, the son of Mary » would never have put forward such a claim.

Islam is nothing but “Modernism” before the word existed.

This is the point on which we must engage; it must not be a sterile “dialogue” but a controversy full of courtesy, in mutual respect. It must include the Jews as well as the Muslims, with the idea of together reaching the full divine Truth and the fruits of the blessing that was promised to Abraham in favour of all nations. World peace is at this price.

Paradoxically, as the Abbé de Nantes expected, the obstacle does not come as much from the Jews or the Muslims, but from western Islamology, since it remains prisoner –and is content to be so – in its traditional straitjacket.

BENEDICT XVI AND ISLAM

They will be three who will come from the East like the Magi, to go to Rome in March. Three representatives of the Muslim world who will be sent by “the 138”, as the signatories of the Letter to the Pope are now called, Muslim officials who are eager to establish a dialogue with the Catholic Church. These three emissaries in conjunction with Vatican officials will determine the procedures for the great encounter between Catholics and Muslims in Rome; the Pope proposed this encounter in his reply to the “138”; it could take place a few weeks later if an agreement is reached:

« The Pope’s reluctance to open a strictly theological dialogue with Islam is well known; he prefers to seek common ground on shared values with it. » (La Croix, 11 January 2008)

In a letter sent in December to Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Prince of Jordan, Ghazi ben Muhammad ben Talal, does not refuse, but he demands the possibility of discussing what he calls theological or spiritual « intrinsic principles », principles of religion, before discussing the « extrinsic » practical applications. « From the Muslim viewpoint, it is in fact important that Islam be taken seriously as a religion » This is understandable! « On the Catholic side, however, there is fear of being led onto the terrain of the affirmations of the Qur’an, where a large part of the assertions of the Christian Faith are denied. » Well! Let us accept the challenge…

We can do so because the Abbé de Nantes has succeeded in keeping us in the integral Catholic Faith, free from all Modernism, but open to all the findings of theological and exegetical science. Thus, we propose to the “138”, discussion on this historical basis: Christ and His message such as the Church teaches it to us in perfect harmony with the inspired witness of the Gospels.

A RELIGIOUS READING OF THE GOSPEL

If we wish to know Jesus Himself such as His contemporaries knew and approached Him, the Jesus of history, how can we reach Him? Through science or through faith? By faith in all that the eyewitnesses of His life say to us about Him, or by « historico-critical » research that is bereft of all religious interpretation?

Benedict XVI’s book “Jesus of Nazareth”, firmly answers with science enlightened by the faith of Peter, this « rock » on which Jesus founded his Church. In fact, the « cornerstone » of this book consists in « seeing Jesus starting with His communion with the Father, who is the centre strictly speaking of His personality; without this communion, we understand nothing, whereas, thanks to it, Christ makes Himself present to us still today » (p. 9).

This is the fundamental affirmation, which is the result of a « long inner progression » of which this book is the result. Like his master St. Augustine, Benedict XVI repeats: Credo Evangelistam: « I have faith in the Gospels. » Following him, we can thus read the Gospels and take as an indissociable whole the historical event and its theological or mystical meaning: it is a whole in the perception that the Apostle, who was inspired and thus equipped with full light, had of the event of Christ that he experienced, and that he handed down to us.

He was inspired, enlightened, and recorded for us his experience in such wise that we read everything in the Gospels, we listen to it as though prostrate in adoration before Jesus, the Son of God, who lived, who is living, and who will return at the end of time. St. Mark’s first words: « The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus, the Son of God », like those of St. John: « In the beginning was the Word », invite us to make this act of faith. St. Luke does so as well when he promises us an ordered account, established in a “critical” manner, of what had been handed down from those who were, from the beginning, eyewitnesses and servants of the Word, personified in Jesus, Son of Mary, the Son of God.

The name “Jesus of Nazareth”, appears in the Gospels, but not once in St. Paul, nor in any other Epistle. This is because “Jesus of Nazareth” made way for Jesus Christ, the King of the universe, the Saviour of all men. Nazareth? A souvenir… that we must cultivate in our heart, in imitation of the Immaculate « who kept all these things, pondering them in Her Heart »…

THE FULFILLMENT OF A LONG EXPECTATION

In a “First Survey of the Mystery of Jesus”, Benedict XVI shows how He was expected not only as Messiah, King of Israel and of the world, the new David, but also « as a new Moses, Moses himself then being presented as a prophet » (p. 21).

In order to be understood the Gospel, in fact, presupposes the same knowledge and the same familiarity with the Old Testament that the contemporaries of Our Lord had, and this appears in this retort of the Samaritan woman to Jesus: « I know that the Messiah is to come, He whom they call Christ. When He comes, He will reveal everything to us. » By her faith, she forces Jesus to reveal Himself completely: « I am, I, the One who speaks to you », He replied to her. By this answer, He admits that He is the expected Messiah, and more than the Messiah. He identifies Himself by this “I am”, in Greek, “Ego eimi”, with Yahweh-God, who revealed Himself to Moses in the Burning Bush in the same way: “I am” (Jn 4.25-26).

What difference is there between Jesus and Moses?

The Pope points out that, as founder and legislator of the chosen people, Moses is presented, in the conclusion to the Book of Deuteronomy, as « he whom Yahweh knew face to face » (Dt 34.10); he had spoken to God as a friend speaks with a friend (Ex 33.11) (…)

This is where we see « that the proximity of Moses with God, which makes him the great mediator of the Revelation, the mediator of the Covenant, discovers its limit.

« He does not see the face of God, even though it is given to him to immerse himself in the cloud of proximity with God and to speak with him as a friend. Thus the promise of a « prophet like me » implicitly conceals an even greater expectation: that the last prophet, the new Moses, would be granted what the first Moses had been unable to obtain – to see truly and directly the face of God and thus be able to speak based on this full vision and not simply because he saw God from behind. Thus, this also implies almost naturally the hope that the new Moses would be the mediator of a Covenant superior to the one that Moses was able to bring back from Sinai (cf. Heb 9.11-24).

« It is in this context that we find the key to interpreting the end of the prologue of the Gospel of St. John: “No one has ever seen God; it is the only Son, who is nearest to the Father’s Heart, who has made Him known.” (Jn 1.18) It was in Jesus that the promise of the new prophet was fulfilled. In Him was fully realised what remained incomplete in Moses: He lives before the face of God, not only as a friend, but as a Son, He lives in the most intimate union with the Father. » (pp. 25-26)

THE ANOINTING OF CHRIST THE KING

Benedict XVI then devotes a first chapter to the “Baptism of Jesus” that marks His entry into « public life ». The Pope stresses its historical character: « While Matthew merely contents himself with the rather abstract formula “in those days” to date the event, Luke situates it very knowingly in the much broader context of a universal history, which permits an extremely precise dating. » (p. 29)

Benedict XVI insists on inserting evangelical events into history: « Luke had already given two essential dates in the accounts of the childhood. Concerning the birth of John the Baptist, he tells us that it must be situated “in the days of Herod the Great, the king of Judea” (1.5). While the dating of the life of John the Baptist thus remains fixed in the history of the Jewish people, the history of the childhood of Jesus begins with these words: “in those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree,…” (2.1) This time it is the great History, universal history embodied in the Roman Emperor, that is in the background. » (pp. 30-31)

The Abbé de Nantes compares this encounter of Heaven with the earth to a parabolic curve that touches the horizontal line of the sacred history of Israel at one point. It was already so near to it that we do not know exactly at what point it touched it. The contact was so well-prepared by the long approach of the Old Testament that we believe that we see it before it happens. This is what characterised Judaism before Jesus Christ, shortly before the Christian era: the Jews await the Messiah; they already imagine Him with such precision; they already are aware of Him as physically present, as real as sowing seed among His people that, when He appeared, no one was surprised. They were expecting Him.

It could be believed that it was one or the other: John the Baptist, for example. In fact, when the hour of the Gospel struck on the dial of history, it was not Jesus who appeared on the scene of the world; it was someone other than He. This is something unprecedented, the Abbé de Nantes points out: Jesus has a precursor who enters the service of « Him who comes » and who is greater than I, he said, because He existed before me… John the Baptist, whose entire vocation was not to draw the crowds to him, but to bear witness to Another… who came after Him, but who existed before … John the Baptist was totally absorbed in his vocation of Precursor in order to withdraw as soon as Our Lord appeared.

For John the Baptist appeared greater than Jesus of Nazareth, an unknown man, son of a carpenter, as was believed, and who went there, with all the others, where the throng gathered around a great Prophet, John the Baptist. Between the two of them, the greater, according to the natural point of view and according to the Jewish faith, was John. Yet, « John is the least in the Kingdom of Heaven », Our Lord would say.

In the prologue of the fourth Gospel, St. John the Evangelist does nothing other than affirm what St. John the Baptist, already attested about Christ after His Baptism: « He who comes after me ranks before me because He existed before me. » (Jn 1.15)

Our Father observes that « the structure of the Gospel of Matthew was intentional in order to manifest this fact: Jesus inherits from the Old Testament through John the Baptist and He founds the Church on Peter. This is continuity in novelty. He who assumes in His Person the fulfilment of the past and the foundation of the future is the greatest of all. In Him is found the crux of universal history. » (CRC n^o 79, April 1974, p. 11)

Everything was ready when the Archangel Gabriel descended from Heaven to announce to Mary that She would be the Mother of the Saviour. Everything was ready because God was present in His people. He was so present that He only has to don the veil of flesh in the virginal womb of Mary for the Invisible to become Visible.

THE BIRTH OF CHRIST

The Virgin Mary told her secrets to the Apostles, partially at first, and this is the tradition that St. Matthew relates, then much more profoundly to St. John. In his prologue, the latter introduces us to the inner life of the Holy Trinity in which God the Father expressed his intention of sending His Son amongst us. The generation of this Son is related to us in a totally divine manner, even in St. Matthew and St. Luke, where the events assume a totally human character. It was necessary for the Word to enter into the things of the earth. If these Gospels of the Childhood are very human, they are so in a divine manner. The marvels that surround them are like God’s signature.

Jesus, Son of Mary, Son of God, « is before us, the Pope writes, as the “beloved Son”, who is thus on one hand the One who is totally different, but who for this same reason can also be our contemporary, and as St. Augustine says, for each of us, “more interior than our innermost self” » (p. 44).

When all is said and done, Christian life is nothing other than seeing and contemplating Jesus in the very mystery that He represents for those who approached Him during His life. The simple fact that they had Him before their eyes, that they looked at Him, they had the vague – or perhaps clear – impression that Jesus could do everything, was everything, had all power and all knowledge, and that all could flow from His hands, that all revelation could come from His lips, because of His majesty, because of the mystery that He was.

It was precisely this mystery that St. John called the Word of God. This name explained all the circumstances, all the events, all the words and miracles of His life. He is the Only-begotten Son, the only Son of God who, in the beginning, before the world existed, did not think about the world but was turned « towards » His Father, was thus the subsisting Word, image and splendour of His Father, who had no other occupation than to render glory and honour to His Father:

« In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God. »

This means, from the first word, that this Person existed as a Person from the start, « in the beginning », turned towards God, equal to God and God Himself. The Word was God.

He was the Light that is with God, Light of light turned towards God but, inasmuch as this Word turned Himself towards the world, He was the Light of every man, that is to say the food of human intelligences. « Through Him everything came to be; not one thing had its being but through Him. All that came to be had life in Him and that Life was the light of men. »

The beauty and order of nature are like a word heard by man, who comes from God. The same applies to all the revelations that God multiplied, from century to century, before the Incarnation. They are manifestations of the Word.

Thus He was at home everywhere, and everywhere this Word rang out, becoming food for all men. Now, this spiritual food, the world did not accept Him.

To our great surprise, there is no question of this tragic refusal in the Pope’s book. (…)

The truth is that the history of the relationship of Israel with God is the chronicle of a constant infidelity of this people that forced God to punish it to the point of dispersing it over the surface of the world. As for the “Land”, ha-’aretz, the Promised Land towards which we are now marching… it is Heaven: through death and resurrection. As surprising as this may seem, the Pope does not say so in his book. Not even when he comments on the beatitudes: « Blessed are the meek for they shall possess the land. »

CONQUEROR OF THE DEVIL

Our Lord came out of the water of the Jordan and « to our surprise, the Pope writes, the three synoptic Gospels relate that the first disposition of the Spirit was to lead Him into the desert, “in order to be tempted by the Devil” (Mt 4.1). » This is not very surprising, in fact, if one has in mind the main idea that the Pope indicated at the beginning of his book, according to which Jesus is a new Moses; after His Baptism, an image of the crossing of the Red Sea, Jesus must lead His people in a new exodus towards the Promised Land, which is Heaven. He must therefore, He the Leader, He our King, pass through the trial of the desert.

In St. Matthew’s account, the parallel is striking: Our Lord answers the three temptation of the Devil with three citations from the Book of Deuteronomy. On the other hand, « in his brief account Mark stresses the parallel with Adam », Benedict XVI writes: « Jesus “was with the wild beasts, and the angels ministered to Him.” »

From what the Pope writes, it is the restoration of the earthly Paradise: « The wild beasts represent the most concrete form of the threat that the rebellion of creation and the power of death caused to hang over man; they become friends as in Paradise. » One forgets that Satan is there: « He remained in the desert for forty days, and was tempted by Satan. » (Mk 1.13a) This is effaced!

This omission forces us to ask a distressing question: does the Pope interpret the episode of this confrontation between Christ and Satan as a midrash, haggadic, that is to say legendary, staging of texts of Holy Scripture, without an historical basis? Did the Apostles and disciples of Jesus invent this scene?

If so, St. Luke, the Greek doctor who wrote for Greeks after a rigorous investigation, would not have taken up this passage of rabbinical literature.

The truth is that Our Lord Himself related to them how He stood up to this terrible combat against the Devil. The Abbé de Nantes often drew our attention to how dreadful it was for Christ to be tempted so closely by the Devil, to feel his breath very concretely. Unlike Adam and Eve, Jesus resisted the Tempter, without the slightest hesitation, of course, but in a harsh, bitter, meritorious way, not struggling against bad tendencies – He had none – but against the weakness of human nature. At the cost of this fight, the wild beasts, set against sinful man, are at peace with Him, God’s Holy One.

The Pope adds: « Mark concluded his brief account of the temptations by words that can be understood as an allusion to Psalm 91.11: “And the angels served Him.” These words are also found at the end of Matthew’s more elaborated account of the temptations. It is only from this broader context that it becomes fully understandable. »

What does the Pope mean here? St. Matthew wrote something very simple: « Then the devil left Him, and angels appeared, and the angels ministered to Him. »

St. Matthew himself had heard Jesus relate how the Devil had left and let the angels approach to minister to Him. What does the Pope mean when he writes that it is « an allusion to Psalm 91 »?

We recite this psalm at Compline on Sunday. He who takes shelter under the wings of the Most High fears nothing and no one. God’s angels are at his disposal. It was by quoting this psalm that the Devil tried to tempt the Lord and cause Him to fall – this is literally the case, because he suggests to Him to throw Himself down from the Temple:

« Then the Devil took Him to the Holy City, and made Him stand on the parapet of the Temple, and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: He will command His angels concerning You and with their hands they will support You, lest You dash Your foot against a stone. » (Mt 4.5-7)

But Our Lord did not come to satisfy the curiosity and the pride of those who would follow Him. He would say so later on to the Pharisees when they asked Him to perform signs in the sky. He demanded faith, quite simply. Jesus thus answered by quoting Deuteronomy: « You shall not tempt the Lord your God. »

The Pope subtly writes that, in order to whisper this second temptation, the Devil plays the exegete:

« « In order to lure Jesus into his snare, the Devil quotes Holy Scripture: Psalm 91, which evokes the protection that God grants to the faithful man. »

And here we see, « The interpretation of the Bible can effectively become an instrument of the Antichrist ».

For the centenary of St. Pius X’s encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, which condemned Modernism, here is a good truth to recall. « The worst books that destroy the figure of Jesus, that destroy the Faith, were written with alleged results of exegesis. »

Alas, we must point out that the Pope himself illustrates this truth. For he himself becomes a Modernist exegete by explaining St. Mark’s words: « And the angels ministered to Him », as « an allusion to Psalm 91 », without telling us whether, yes or no, the angels approached Jesus to minister to Him…

As for the first temptation, that of changing stones into bread, Benedict XVI shows that Jesus answered by making Himself our bread in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. This rich reflexion, however, must not conceal to us the primary meaning of the episode: Our Lord refused to be a Messiah who would bring well-being and prosperity by changing stones into bread.

And the third temptation? « The climax of the entire account », Benedict XVI writes. The Devil offers the Lord domination over the world. « Is this not precisely the mission of the Messiah? » the Pope asks (p. 58). Yes, but not at the condition laid down by the Devil: « If You fall at my feet and worship me. » Now, the Holy Father fails to quote this clausula. He only writes:

« The reign of Christ should thus take the form of a political kingdom and its splendour. The weakness of the Faith, the earthly weakness of Jesus Christ should be supported by the political and military authority. »

This is however, what St. Pius X demanded: « Omnia instaurare in Christo. » Jesus Christ, who has been established from His resurrection in His divine power, demands from human institutions themselves submission to His law, in order to support « the weakness of the faith » of the faithful. Good Christian institutions are, in fact, necessary, like those of France during the reign of the Capetians, in the kingdom of Louis IX, King of France… St. Louis! It was also the mission of Joan of Arc, under the Valois, to have the king of France crowned as the lieutenant of the King of Heaven…

Yet, Pope Paul VI, and following him the Second Vatican Council, yielded to the third temptation by proclaiming « the cult of man » behind which Satan hides.

THE GOOD NEWS OF THE COMING OF THE KINGDOM

« After John the Baptist had been arrested, Jesus left for Galilee to proclaim the Gospel of God. He said: “The time is accomplished. The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the Gospel.” »

Under the title “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God”, Benedict XVI continues without any transition, like St. Mark. Thus, the time had indeed come for God to reign – not yet in an organised society with its institutions, as would be Christendom after the conversion of Constantine – but « a break then took place in time; something new was being fulfilled. » the Pope writes (p. 68)

What? The rest of the chapter becomes lost in scholarly considerations on « the now famous sentence of the Catholic Modernist (sic!) Alfred Loisy: Jesus announced the Kingdom, and it is the Church that came. » What a disappointment! The Pope does not really refute it. Here we see the spirit of the Council in action in Benedict XVI, which is a loss of interest in the Church, a spirit of “self-criticism”, of “reform”. For truly, the Church is the Kingdom!

« Everything depends, he says, on the way in which we understand the words of Jesus concerning the “Kingdom of God”. » Benedict XVI lists « the different meanings of the word “Kingdom” in the history of the Church ».

It is an excess of scholarship in order to omit any reference to a quite simple truth: before, Satan reigned through kings whose empires followed one another endlessly, without “orthodromy”. The Old Testament, however, announced that one day God would reign on earth. The Pope mentions « the psalms called psalms of enthronement, which proclaim the kingship of Yahweh, a kingship conceived both as universal and cosmic, welcomed by Israel in adoration » (p. 77).

Well, the time has now come! God has begun to reign on earth. The only thing to do is to repent and believe in the Gospel. What does this mean? Our Lord began by saying the same thing as John the Baptist: the Kingdom of God is at hand, repent. The difference is that John the Baptist announced Someone greater than himself to establish the Kingdom, while Our Lord, from the outset, allows looks and hearts to focus on Him. Benedict XVI explains it in a few excellent pages: the Kingdom, « is Jesus Himself » (p. 81). Yes, but after Jesus? For one day Jesus will be “taken away”.

« They come to say to Him: “Why do the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?” Jesus answered them: “Can the bridegroom’s attendants fast while the bridegroom is still with them? As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day. » (Mk 2.18-20)

The Bridegroom in the Song of Songs, in the Prophet Hosea, in Ezekiel, is Yahweh! Thus, Jesus is God « Your Creator will be your Spouse », an oracle of the Prophet Isaiah announced (Is 54.5). Jesus was the awaited Bridegroom who came to take possession of His spouse. Jesus is God Himself who came to establish His reign in Jerusalem as promised.

For the time being, admirable Jesus, sweet Jesus, fair and attractive Jesus conquers the throngs as though irresistibly. One day, He crossed the lake in order to speak to His Apostles in a lonely place. More than five thousand people arrived ahead of Him on the opposite shore and listened to Him until the evening, with no concern for hunger or fatigue. At nightfall, the enthusiastic crowd wanted to make Him king.

We must imagine what this “Galilean idyll” was in a magnificent country, which was not yet transformed into a desert by the Muslim invasion. There, Jesus was at home with simple folk, the poor, fishermen. He radiated an authority that charmed them because straightaway, His teaching was radically different from that of the scribes and the Pharisees.

« The reaction of Jesus’ audience was clear, the Pope writes: this teaching does not come from any school. It is radically different from the teaching that can be received in schools. It is not an explication according to the method of interpretation such as it is transmitted in schools. It is completely different. It is a question of a teaching that is given “with authority.” » (p. 26)

The word “authority” is the Greek word exousia that is encountered in the Gospel according to St. John. Jesus spoke with power. It was not only, and even not at all a “legal” authority. It was the authority of intelligence – He knew the things of God, His Father – and the authority of the heart: He loved all these people as the sheep of His flock, the flock that His Father had entrusted to Him. Thus, it was “total” authority and not totalitarian! In Galilee, Jesus appeared as a sovereign Master. All things are subject to Him, but He Himself is subject to one Person alone: to God His Father.

The Pope says so excellently:

« Above all, we are going to understand clearly that Jesus always speaks as a Son, that the relationship between Father and Son is always found in the background of His message. » (p. 83)

It is precisely this surprising relationship of perfect submission, of subordination, of inner and cordial obedience to God His Father, which situates it out of the ordinary, above all the other men.

It is in this way that He reigns.

The King is here! Our Leader, our Prince, our Shepherd, the Son of David, the Prophet is here! He is Jesus. We have found the Messiah! Andrew said to Simon, his brother (Jn 1.41). Such is the Good News that made hearts overflow with enthusiasm, drawing people onto the roads and into the deserts, following Christ! Then, Our Lord, with sovereign authority, proclaimed the law of His Kingdom.

Before studying this law, we must point out that the Pope does not speak of the miracles! « If you remove the miracles and the parables, not much is left of the Gospel », Mgr Vingt-Trois declared on a kto broadcast, in an interview devoted to the Pope’s book. He could not have said it better than this. What is the “Kingdom”? To this question, Jesus answered by His miracles. (…)

Jesus mimed, with His Apostles, what the life of the Church would be. Jesus and His Apostles in the bark, the bark in the storm, is the anticipation of the Church, the Church with the Pope and bishops, that would fight against the storm of the world, the agitation of the elements that the demons raised against the Church. And Jesus slept.

The miracles are allegories of the Kingdom to come. They manifest this power (exousia) that Jesus has to expel demons.

The miracle of the Gerasene demoniac who was delivered with difficulty from a « legion » of unclean spirits is the symbol of this fight that Jesus engaged in against the reign of Satan, Prince of this world, in order to cast him out (Mk 5.20). (…)

The reign of God is this: this power that He has to expel demons – with one word! – and a new teaching, which has been given with this freedom that Jesus has to interpret the law and to enlighten minds.

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT.

« The Beatitudes, the Pope writes, constitute in a veiled way an interior biography of Jesus, a portrait of His Person. He who has nowhere to lay His Head (cf. Mt 8.20) is the true poor man, who could say of Himself, “Become My disciples, for I am meek and humble of heart” (Mt 11.29), is truly gentle; He is the veritable pure heart who, in virtue of that, contemplates God constantly. He is the peacemaker; He is the one who suffers for the sake of God. The Beatitudes reveal the mystery of Christ Himself. They call upon us to enter into communion with Christ. » (p. 95)

Let us allow ourselves to be captured by the radiance of His regard, of His Heart, of His entire conduct in Galilee. Let us meditate this law of the Kingdom in order to conform our life to it, in order to find ourselves among the elect, and not to exclude ourselves by our own folly, or our own covetousness, from this Kingdom that He came to establish on earth, with a view to eternal life. (…)

 1o The Beatitudes refute the Sadducees of all times who say that they are happy when they are rich, when they laugh and amuse themselves, when they have much to eat and drink. « The criteria of the world are inverted », the Pope writes, recalling the experience that St. Paul had of them in his life as an Apostle: He feels as though he is “last of all”, like a person condemned to death, put on show in front of the world, with no country, insulted, slandered (cf. 1 Co 4.9-13). Nevertheless, he experiences infinite joy. »

« Happy the poor, happy those who hunger and thirst; happy those who weep. »

Unlike the carnal messianism of the Jews, and the passions of all men, the Beatitudes teach where the true happiness is that the new Kingdom is going to establish here and now: the elect of the Kingdom, the disciples to whom the eternal life of Heaven is promised, they are happy now, to know that they are chosen. Who are they? They are the « poor in spirit ». « This expression, the Pope points out, appears in the scrolls of Qumrân, where it constitutes the definition of the members of the community that they themselves use. » (p. 96) (…)

With the proclamation of the Beatitudes, something changed in the history of the world. It is the fact that foolishness in the eyes of men becomes wisdom in the eyes of God. This is why, century after century, Christians divested themselves of their riches, bound themselves by painful vows of obedience, mutilating their nature in order to be the blessed of the Kingdom, devoted themselves to chastity to be pure, because the pure will see God. As a mark of their belonging to the Kingdom, they will be persecuted because of Christ.

2o The second part of this great charter of the Kingdom is directed at the scribes and the legal experts, in order to deliver the small people from their tyranny. The Pope brings them to life again in the person of Rabbi Neusner, his friend (p. 125 sq.). (…)

« The rabbi accepts the otherness of the message of Jesus, and he withdraws without hatred appearing; and while maintaining the rigour of the truth, he always makes apparent the reconciling force of love. » (p. 126)

Thus, the Pope perfectly conceives that « the rigour of the truth » and « the reconciling force of love » can be maintained without Jesus, and even when withdrawing from Him! The Holy Father listens with extreme benevolence to Rabbi Neusner when he accuses Jesus of destroying the cohesion of social order in Israel by letting the disciples pick the heads of grain on the Sabbath, and by performing « healings » on that day (p. 129)!

Now, it is precisely the weakness of this Law, which Jesus denounced, to be a law of public order and not of inner perfection: « Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect » (Mt 5.48), even in the secret of your innermost thoughts. « You have learned how it was said to our Ancestors: You must not kill; and if anyone does kill he must answer for it before the court. But I say this to you: anyone who is angry with his brother will answer for it before the court; If a man calls his brother Raca [an Aramaic word that means « empty-headed »] he will answer for it before the Sanhedrin; and if a man calls him “Fool!” [môré ] he will answer for it in hell fire. » (Mt 5.21-22)

The law of perfection seems impossible. We see that there is a mystery. Our Lord still hid the secret of a new life the source of which He would open in His Kingdom: the life of grace.

For the time being, He promulgated His new, humanly impracticable law, until He would make it accessible by a spiritual miracle, much more astonishing than all His miraculous cures.

THE PRAYER OF THE LORD: THY KINGDOM COME!

3o The third part of Our Lord’s teaching concerns worship « in spirit and in truth » (Jn 4.23-24), as He said to the Samaritan woman. The teaching of our Lord is as far from the ostentatious and hypocritical “piety” of the Pharisees as could be; Our Lord taught love for God the Father that is sufficient in itself. We do not pray to God in order to be seen by men, but by the heavenly Father, in order to love Him more and to obtain His grace: « When you pray, go to your private room and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in that secret place, and your Father who sees all that is done in secret will reward you. » (Mt 6.6)

This is so new that one day the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray. They did not know how to pray? Indeed they did! But, as Our Lord said: « Every scribe who becomes a disciple of the Kingdom of Heaven is like a householder who brings out from his storeroom things both new and old ».

What did Our Lord mean by « things both new and old »? He meant what was already known by the Jews about this Kingdom to come and whose advent they were demanding by reciting the “psalms of the Reign”, for example. To teach them to pray in this way: « Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy Name, Thy Kingdom come », was to tell them that the expectation of the Kingdom was right and that Our Lord answered this expectation.

On the other hand, however, they were « new things », because they did not appear precisely as they had imagined: they were different and better. Our Lord invited His dear Galileans to meditate all that in order to gradually embrace His view of things. They would not do it, by virtue of a blindness announced by a prophecy of Isaiah that Our Lord quotes:

« You will listen and listen again, but not understand, see and see again, but not perceive. For the heart of this nation has grown coarse, their ears are dull of hearing, and they have shut their eyes, for fear they should see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their heart, and be converted and be healed by me. » In St. Mark, it is worse, more brutal: « otherwise they might be converted and be forgiven. »

Benedict XVI translates: « Unless they are converted and God forgives them. » (p. 213) The “Message of the Parables” to which this chapter is dedicated is completely changed! The text, however, is totally different! Our Lord speaks in parables out of mercy for the good, for the little man, for those to whom the Father reveals Himself, but these parables are already a punishment for the wicked, the proud, those in high places, so that they remain in their tragic blindness. (…)

This is the source of the bitterness of Our Lord, who revealed the feelings of His Heart: He was lucid, He knew what was in man, St. John said. Certain educators know in advance the children who will remain on the right path; there are those children who do not yet know what is in them, about whom it is unknown whether they will turn away from the straight path. Our Lord foresaw what would happen; He knew that this people of Galilee would not be faithful to Him.

Another parable, also taken from agriculture, is more consoling: that of the seed that grew by itself, specific to St. Mark. It is very brief, and extremely rich. It shows the force that the seed has, bearing life within itself, in the Kingdom of God, where divine grace works, even though Our Lord Jesus Christ, dead and risen, does not seem to pay attention:

« This is how it is with the Kingdom of God; it is as if a man were to scatter seed on the land » This “man” is still the sower, Our Lord Jesus Christ, who left the bosom of the Father in order to sow His Seed that is His Word. « While he sleeps, when he is awake, the seed is sprouting and growing; how, he does not know. »

Our Father’s commentary is of a marvellous simplicity. It sends to oblivion all the vain scholarship of our officially recognised exegetes from Fr. Lagrange to Fr. Xavier-Léon Dufour. It suffices to be attentive to the meaning of the words… « While he sleeps, when he is awake », in Greek: kai katheudè kai égeirètai. The verb katheudo means, to sleep, as it does further on in Verse 38 of this same Chapter 4: Our Lord sleeps in the bark. It is the same word katheudôn; and the disciples wake Him: égeirousin. Consequently, Jesus rises: diégertheis. Still a little further on, in Chapter 5, the little daughter of Jairus, the synagogue official, is dead: Jesus says: « She is asleep », katheudei.

“The message of the parables” is easy, Jesus comes, He sows the Word in Galilee. He passes, then He falls into the sleep of death in Jerusalem, but He gets up, risen from the dead.

Thus the Kingdom of God is established on earth, but it is in a state of flux. Our Lord reveals to the Jews something about which they did not have the faintest idea: there was an intermediate time that had to pass between the establishment of this “reign” and its consummation, or its potential fulfilment, the advent of the “Kingdom”.

St. John the Baptist expected an immediate fulfilment. Our Lord, through the parables, gives “orthodromic” profoundness to the development of the Kingdom, first slowly established, in a concealed manner. It develops, and a day will come when it will be realised in power. Even now, Christians have difficulty admitting these two times in the development of the Kingdom.

Either they dream of a sudden advent of Christ in glory who will come to suspend the course of history and establish His Kingdom by force, or they see the Kingdom of God as a slow evolution over centuries, to the point that they cease to think of Heaven and put the essential part of the Kingdom of God in history. This was the thinking of Fr. Chenu. From reading attentively what Pope Benedict XVI writes, we understand that in the past the disreputable French Dominican influenced the young German theologian Joseph Ratzinger.

As for Our Lord, He distinguishes this slow and hidden advent of the Kingdom on earth from the Kingdom to come that is now of the earth but of Heaven, and which will come at the time of the Parousia. (…)

Nevertheless the Gate of Heaven must be opened.

At what cost? (to be continued)

Brother Bruno of Jesus.