Introduction
One of the many great promises which modern science offers the present generation is its being able to reconstruct the past which much faithfulness and precision. It is certainly a scientific wonder that representational graphics are now available for modern people to behold and study the past. Instances to these are everywhere: ancient villages, once buried hundreds of feet below, are now being unearth to reveal finer details of ancient living; fossilized remains of dinosaurs are now being gathered for further studies; ancient manuscripts being restored in order to capture with precision the valuable insights etched in fragile papyri; among many others.
To be sure, the fields of geography, paleontology, sociology or other ancient studies are not the only ones benefiting from the scientific advance the world is witnessing nowadays. The science of reconstructing the past is also now being applied to religion and matters of faith. In particular, the long held beliefs about Jesus – and the otherwise many facets of his life, ministry, mission and the subsequent rise of Christianity from a handful of post-resurrection believers – have now been subjected to numerous scientific studies that aim at faithfully reconstructing the world into which he was born. Many new discoveries have surely helped modern believers portray the Jesus Christ they worship within a more historically factual picture; and this is a privilege not enjoyed only a few centuries back. Surely, there are a lot of aspects to be discovered about the life of Jesus; and with that, a lot of controversial claims to dispute, a lot of new angles to unravel.
Elizabeth Johnson’s Consider Jesus
While many contemporary historical studies about Jesus Christ have emerged in the last few decades, a few are perhaps easily understandable in both content and scope. Elizabeth Johnson gave her own share of thoughts about this fast rising trend with a helping of a book entitled “Consider Jesus: Waves of Renewal in Christology.” Her work exemplifies how the modern world takes interest in rediscovering – or renewal, to use her choice of word – the most important figure of the Christian religion – Jesus Christ. Her purpose in writing the book is in itself telling: “to present the fundamental rethinking taking place in Christology” (Johnson, 1990, p. ix). To achieve such goal, her work combines a historical review of Christological issues that have figured since the beginning of Christianity, with a thematic review of the current Christological concerns of this present age – e.g., rediscovery of Jesus’ life and ministry, his stance on justice and feminism, his suffering and message of salvation, and last but not least, the message of liberation. At the very least, her attempt to map the development of contemporary studies in Christology (which happens not only within Catholic circles, but more so within Protestant and Evangelical churches as well), is an important contribution for those who “are seeking greater understanding of their faith” (Johnson, 1990, p. ix).
Personal Reflections
Elizabeth Johnsons’s Consider Jesus is at the very least thought provoking. It is able to elicit new insights about Jesus – insights that either challenge or support some of the many existing teachings about Jesus.
First, her discussions on the humanity of Jesus in the second chapter of her book have truly challenged the way I understand the Christian doctrine on the two natures of Jesus Christ. For once, it is really difficult to conceive how someone is both a human person and a God in an existence marked by perfection on both natures. Johnson writes: “Chalcedon had confessed that the identity of Jesus Christ was to be understood as comprised of two natures, a human nature and a divine nature, which came together in the unity of one person” (Johnson, 1990, p. 19). Although the Christian teaching about this has been consistent in history, the difficulties surrounding such teachings still abound especially with the advent of modern psychological sciences. For all its sacredness, an inquiring mind can easily question that this model may give an impression that Jesus Christ existed as a man with two circuits of consciousness – one as a man, the other as God. If it would be pushed further, this would simply mean, using modern psychological theories, that Jesus was in a way schizophrenic because he is a person with two consciousnesses. In view of such problem, Johnson tackles the problem by shedding light at the implications of the three concepts that are involved: human nature, divine nature and one person (Johnson, 1990, p. 21).
Johnson’s approach to the problem does not only involve theological exposition of the Church’s past teachings on the matter. She rather takes into careful account the many new theories of Existentialism and psychology to understand that human nature is not just defined by its rational capacity, but also by its “capacity for the infinite” (Johnson, 1990, p. 24) – that is, an openness to a relationship with God. I find this as a very novel insight; if not, Johnson’s most unique appropriation of contemporary teachings to understanding Jesus Christ. The “hypostatic” union I once found hard to understand is now defined in terms of relationship. Johnson admits that there is a “tendency in the Catholic approach to think of Jesus as more divine than human” (Johnson, 1990, p. 21) and this has resulted to defining the humanity of Jesus in a very dogmatic tone. When one however discovers the more complex dynamics of what it means to be a person, the difficulty of trying the weave the metaphysical definitions of the personhood of Jesus Christ is given light in terms of his relationship with God. “Hypostatic union”, when seen under the lenses of relationship, does not so much pose a case for misunderstanding, since Johnson states that this theory simply states that Jesus is “genuinely human” because of his profound relationship with God – his profound openness to the Infinite reality, that is. In ways more than one, this perspective also applies to the manner by which one can understand the kind of knowledge Jesus had as both a human person and God. Because Jesus has to be seen as a person who went into a process of opening himself to God in his lifetime, Johnson believes that Jesus’ knowledge involves that he knew he is God on a subjective level (intuitive) and yet still had to further discover the implications of his identity on an objective level (knowledge).
Second, even in discussing the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus, Johnson’s book aptly appreciates “what was (Jesus) like as real person in history” (Johnson, 1990, 0. 49). I find this very helpful indeed. For a believer who seeks to understand the central figure of his or her faith, I think that revealing the facets of Jesus’ earthly life can provides an array of models for emulation. After all, human persons as we are, we need someone to identify ourselves with someone in order to bring concrete sense in faith. Let me enumerate some:
Jesus’ life is a history married with the dominant Judaism of that time. Johnson has dealt with this with great clarity. It is certainly important to always be reminded of the fact that, in one way or another, Jesus started to bank both his preaching and wisdom in the context of Jewish faith. It emphasizes more than anything else, how Christianity and Judaism are so much related than they are separated. In so many ways, Christianity shares so much with Judaism. Johnson observes: “Jesus’ preaching was shaped by the tradition of Judaism which was hoping for the reign of God, expecting (it) to come in the last day when God would come as judge the living and the dead, and set up a kingdom of justice and peace” (Johnson, 1990, p. 52). I think this is a very important learning to remember. If one were not to take into account Jesus’ history, one would not have appreciated more the sacred fact that establishes Jesus’ connection with the Jewish tradition.
Next, I found it helpful as well to consider the historical situations which characterized the death and resurrection of Jesus. Many times, these stories are passed on to later generations of believers as though it is some kind of legend that may picture Christ as a very naïve person to face death without any resistance whatsoever (at least, if one were to listen to the story first time). But Johnson book has indeed clarified that the death of Jesus was something not determined in eternity, and not even “an accident” (Johnson, 1990, p. 57). When one looks at Jesus’ death under the lenses of cause and effect, one realizes that Jesus died standing up for what he preached in his lifetime because at the time of his trial, he did not want to recant the wisdom which flowed from him, even when they are taken maliciously by his detractors. Johnson did rightly notice, “Jesus triggered a great deal of conflict with the religious authorities of this day” (Johnson, 1990, p. 57). What is most important here I believe is to note that in his agony, Jesus did not stop calling out to God because there is a very close bond that unites them even as he cried out “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Psalm 22). Jesus’ death, and surely his resurrection, is a glaring testament of the openness he has with God in his lifetime.
Johnson discusses other debatable issues on Christology in his book. Some of them were the ones that figured in the mid-1990 as a result of the rise of renewal movements within Christian circles. A few examples would be the Liberation and Feminist movements which she discussed in the sixth and seventh chapter of her book respectively. In it, Johnson has considered the issues that these movements champion, and the urgency which defines their cause in relation to faith. Still, I have noticed that Johnson’s approach in promoting these movements stems from her exposition of the historical conditions of Jesus – that took the side of the poor, and “restored women to full personal dignity in the reign of God” (Johnson, 1990, p. 112). Like many of her already insightful discussions on the previous chapters of her book, her treatment on the causes of Liberation theologians and Feminist theology is more analytic than persuasive. On many accounts, I personally find this approach being more academic and informative than being sympathetic to the cause. This I find a bit ambiguous in Johnson. While she may call the need to commit “personally and ecclesially to enter with into the struggle for justice” (Johnson, 1990, 0. 94), she does not seem to show how exactly – and into what aspects of Christian practice – this is to be exactly to be achieved.
Conclusion
All things considered, Elizabeth Johnson’s book Consider Jesus is a wealth of treasure that contributes to the unending quest to understand the faith which, by rough measurements, has been handed over to as many generations for more than two thousand years. This is very important, if not necessary. To believe does not mean one accents blindly to faith. Surely, there is a need to educate it, in order that one may fully appreciate and own the faith he or she professes. Johnson’s book is a material that can add vital insights to anyone who wants to educate one’s faith. After all, faith is something that seeks understanding too. To look at the historical conditions of Jesus, and learn from it in the process, is definitely one important way to understand the faith that one professes. Johnson’s book is generally successful in such field.
Reference
Johnson, E. (1990). Consider Jesus. Waves of Renewal in Christology. New York: Crossroads
