Jesus Christ

JESUS CHRIST. - The second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, that is, the Son of God made man.

I. THE LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST ACCORDING TO SACRED SCRIPTURE.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The name

The Greek 'Ιησός (Lat. Iesus) renders the Hebrew Jēšā', an abbreviated form of the name Jēhōšā' (Joshua). This word is composed of the divine name Jāh Jēhō in the short form "Yahweh" and of šhā', a vestige of the verb šā' ("to be happy, unharmed"), in the hiph'il form (from the similar verb jāšā' = "to help," "to free," "to save"). The name of J. therefore means: "Yahweh is salvation." Fundamentally it is the same name announced by Is. (7:14): Emmanuel (v.), "God with us" (Mt. 1:23 sees in the fact of the imposition of the name of J. commanded to St. Joseph the fulfillment of the prophecy of the name "Emmanuel"). J. is "God with us." God is with man in order to save him, according to the force of the expression "God with man" in the Old Testament (cf. U. Holzmeister, in Verbum Domini, 8 [1928], pp. 363-369). The appellation "Christ" or "Messiah" completes, in the usage established since apostolic times, the name of J.

2. Genealogy

In order to be with man in the most concrete form possible, "God who saves" took in J. a stable dwelling among men: the Word was made flesh and dwelt (as in a tent) among men (Jn. 1:14). The "flesh" is humanity with its frailty. Already in the genealogies that list the ancestors of J., it appears that he inserted himself into the history of man by descending from the family of David and of Abraham, in which weaknesses are not lacking: the sinful women Thamar, Rahab and "the one of Uriah." There are two genealogies, contained in Mt. 1:1-16 and Lk. 3:23-38, and they seem to report conflicting data. To reconcile them it has been supposed: that Luke would give the natural genealogy (of Mary), Matthew the legal one (of Joseph); but this hypothesis ignores that the genealogies intended to prove not the natural origin, but the succession and the legal origin (M.-J. Lagrange, St Luc, Paris 1921, p. 123). Both evangelists therefore wished to give the genealogy of St. Joseph. There is no difficulty on the part of the Davidic origin of J.: this is proved and asserted even if J. descended from David only by legal means. The obvious sense of Lk. 3:23 says that Luke too recounts the genealogy of St. Joseph. According to many ancient and modern authors, Joseph is called by Matthew the son of Jacob, by Luke the son of Heli, because Jacob and Heli were sons of the same mother (Estha) and of different fathers (the first of Mathan, a descendant of David through Solomon; the second of Mathan, a descendant of David through Nathan), and Heli having died without children, Jacob his brother, according to the law of the levirate (Deut. 25:5-6) married the widow of Heli and had by her a son Joseph, who was therefore the natural son of Jacob, the legal son of Heli. Matthew gives the genealogy of the natural father, Jacob; Luke that of the legal father, Heli. This second explanation runs up against the difficulty that the law of the levirate applied only to brothers at least of the same father, if not also to brothers, sons of the same father and the same mother (cf. U. Holzmeister, Quaestiones biblicae de sancto Ioseph, Rome 1945, p. 11).

A third hypothesis has recourse to adoption: Joseph is the son of Jacob, but was adopted into the family of Heli. It does not appear that the Hebrews had the practice of adoption, except in the case where the father-in-law adopted as a son his son-in-law, the husband of his daughter: the son-in-law then entered into all the rights of a son. This happened in particular when the daughter was an heiress, the father being without male children. In the present case, Joseph, son of Jacob (Matthew's genealogy), marries Mary, daughter of Heli; the latter adopts as a son his son-in-law Joseph. Thus Luke gives the genealogy of Joseph (because he was adopted by Heli) and together the forebears of Mary. This solution seems the most probable, even if one cannot prove with certainty that Mary was an heiress daughter. Such adoption was in use among the Hebrews (Ex. 2:61; I Chron. 2:34-35). The effort to reconcile the two genealogies is laborious, as can be seen; more useful is to understand their meaning. Matthew wished to show in J. the heir of the promises of Abraham and of the throne of David; Luke, going back as far as Adam, wished to show that He is the Savior of all humanity (M.-J. Lagrange, St Luc, p. 126).

3. The divine Word

Jn. 1:14 marks the identification of the man J. with the Word of God. The Johannine prologue, with its expressions on the life of the Logos with the Father, affirms that J. had a life and an action before coming into the world. In him was life (Jn. 1:4). He preexists: in the beginning (before the creatures existed) was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (ibid. 1:1). This life unfolds with the Father. The mystery of the life of J. with the Father will be placed by J. himself in relation to his work: what J. is for man has its origin in what he is before dwelling among men. The love that he receives from the Father before the creation of the world will be communicated to them (Jn. 17:26). Indeed the most hidden mystery of the life of God, the Father's being in the Son, is the cause of the life of J. in the faithful: "I in them, and thou in me" (ibid. 17:23).

If men know the Father, whom no one has ever seen, it is because the only-begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father has revealed him. The intimacy with the Father (being in the bosom of the Father) is the reason for the manifestation of the Father. J. is the light that enlightens every man, because in the bosom of the Father he is the image of the Father, of the invisible God (Col. 1:15) and as the Only-begotten of the Father there belongs to him the "glory," the manifestation of the divinity (Jn. 1:14; correspondence between 1:14 and 18: to contemplate with the eyes of the body the glory of the Father in J. was to receive its light, to accept his revelation of the Father, to see the Father in Him: "he who sees me, sees the Father": Jn. 14:9). All this is summed up in the word Logos. All that J. is for man he is because he is the Logos of the Father.

J. manifests in himself the glory of the Father and thus declares the Father and explains him, because he is the Logos, the personal Revealer of the Father. This concept of J. as Revealer of the Father St. John wished above all to express with this term, very akin to the concept of Sapientia (σοφία) with which St. Paul had identified in Jesus the Wisdom of the Old Testament, which comes forth from God, manifests him, dwells among men. The word Logos was also suitable because in the language of primitive catechesis it had come to signify the Christian message and its content, the very Person of the C. (cf. Col. 1:25-28); he is the Word of God to humanity, a word productive of salvation for men, as and supremely more than the words that God had spoken through his messengers in the Old Testament. God therefore sent his Son as his supreme word of salvation to man. If J. is Savior, he is so because he is the Logos of the Father (cf. R. Kittel, Theol. Wörterbuch zum Neuen Test., IV, pp. 100-40). In J. takes place the supreme revelation of the salvation of God: a concrete revelation, in the giving of salvation.

II. THE LIFE

1. Preparation: first manifestations of the human and divine life of J

a) Before the birth. - α) To Mary. - Every human life must be prepared within the family. "God with man" had a family, composed of Joseph, of the house of David, and of his spouse Mary. The angel announces to Mary that the child will be son of the Most High, heir of the throne of David, eternal king, holy, son of God (Lk. 1:32-35; v. ANNUNCIATION). The future mother of God was prepared with an adornment of grace, and with a special presence of God with her: "the Lord is with thee" (the phrase signifies the most special help that God will give her so that she may accomplish the difficult mission that at that moment he entrusts to her). The incarnation of the Divine Word will come about through a descent from on high of a holy spirit (the creative power of God) and through a presence of divine omnipotence, in the manner in which the cloud covered the ark and was a sign of the presence of God in the midst of the people: "with God nothing is impossible" (Lk. 1:37). β) In 'Ajn Kārim. - The first to whom the mystery of the presence of God in the flesh of man was revealed was Elizabeth who, "filled with the Holy Spirit" (Lk. 1:41), recognizes in Mary the mother of her Lord, and in him whom she bears in her womb the Blessed One, enriched by God with great benefits.

The divine-messianic character of J. is manifested in the canticle of Mary (v. MAGNIFICAT): God is savior, is great, holy, merciful. These attributes of God will be manifested in the distribution of the goods brought by J.; his salvation will consist in the exaltation of the humble and in filling the hungry with good things.

The canticle of Zechariah, which shortly afterward is pronounced in the same house, will insist on describing what are the goods of salvation brought by the Messiah, whose human life, just begun, was by then known in that family. It will be a redemption, a liberation from enemies, which will be followed by a service of God in holiness and justice; a remission of sins, an enlightenment of those who sit in darkness, a directing of men's steps in the way of happiness, a visitation of the Sun that rises and comes from heaven (cf. Is. 60:3).

γ) To Joseph. - The righteous Joseph, to whom the "Infancy Gospel" of Matthew probably goes back (cf. J. Lebreton, in DBs, IV [1950], p. 976, whereas that of Luke goes back to Mary), ignoring the mystery accomplished in Mary, thinks of sending her away in such a way that her honor, of which he does not doubt, may not be harmed; but he is instructed by an angel; the child to be born will save his people (Israel, to whom Matthew directs the Gospel); the liberation will be spiritual: from the hostile power of sin; Joseph will have the rights and function of a father, imposing the name that will indicate the mission: J. And Joseph takes Mary into his home, to act as father to the Savior.

b) The visible manifestation: Bethlehem. — At the time of the birth of J., Palestine was subject to Rome (from 63 B.C., annexation to the province of Syria); king Herod had obtained power from Antony in 40 B.C. He was master of all Palestine, but with limited authority. He was not even a king but, strictly speaking, an ally (socius); which makes a census during his reign all the more possible. The census (not necessarily unique and simultaneous throughout the whole Empire) was carried out by Quirinius: whether the latter was twice prefect of Syria, or carried out the first census as an assistant, in the capacity of procurator, to the governor of Syria, or whether the phrase of Luke is to be understood as "this census was carried out before that which took place under Quirinius governor of Syria" (cf. U. Holzmeister, Historia aetatis Novi Testamenti, 2nd ed., Rome 1938, pp. 38-43; and for the last interpretation: M.-J. Lagrange, St Luc, p. 67), the note of Luke is worthy of faith and stands fully on historical ground. Joseph goes to Bethlehem, from which his family originated; Mary accompanies him (it is obvious that, finding herself in such a state, Joseph would not have wanted her to remain alone in Nazareth). Thus the prophecy of Micah is fulfilled. The year of the birth of J. can be fixed at 748 of Rome (corresponding to the 6th before the Christian era), ca. 2 years before the death of Herod (March of 750 of Rome).

The event, in its external circumstances and in the meaning that God and the first witnesses gave it, has been transmitted by Luke (chap. 2): a Marian source, as he seems discreetly to wish to suggest (ibid. 2:19). The place that received God in his supreme manifestation and self-giving was Bethlehem (Lk. 2:6); more precisely a region in which there were shepherds intent on guarding the flock (ibid. 2:8); and in this a manger (ibid. 2:7), hence a stable. Even if the account of Luke had not yet been written, St. Paul (II Cor. 8:9) comments on it: "You know the grace of our Lord J. C., how for your sake he became poor, though he was rich, so that you might be enriched by his poverty." The Corinthians know: in the apostolic catechesis the life of J. had a great part; even if all the particulars were not known, the first Christians must have heard speak of the humble origins of their Master. They also had the good fortune to deepen in the preaching and in the letters of the Apostles the meaning of the Incarnation. St. Paul will point it out to the community of Philippi: "Have the same sentiments as C. J., who, possessing the divine nature, did not consider his equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself taking the form of a slave, and becoming like men; and having shown himself a man in his outward appearance, he humbled himself" (Phil. 2:5-8).

c) The other manifestations in the humility of the beginnings. — Eight days after the birth, the Newborn was incorporated into the people of Israel, becoming subject to the Law (Gal. 4:4) and receiving the name that indicates his nature and mission (v. above). The subjection to the Law was shown in fulfilling, forty days after the birth, the command to redeem the firstborn (Num. 18:15-16) after having consecrated them to the Lord (Ex. 13:2). J. assumes the character of a victim offered to the Father (cf. the sacrificial sense of the word παραστῆσαι of Lk. 2:22 in Rom. 12:1; M.-J. Lagrange, Epître aux Romains, Paris 1916, pp. 292-93; and the related sense of consecration to God in Rom. 6:13). J. reveals himself here also as the salvation of God for all men, as light of the gentiles and glory of Israel and, in the prophecy of Simeon himself, as an occasion of ruin and of salvation for many and as a sign that will be contradicted, and will be for his own a source of suffering (Lk. 2:34-35). The predictions of Simeon begin to come true, the facts show concretely who the child is, brought back to Bethlehem. Adored by the Magi (v.), led to him by the star, symbol of C. the light, he is persecuted by king Herod. The intimate union with the Father, already manifested in the providence that frees him from Herod, is revealed progressively in Nazareth in obedience, in the continuous manifestations of grace and with a clearer light also at twelve years in the Temple, when he remains there unknown to his relatives, and then explains to them the mystery with the words: "Did you not know that I must attend to the things of my Father?" (Lk. 2:49; even if the words are to be understood in the sense of "being in the house of the Father," they always indicate the close union between the Son and the Father).

2. Public life

a) Chronology of the events. — For the chronology (v.) of the events the most recent authors are followed; here the intention is only to propose a framework of the facts of the public life of J., noting that the chronology can be entirely postponed by one year.

a) Until the first Passover. — John the Baptist begins his ministry in the autumn of the year 26 (779 of Rome), which lasts some months; in the winter between 26-27, perhaps in the first days of Jan., Jesus comes to be baptized: between the Baptism of Jesus and the 1st Passover of Jn. 2:13 some months pass; Jesus spends forty days in the desert where he is tempted, returns to the banks of the Jordan (Jn. 1:20), receives the testimony of John, gathers the first disciples (ibid. 1:35-51), returns to Galilee and attends the wedding at Cana (ibid. 2:11), remains not many days at Capernaum and near Passover sets out for Jerusalem (ibid. 2:12-13).

β) From the first Passover to the beginning of the Galilean ministry: March-May or June of the year 27. — On the occasion of Passover Jesus purifies the Temple (ibid. 2:14-25), has a conversation with Nicodemus (ibid. 3:1-21), remains some time in Judea, where he receives the last testimony of the Baptist (ibid. 3:22-30); he returns to Galilee, both to escape the Pharisees who have heard that he is making disciples (ibid. 4:1-3), and because John had been imprisoned (Mt. 4:12; Mk. 1:14; Lk. 4:14 too belongs to the second return to Galilee); passing through Samaria he converts the woman: it is the time of the harvest (Jn. 4:35b; 35a is a proverb: cf. F. Prat [v. bibl.], I, pp. 210-12, 486-88); arriving in Galilee, he heals the son of the royal official (Jn. 4:43-54). It is the first days of June of the year 27.

γ) Galilean ministry. — The first part runs from June 27 to the second Passover, of the year 28, and embraces the events narrated by the Synoptics up to the multiplication of the loaves, where the Johannine account rejoins them (Jn. 6:1-13); Mt. 4:12-14:36; Mk. 1:14-6:56; Lk. 4:14-9:17. Jesus inaugurates the ministry with a preaching at Nazareth (Lk. 4:16-30; some place the event later, following the chronological order of Mk. 6:1-6 which would be the same as Lk. 4:16-30); descending toward the lake, he definitively calls the first four Apostles, chooses Capernaum as the center city of his ministry, and teaches there in the synagogue. A typical day is described: first miracles: the demoniac, Peter's mother-in-law, the leper (Mk. 1:16-45 and parallels). The conflicts with the Pharisees begin (Mk. 2:1-3:6): the paralytic and the remission of sins, the calling of Matthew and eating with sinners, fasting, the ears of grain on the sabbath, the man with the withered hand. Jesus chooses the twelve from among the disciples and the crowd that by now follows him (Mk. 3:7) and delivers the great Sermon on the Mount (Lk. 6:12-49). All this must have happened fairly early, in the first period of the Galilean ministry. A period of indeterminable length passed between the Sermon on the Mount and the discourse of the parables: between the two are to be placed the events narrated by Lk. 7:1-8:3: the healing of the centurion's servant, the raising of the widow's son, the embassy of the Baptist, the sinful woman. During this time Jesus goes from city to city and from village to village preaching (Lk. 8:1), assisted by some women (ibid. 2-3): all this must have occupied the months of summer and autumn of 27. In autumn (Nov.) the discourse of the parables of Mt. 13 harmonizes with the scene of the sowing; Lk. 8:4-18: the sower, the tares; Mk. 4:26-29: the seed that germinates by itself; and the others, even if not all spoken on the same day. After the sermon of the parables, Jesus goes to the other side of the lake (Lk. 8:22-39): the storm calmed, the liberation of the demoniac. On his return, he raises the daughter of Jairus and heals the sick woman (Lk. 8:40-56). Thus ends the first year of public life: from Jan. 27 to Jan. 28. The events narrated by Lk. 9:1-17 can be fixed more precisely in time: the mission of the Apostles must have taken place in Feb. 28; when they return, Jesus multiplies the loaves for the first time and the feast of Passover is near: cf. Lk. 9:10 with Jn. 6:4. Jesus' journey to Jerusalem for the feast of Passover or Pentecost of 28, during which he heals the paralytic of the pool of Bethsaida (Jn. 5), marks the division between the first and the second part of the Galilean ministry (with many authors the transposition of chapters 5 and 6 of John is held here; cf. the discussion in F. Prat, I, pp. 567-68; cf. also N. Urichello in Biblica, 31 [1950], pp. 129-63).

The second part of the Galilean ministry runs from summer 28 to the feast of Tabernacles (Oct. 28: Mk. 7:1-9:30; Lk. 9:18-50; p. 51-18:30).

After the healing of the paralytic in Jerusalem and the ensuing discussion, Jesus returns to Galilee (Jn. 7:1). The principal events of the second Galilean ministry are the journey into Phoenicia and the Decapolis; the miracles of the Canaanite woman's daughter, of the deaf-mute, the second multiplication of the loaves, the blind man of Bethsaida, the confession of Peter, the transfiguration with the healing of the demoniac, two announcements of the Passion. Here Luke inserts the section called "the journey" (Lk. 9:51-18:30), whose events must have occurred, at least in part, during Jesus' journey to Jerusalem for the feast of Tabernacles (Jn. 7:2), during Jesus' stay in Perea before and after the feast of Dedication (Jn. 10:40: πᾶν) which belongs to the last period of the public life (v. further on). But certainly Luke has here gathered together events and sayings of Jesus that belong to different times, including the Galilean ministry.

8) From the feast of Tabernacles, Oct. 28, to the last Passover, March 29 (Apr. 30). - Jesus goes to Jerusalem for the feast of Tabernacles (Jn. 7:2-7); on the journey he sends the 72 disciples, is welcomed at Bethany by Martha and Mary (Lk. 10:1-42), teaches the Pater noster (ibid. 11:1-13); on arriving in Jerusalem he teaches in the Temple and manifests himself solemnly on the last day of the feast (Jn. 7:2-53), frees the adulteress (ibid. 8:1-11). The events that follow in John fit well between the feast of Tabernacles and the feast of Dedication and are the dispute in the Temple (Jn. 8:12-59), the healing of the man born blind (ibid. 9:1-41); the parable of the Good Shepherd (ibid. 10:1-21). Between Oct., the feast of Tabernacles, and Dec., the feast of Dedication (ibid. 10:22) there was a stay of Jesus in Perea (cf. ibid. 10:40); in Dec. Jesus attends the feast of Dedication (ibid. 10:22-39), and withdraws again to Perea (ibid. 10:40-42). During the first and second ministry in Perea many events must have occurred that Luke narrates in the journey section, and that are difficult to fit into a more precise chronological order. The principal events are (after those from Lk. 9:51 to 11:13) the banquet at the house of the chief Pharisee (ibid. 14:1-6), the ten lepers (ibid. 17:11-19); the majority of these chapters is occupied by teachings (parables of mercy, of the good use of riches, warnings against the Pharisaic spirit, etc.). At a certain point, between the feast of Dedication and Passover, at a time less precisely determined, but certainly near the latter (Jn. 11:55), Jesus goes to Bethany, and there performs the miracle that will decide his death, the resurrection of Lazarus, after which, to escape the snares of the Jews, he withdraws to Ephrem, remaining there a few days (Jn. 11:54-55).

2) The final journey to Jerusalem and the last week (Lk. 18:30–21:38 and parallels; Jn. 12). - Leaving Ephrem, J. sets out toward Jerusalem, not directly, but passing through Jericho, where he heals the two blind men and stays with Zacchaeus, and then to Bethany, where he is invited to supper, and Mary, the sister of Lazarus, anoints his feet: six days before Passover (Jn. 12:1), that is, on the Sabbath. On the following day (ibid. 12), J. enters Jerusalem in triumph, and in the evening returns to Bethany (Mk. 11:11). On Monday, returning to Jerusalem, he curses the fig tree, drives the sellers from the Temple, and in the evening again leaves the city (Mk. 11:12-19). On Tuesday he is again in Jerusalem, in the Temple (ibid. 11:27), where he disputes with the chief priests, scribes and elders. On leaving the Temple he begins the eschatological discourse to his disciples (ibid. 13:1). It appears that on Wednesday J. did not go to Jerusalem, but spent the whole day at Bethany with the Apostles (F. Prat, II, p. 261); it was the day on which the second council of the Sanhedrin was held (after that of Jn. 11:46-53), of which Mt. 26:2-3; Mk. 14:1; Lk. 22:1-2. With this we enter the account of the Passion, which is treated below.

b) Principal aspects of the public life. - a) The formation of the Apostles. - The revelation that J. makes of himself and of the Father needs testimonies: St. John describes the work of the Baptist from this point of view: Jn. 1:6-8. 15. 19. 32-34. Presented as the Lamb of God, as the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit, J. seeks others who, after having been with him from the beginning, may bear witness to him (Jn. 16:27; Acts 1:21-22). The principal work of J. during his public life was, besides preaching to the crowds, the formation of the Apostles. To them he reserves the explanation of the parables, because to them it has been given to know the mystery of the Kingdom of God (Mk. 4:10-11). He patiently bears with their slowness, their little faith, their prejudices about the character of the Kingdom (cf. Mk. 4:40); he corrects them and with wise progression introduces them into the mystery of his life and of his mission, accustoming them to the thought of the Passion (Mt. 16:21-23); he warns them against the spirit of Pharisaism (ibid. 16:6-12); he aims to form them in goodness (Lk. 9:52-56), in detachment (Mt. 10:9-10). He foretells persecutions to them (Mt. 10:16-25) (against all the disciples of J.); but at the same time he instills courage in them and the awareness of their dignity: it is he who sends them (ibid. 16a); in them J. comes, and because J. is sent by the Father, in them it is the Father himself who comes to men (Mt. 10:40). J. reserves for the Apostles the last hours with the supreme manifestations and gifts. But what above all formed the Apostles for their office of witnesses was the concrete revelation that J. made of his nature before them for about two and a half years: what they call contemplating his glory (Jn. 1:14), the manifestation of the life that was with the Father and that has now appeared to them and that they proclaim (1 Jn. 1:1-3).

In J. the Apostles progressively discovered God. On their souls as pious Jews, accustomed to the synagogue reading, were impressed the great biblical theophanies, not abstract, but concrete in the very history of their people. God was for them a holy God, who by his holiness had kept the contamination of idolatry far from the people, and when the people abandoned themselves to it he punished them with the severity of a judge, and forgave with mercy when they repented. He was a unique God, jealous of the love of the people whom he called his "bride"; who was its Shepherd and Father; he spoke through the prophets and through the leaders, and gave his laws; the king represented him and was like the tangible sign that God was always present in the midst of the people. The Tabernacle first, and then the Temple, were the place of the glory of God, where he manifested himself in the cloud, from which he heard prayer and communicated his will.

J. manifested to the Apostles and to all the people that the God of the Fathers had come in him in the most solemn, definitive manner. He shows himself from the beginning master of nature and thereby manifests his glory for the first time (Jn. 2:11); he has authority over the temple of Yahweh and he himself is the temple, in which God resides (ibid. 13-22); he is conscious that in him the prophecies are fulfilled and he proclaims it from the first moment of the Galilean preaching: "the time is fulfilled" (Mk. 1:15); in him the Kingdom of God has drawn near, has already come. From the first moment he demands a full adherence to his message, with the total transformation of life (cf. the word μετένοια, which implies a true conversion); he calls the Apostles with a single word (Mk. 1:16-20); teaching with authority in the synagogue and forgiving sins, J. presents himself as God himself come to men (cf. the impression made by the first deeds: Mk. 1:22. 27. 37. 45; 2:12). J. confirms this impression when, a few weeks after the beginning of the ministry, he delivers the Sermon on the Mount: there he shows himself the definitive revealer of the will of the Father, who has the same authority as God, whose law he perfects, and who wishes to initiate his own into intimacy with the Father (cf. Mt. 5:45. 48; 6:4. 6-18. 25-34; 7:21). The Pater noster, placed by St. Luke on a more reliable occasion, during the journey to Jerusalem for the feast of Tabernacles, is the revelation of the new spirit of filial confidence with the Father, promulgated in the Sermon on the Mount. The whole discourse gives the impression that this is not an ordinary prophet who speaks in the name of God, and urges men toward God: J. demands for himself what the prophets had asked for God: "whoever hears my words and puts them into practice..." (Mt. 7:24). In this fact there is "a fundamental truth that dominates the whole Gospel, and illuminates the problem of the C.: it is on the relations with the C. that the religious value of a man depends" (J. Lebreton, in DBs, IV, col. 1018). Shortly afterward J. forgives a sinful woman, and proclaims that he has spiritual relatives in whoever does the will of his Father (Mk. 3:31-35; in Lk. 8:20-21 the will of the Father is his word, that is, the word of J. himself). In the parables of the Kingdom he proclaims himself king, foresees the future of his Kingdom, the phases and destinies of the Kingdom in the world, its expansion, despite its humble beginnings, its power of penetration, to which nothing can resist (mustard seed and leaven); he insists on the docility required to be part of it (sower), on its price and value (pearl and hidden treasure). These are profound words, of which J. reserves the explanation to the disciples (Mk. 4:34); they show in J. the founder of the Kingdom of God on earth, and the judge not only future (parable of the tares), but also present (his preaching already discriminates among men, and the judgment of condemnation is that men have loved darkness more than light: Jn. 3:18-19): the disciples question him, marveling that he speaks to the people in parables (Mt. 13:9). All this, together with his power over demons (manifested anew now at Gerasa: Mk. 5:1-20), over nature and over death itself (the storm on the lake, the two blind men and the mute man, the daughter of Jairus [Lk. 8:22-56], and shortly before the son of the widow [ibid. 7:11-17]), profoundly influences the souls of the Apostles: gradually they see him ever more intervening with goodness in the miseries of man, and at the same time isolating himself ever more from the common mentality and earthly mentality of the religious leaders of the nation, of the whole people and even of some of the disciples: John 6 (multiplication of the loaves, discourse on the bread of life, misunderstanding of the Jews and of many disciples: v. 66); then they, through the mouth of Peter, proclaim their faith in J.: "we have believed and have come to know that you are the Holy One of God" (v. 69). The concrete manifestations of J. led them to place the man J., whom they had before their eyes, in the category of the divine; from then on they would see J. ever more in the light of God: He is the Holy One of God, who participates in a unique and incommunicable way in the holiness of God (F. Prat, I, p. 400). The events at Jerusalem for the feast (John 5, 1-47) and the second part of the Galilean ministry confirm the faith of the Apostles, which is solemnly manifested at Caesarea Philippi, with Peter's explicit acknowledgment of the divine sonship of J. The last events of Galilee (the Transfiguration, with the testimony of the Law and the prophets, with the manifestation of the "glory" of God in the face of J. (cf. B. Zielinski, De Doxa Christi Transfigurati, in Verbum Domini, 126 [1948], pp. 291-303) and the ministry in Judea and Perea with the cry on the last day of the feast of Tabernacles (John 7, 37) and the declaration about himself, light of the world (ibid. 8, 12); the corresponding confirmation of the word in the fact of the healing of the man born blind (ibid. 9), the parable of the Good Shepherd who gives his life, so that they may have life in abundance (ibid. 10, 1-18), and the confirmation of the gift of life in the resurrection of Lazarus (ibid. 11, 1-44), make one see in J. ever more resplendent the revelation and the self-giving to men of the God of the Old Testament, who had revealed and promised himself as a source of living water (Jer. 2, 13; Ps. 35 [36], 10); as light (Is. 60, 20; Ps. 26 [27], 1); as Shepherd of the people (Is. 40, 11; Ps. 22 [23], 1-4).

β) Way to the salvation of God. — The definitive "visitation of God," promised in the Old Testament, was to consist principally in the salvation of man. More than anything else, in J. the God-Salvation, the God-Redeemer reveals and gives himself (v. cō'EL).

The principal aspects of the salvation wrought by J. are already indicated in the compendious description given by Mt. 4, 23 and 9, 35 (cf. St. Peter in Acts 10, 38), which embraces the whole Galilean ministry: "he went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom and healing every disease and infirmity": miracles and discourses are the means by which J. comes into contact with man in order to save him.

For the main lines of J.'s teaching, cf. J. Bonsirven, Les enseignements de Jésus-Christ, (2nd ed., Paris 1946). It suffices here to observe that J. shows fulfilled in himself the lines in which the idea of salvation had been expressed and already in part realized, an idea that permeates the doctrine and history of the Old Testament. In J. the "promise" made to the patriarchs is fulfilled (John 8, 56; Mk. 1, 15); the Kingdom of God, the government of God in the world announced by the prophets and ever anew restored in the unfaithful people, now has its full fulfillment: J. proclaims its coming (Mk. 1, 15), describes its characteristics and phases (the Sermon on the Mount and the parables, the eschatological discourse), and inaugurates it in himself, casting out the antagonist, the prince of this world (John 16, 11. 33). The liberation-restoration with which J. gives supernatural reality to what had happened as a type in the history of the chosen people, has its manifestation in the miracles, which are, already as physical facts, a liberation from the spiritual enemies of man (the liberation of the possessed is a liberation from the devil; the healing from diseases and the resurrection of the dead are a taking of man away from the power of death and of the sin that is its cause). But in addition the miracles have a symbolic or parabolic character; they signify spiritual salvation.

This symbolism is expressly noted in the Fourth Gospel: the healing of the paralytic at the pool foretells the power of J. to give life (John 5, 19-30); the resurrection of Lazarus symbolizes the fact that J. is the resurrection and the life for those who believe in him (ibid. 11, 25); the healing of the man born blind, that J. is the light of the world (ibid. 9, 4-5). Even when it is not explicitly noted, there is in all the miracles the sense of announcements of the Kingdom, signs that the salvation of man is being wrought, in soul and in body: J. saves the whole man (cf. Mk. 2, 1-12; John 5, 1-14).

The liberation and acquisition of the new people of God, which J. accomplishes, had its culmination in the shedding of blood, already necessary in the Old Testament to establish the covenant between God and man (cf. Ex. 9, 8; Hebr. 9, 15-22). But already in his public life J. began to form the new people, with new laws and a new spirit (the Sermon on the Mount) and established in his teaching the conditions for participating in the salvation offered and entering the new people. He communicates salvation only to one who is born from above of water and the Holy Spirit (John 3, 3-5), to one who eats the flesh of the Son of Man and drinks his blood (ibid. 6, 53). But beyond a sacramental life (the idea of life in John, chaps. 3-6 is connected with sacramental rites), J. requires moral dispositions, intimately connected with it. The first is to enter into God's plan by means of faith. J. demands, as an absolute condition of salvation, faith in him and in the Father (John 5, 24; 6, 29). The faith that he demands is not an adherence of the intellect alone, but of the whole man (J. mostly used the expression πιστεύω εἰς, stronger than πιστεύω τινι: one believes even in a man, but one believes in God alone (cf. J. Huby, De la connaissance de foi dans st Jean, in Recherches de sciences rel., 21 [1931], p. 408, note 439), whereby man abandons his own salvation into the hands of God and accepts the ways of God, leaving his own. The Kingdom is received with the humility and faith of a little child (cf. Mk. 10, 15).

The other moral condition required (connected with faith) is to follow the C.: this is necessary in order to be his disciples, and in order not to lose oneself (Mt. 10, 38-39; Mk. 8, 34-35). Salvation depends on one's attitude toward him. He knows that he is the only mediator of salvation between God and man (cf. Mt. 11, 27; John 14, 6); no one goes to the Father except through him, who alone can reveal the Father (ibid.). Therefore he knows that all have need of him; to reject him is to reject the Father (Mt. 10, 32-40; Lk. 10, 16).

For his sake one must lose oneself, leave everything and imitate him (for an ancient Oriental, to be a disciple of someone meant to accustom oneself to do in everything as the master did, and therefore to follow him in all states and conditions of life).

γ) The conflict with the Jews. - The conflict between J. and the Jewish religious-political environment was inevitable; the way in which he worked out man's salvation and the way in which he offered it clashed with the mentality of the Pharisees and of all official Judaism, and provoked the conflict that was to lead to the death of J. The causes of this conflict have been extensively studied (A. Charue, L'incredulità des Juifs dans le Nouveau Testament, Gembloux 1929; cf. J.-B. Frey, Le conflit entre le messianisme de Jésus et le messianisme des Juifs de son temps, in Biblica, 14 [1933], pp. 133-149, 269-93) and can be summarized as follows. The fundamental cause is that every time God enters into man's history, he places man before a supreme and definitive decision: either for him or against him. No one can remain indifferent before God's intervention. However, in order to be on God's side, one must renounce everything that is not him. Now the definitive and final decision before which God placed the people in his supreme manifestation and self-giving in J. entailed the renunciation, on the part of the people and their leaders, of their interpretation of the Sacred Books: J. gave the Old Testament a meaning too different from Pharisaism not to provoke a reaction. For him the Old Testament contains the history and destiny not of one people alone, but of all humanity, whose salvation it announced: the serpent prefigures the salvation of all believers (Jn. 3, 14-15); the patriarchs will receive the pagans at their banquet (Mt. 8, 11). Zacchaeus too is a son of Abraham (Lk. 19, 9). The salvation that J. offers is for all (J.-B. Frey, op. cit., p. 273). Beyond the nationalist spirit of Pharisaism, J. combats the Jewish interpretation of the figure of the Messiah. J. does not want to be the magnificent king, the ruler, the liberator from the foreign yoke, as was expected by many Jews. What in the minds of the prophets had been conditioned upon the people's faithfulness, or was a symbolic element of the spiritual goods of the future messianic kingdom, was interpreted as a principal and necessary element: in the Gospel the signs of the Jews' mentality appear and J. combats it (J.-B. Frey, op. cit., pp. 269-73). J. speaks of the humble and patient Messiah, who frees from sin, and who has a wholly spiritual mission (Lk. 4, 18-19); he does not want to become king (Jn. 6, 15); he refuses the prodigious signs that the crowd expects (Lk. 11, 29).

Besides having to renounce the interpretation of their Scripture, the Pharisees realize that they must also renounce their spiritual predominance over the people and their role as its guides. Indeed they are alarmed from the very beginning when J. enters the Temple, which is their domain, as its master (Jn. 2, 18); they do not accept the new interpretation of the law of the Sabbath, because it is not theirs (Mk. 2, 24; 3, 4); to follow the new teacher is a seduction (Jn. 7, 47). When they see that many others follow him, they try to seize him (ibid. 32); and they resolve to do away with him, because: « if we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him » (ibid. 11, 48).

The most difficult renunciation that J. demanded by his doctrine and by his very presence was the renunciation of their own righteousness. Pharisaic legalism is in contrast with the interior spirit that J. requires of his disciples (cf. the Sermon on the Mount, and further Mk. 7, 1-23 and parallels). The burden of prescriptions that they impose is in contrast with the yoke of J. (Mt. 11, 28-30); they crush souls with their religion of purely external works, and, arrogating to themselves the monopoly of salvation, they make those works an indispensable condition. J., on the other hand, overturns this righteousness of observances, and accuses the Pharisees of hypocrisy (Mt. 23). They, who feel themselves good and holy, cannot tolerate that this prophet should make them feel that they are far from true salvation, and that to find it they need him. This is the blindness or hardening of which J. speaks (Jn. 9, 39-41) and his Evangelist (ibid. 12, 37-43): the failure to recognize that they need him. Thus the mission of J., whose purpose is to enlighten, has as its effect, because of their bad disposition, to blind and harden them further. But the epilogue of the drama that leads J. to death will still be a victory of God, as already in the ancient infidelities of Israel. God always has the last word in history, and it is a word of salvation.

c) The Passion, supreme manifestation and self-giving. The 3rd Passover: year 29, 782 of Rome. - a) General consideration. - The Passion of J. was interpreted by J. himself as the necessary death of the grain of wheat, which, fallen into the earth, bears much fruit (Jn. 12, 24); as his supreme glorification (together with the Resurrection) by the Father (ibid. 13, 31-32; 17, 5; cf. 7, 39); as the hour of the enemies and the power of darkness (Lk. 22, 53); as a giving of his life in redemption for many (Mt. 20, 28); as a fulfillment of prophecies, necessary for J. C. to enter into his glory (Lk. 24, 25-27). The first apostolic catechesis likewise saw in the Passion a fact that happened because and as God had foreseen and decreed it (Acts 2, 23), a rejection by the Jews of the stone, which then became the cornerstone (Acts 4, 11); a joining together of Herod and Pilate, of the gentiles and the Israelites against the holy servant of God, J., anointed by God to do to him all that the hand and counsel of God had beforehand prepared (ibid. 4, 26-27: in the mouth of the disciples, already well instructed in the meaning of the Passion of J.).

Later a theological deepening would further highlight the sanctifying justice of the Father in the Blood of C. (Rom. 3, 25-26); the Father who does not spare his own Son, but delivers him up for us all (ibid. 8, 32); he perfects, through sufferings, the captain and leader of our salvation (Hebr. 2, 10), that is, he makes him in all things like his brothers, tempted and tried as they are and therefore merciful, able to sympathize with our weaknesses (ibid. 2, 17-18; 4, 15): he learned through his sufferings what obedience is, he offered up in the days of his life prayers and supplications with loud cries and tears, and was heard because of his piety, and, made perfect, he became for all those who obey him the cause of eternal salvation, God having proclaimed him high priest according to the order of Melchizedek (ibid. 5, 7-10). He offered himself (spontaneously) to God as a victim without blemish (ibid. 9, 14).

The theological themes that explain and coordinate the facts of the Passion are therefore: the power of darkness, the spontaneous self-giving of J., the command of the Father and the obedience of J., the priestly character of the sufferings, the passing of J. through all the trials of men, so as to perfect his priestly office, the filial prayer, the fruit of the seed that falls into the earth, the redemption that is accomplished.

β) The Power of darkness enters into action. - The drama that was the whole public life of J., in the struggle between the unbelief of the Jews and his preaching, reaches its climax in the decision of the Sanhedrin to put J. to death, taken after the resurrection of Lazarus (Jn. 11, 46-53). A second meeting of the Sanhedrin two days before the Passover deliberates on the manner of seizing J. (Mt. 26, 3-5). On the same day or at the same time Judas offers to hand J. over; it is Satan who has entered into him (Lk. 22, 3; Jn. 13, 2). The price is thirty shekels equivalent to about 116 gold lire, a price lower than that of slaves.

γ) The gifts of the 13th of Nisan. - The paschal Supper, which J. brought forward to the 13th of Nisan together with other Jews (this solution is held by exegetes to be the most probable; in this way the apparent divergences between the Synoptics and John are reconciled), is marked by his gifts and by his obedience to the Father. Jn. 13:1 sees in the events of the Cenacle the greatest proof of J.'s love (not excluding the rest of the Passion). The supreme testimonies of love are due to the fact that J. knows that his hour has come to pass to the Father. J., who has been throughout his public life and is now in a particular way as one who serves (Lk. 22:27), teaches humility first by words (ibid. 24-30), then by example (Jn. 13:1-17), washing the feet of the Twelve. He then shows his disciples that he goes to death neither compelled nor unconscious; therefore he makes known the traitor, who immediately afterwards, invaded by Satan, prince of darkness, by night, leaves the Cenacle (Jn. 13:18-30). Once the traitor has left, J. gives the Apostles his Body and his Blood, and thus leaves them the Sacrifice of the New Covenant. As the Covenant struck by God with the people was ratified with the blood of the victims, so the Covenant that God through J. renews with all humanity must be ratified with the Blood of J. himself. The Blood will be shed for all for the remission of sins, the Body will shortly be given in sacrifice. The Supper, renewed through the centuries by J.'s command, will be the memorial and will apply the fruits of the sacrifice of the Cross, from which already the first Supper has its value.

Having instituted the Sacrifice, J. addresses to the Apostles and their successors the gift of the last words of consolation and warning. The main lines of the discourse (which certainly owes much to John's redactional work) are the following: J. assures the disciples of his imminent glorification, which brings with it the glory of the Father (Jn. 13:31-33); he gives them the commandment of charity, a new commandment (ibid. 13:34), the distinguishing mark of his disciples (ibid. 13:35) on the model of his love, cf. ibid. 13:34 and 15:12-13; he exhorts them to faith with abandonment in God and in him (ibid. 14:1). The motives he brings are: 1) the work of the Father and of the Son for their salvation: the Father has prepared for each one his place in heaven; the Son begins a journey, whose final phase will be the common life with the Father (ibid. 14:2-5); 2) J. is the way, the truth, the life, he is the only way to go to the Father; whoever knows him knows the Father, because of the communion of essence and of life between J. and the Father, manifested by words and works (Jn. 14:6-11); 3) the usefulness of J.'s departure: the efficacy of prayer in J.'s name (ibid. 14:12-14); 4) J. promises the Holy Spirit and describes his action: he will be a defender, he will remain forever with them, as Spirit of truth (ibid. 14:15-17); 5) J. will return at his Resurrection and will be a life-giving spirit: the communion of life that exists between J. and the Father will be shared with them (ibid. 14:18-20); 6) the Most Holy Trinity dwells in whoever observes the commandments (ibid. 14:21-24); 7) the last motives for joy are again the illuminating action of the Holy Spirit, the gift of peace, his going to the Father, the victory over the prince of the world (ibid. 14:25-31).

The continuation of the discourse (Jn. 15-16) is a collection of sayings of J., uttered perhaps on different occasions (M.-J. Lagrange, St Jean, pp. 398-400). Here J. first reveals the mystery of our union with him (ibid. 15:1-17): J. sees himself as realizing perfectly (ἀληθινή) elements of organic unity and of vital influence with the branches; a necessary union, which brings the efficacy of prayer and the glory of the Father; it has as its condition the observance of the commandments, especially of charity, of which the love of the C. is the example. J. then foretells to the Apostles the hatred of the world and persecutions, promises the Holy Spirit as witness to him, as accuser of the world, and as illuminator of the Church (ibid. 15:26; 16:8; 16:13-15). In conclusion, J. again comforts his disciples, speaking of his return (ibid. 16:16-22), of the Father's love for the disciples (ibid. 16:27), of his union with the Father and of the victory over the world (ibid. 16:28-33).

The third part of the outpouring of the Heart of C. in the Cenacle is the priestly prayer, in which he asks for himself (1-5) glorification; for the Apostles (6-19) preservation in the faith in what of the Father has been manifested by J. and in J. (ἐν τῷ ὀνάριστῷ σου) that they may be one, that they may be sanctified, they for whom J. offers himself as victim (sense of ἀγιάζω, "I sanctify"); finally for future disciples (Jn. 17:20-26), that they may be one, and may be where J. is.

The discourses of J. after the Supper, with his prayer, are among the richest pages of the Gospel for the manifestations that J. made in them concerning the mystery of his Person and of his life; the life in the bosom of the Father and in communion with the Spirit of the Father, his union with the disciples. For a deeper study, see J.-M. Vosté, Studia Ioannea, Rome 1930, pp. 251-301; A. Durand, Le Discours de la Cène (in Rech. sc. rel., 1 [1910], pp. 97-131, 513-39; 2 [1911], pp. 321-49, 521-49); J. Huby, Le discours de Jésus après la Cène (Verbum Salutis), Paris 1932). For the texts on the Holy Spirit: J. Musger, Dicta Christi de Paracleto (Rome 1938).

8) The agony in the garden. - After having said the hymn, J. leaves the Cenacle and goes to the garden of olives. The feelings to which J. gives vent in his heart are sorrow (λυπεῖσθαι: Mt. 26:37) at a present evil, weariness (ἀθημονεῖν), horror and amazement (ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι). Feelings through which men pass and which J. had to share (Hebr. 2:17-18). Sorrow urges J. to ask the Father that the cup pass (in the sense of the lot destined for him), and at the same time he conforms to the will of the Father (cf. Phil. 2:8, become obedient unto death, and death of the Cross). J., fearing death, comes into such anguish as to sweat blood (the phenomenon does not seem foreign to natural causes [cf. U. Holzmeister, Exempla sudoris sanguinei, in Verbum Domini, 23 [1943], pp. 71-76).

9) The religious trial. - The order of events seems to be the following: J. is questioned in private form by the elder Annas, who could more easily have found the motive for a condemnation (Jn. 18:13-24); he is then led to Caiaphas, the high priest, and to the Sanhedrin, gathered in his house (Mt. 26:57-66), where he is asked whether he is the C., and the Son of God. The two questionings are clearly distinct, and the sense given by Caiaphas to the second is whether he is the natural son of God, in the sense understood by the Psalms (2:7) and by J. himself (Jn. 5:18). J., with the expression "you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mt. 26:64), answers affirmatively to the two questions: the allusion to Dan. 7:13-14 proves his messiahship; "to sit at the right hand of God" is equivalent to having divine honors and therefore a divine nature (cf. A. Médebielle in La Ste Bible, ed. L. Pirot, XII, Paris 1938, pp. 293-94). The condemnation of J., pronounced by Caiaphas and ratified by the Sanhedrin, was therefore inflicted because he declared himself the Son of God (cf. Jn. 19:7). Making oneself like God was considered as blasphemy (cf. Mk. 2:7 and Jn. 10:33) and therefore punishable by death (Lev. 24:16). The Sanhedrin therefore pronounces the death sentence, because the right had been left to it, but being unable to execute the sentence, it was necessary to refer the case and have the sentence ratified by the Roman magistrate (Jn. 18:31; cf. U. Holzmeister, Historia aetatis Novi Testamenti, 2nd ed., Rome 1938, pp. 99-100).

With the condemnation of J. to death the religious trial ends, conducted according to competent scholars against Jewish procedural practice, and therefore irregular (H. L. Strack-P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum N. T. aus Talmud und Midrasch, I, Das Evangelium nach Mat., Munich 1922, p. 1024). Even setting aside irregularities of procedure, the sentence was unjust, since the judges should have known from the preparation of the Old Testament and from the proofs adduced by J. that in making himself the Son of God he did not derogate from the holiness of the one God. The unjust condemnation, preceded by the blow with a rod on his face (ἀσπύμα Io. 18, 22), by Peter's threefold denial (on the agreement of the accounts cf. F. Prat, II, pp. 355-56), and followed by the insults of the sanhedrists and the servants (Mt. 26, 67-68) and by the second condemnation in the morning (Lc. 22, 66-70) was the power of darkness in action; and at the same time the progressive annihilation of C. down to the extreme of sorrow and humiliation. On the whole religious trial cf. Giacinto del S.mo Crocifisso in La Redenzione. Conferenze bibliche tenute al P. Istituto Biblico nel 1933 (Rome 1934, pp. 55-88).

10) The civil trial. - In bringing J. before Pilate, the Jews accuse him as guilty of political crimes, the only ones that would have wrung from the Roman Procurator a sentence of death. They accuse him first in general as a malefactor (Io. 18, 30), then as a political agitator who has made himself king and has forbidden the payment of tribute (Lc. 23, 2-5). Pilate recognizes six times the innocence of J.: the first after the interrogation about kingship (Io. 18, 38): Pilate sees that it is not a dangerous kingship; the second after the referral to Herod (Lc. 23, 14): Pilate has seen that not even Herod condemned him; the third after the failed proposal to substitute Barabbas for J. and after the message of his wife, whose words impress Pilate: "nothing between you and this just man" (Mt. 27, 18; cf. Lc. 23, 22 "for the third time"); the fourth after the flagellation and the crowning with thorns (Io. 19, 4): Pilate means that he imposed the flagellation to satisfy the Jews, with the intention however of not going further; the fifth immediately after, when he has said "behold the man", and the Jews ask for the crucifixion (Io. 19, 6); the sixth, after the final struggle with the Jews: Pilate, yielding to the fear of being accused before Caesar (Tiberius) for having acquitted a guilty man of lese-majesty, washes his hands before the people (Mt. 26, 24).

Then were fulfilled the words of Ps. 2, 1-2 concerning the conspiracy of princes and kings against C., as the first Christians remembered (Act. 4, 25-28). J. there also suffered the sufferings already foretold by Is. 50, 6; 52, 13-53, 12. J. is the "servant of Jahweh" who does not turn away his face from ignominies and spittings, has presented his back to those who beat him and his cheeks to those who plucked his beard; a man of sorrows and acquainted with suffering, maltreated, he resigned himself, and did not open his mouth, like a lamb led to the slaughter.

J. shows throughout the Passion the special protection that God grants him (Is. 50, 7); he reveals himself in his answers as king of a spiritual kingdom; he reaffirms his mission and his superhuman origin (Io. 18, 36-37); he affirms that he is in Pilate's hands by the will of the Father (ibid. 19, 11). The fulfillment of the prophecies and the manifestations of his nature, while the struggle of the power of darkness against the light draws to its end, prepare the supreme glorification of J. C. and of the Father in the Death and Resurrection.

η) The Crucifixion and the Death. - The manifestation of the Person of C. in the last hours (from about the sixth hour, that is from twelve o'clock on 14 nīśān, corresponding to our 18 March of the year 29 [782 of Rome] until the ninth hour, that is until fifteen o'clock), unfolds in the succession of fulfillments of prophecies, of prayers to the Father, and of kindness toward men, while the natural causes that determine death are at work. The crucifiers attached the hands of J. to the crossbeam, which he had carried, and then raised him on the upright, already fixed in the ground, where he was attached by the piercing of the feet (v. CROCE, IV. La Crocifissione di G.); cf. the words of J. himself about six months earlier, at the feast of Tabernacles of the year 28: "when you lift up the Son of Man" (Io. 8, 28), and at the beginning of the public life to Nicodemus, with reference to the royal prophecy (type) of the serpent (ibid. 3, 14); for the piercing of the feet and hands cf. Ps. 21 (22), 17. Two malefactors were crucified with J., and to this, if not exclusively, J. was thinking (Lc. 22, 37), applying the words of Is. 53, 12. J. was crucified (though not entirely naked, as the Gospel of Nicodemus, 9, already indicated) without his garments, which were divided into parts, but the tunic was cast lots for among the soldiers: cf. Ps. 21 (22), 19. In the same Ps. 8-9 the insults were foretold (Mt. 27, 39-43). The question is raised whether J., praying on the Cross with the first words of the same Ps. 2: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me" (Mt. 27, 46), pronounced only these words aloud, as the beginning of the prayer, which he then recited entire in a low voice, or whether he meant to indicate a forsaking of him by the Father. This second interpretation has ever less the consent of exegetes, who in this refer back to ancient tradition (cf. L. Mahieu, L'abandon du Christ sur la Croix, in Mél. Sc. Rel., 2 [1945], pp. 209-42).

To the cry of J. and his lament "I thirst" followed the offering of the drink of vinegar; cf. Ps. 21 (22), 16 and 68 (69), 22. Thus all the Scriptures were fulfilled (Io. 19, 30), and there was also accomplished the perfect mercy of the Pontiff already shown on the Cross with the forgiveness of the executioners, with the promise of reward to the thief, with the filial act toward his Mother, whereby, according to an opinion ever more accepted, he promulgated his spiritual motherhood with regard to all men, and there was also fulfilled the entry of the Pontiff into the heavens, a single oblation, by which "he has procured for ever the perfection of those who are sanctified" (Hebr. 10, 14), and with the death of the testator the New Testament came into force in his blood (ibid. 9, 16-17).

θ) The "clarificatio" begins. - St. John presents the Death together with the Resurrection as the glorification of J. (13, 31-32; 12, 28; 7, 39): the veil of the Temple torn, the earth that trembles, and above all the piercing of the side are the first glorification of J.; the last fact in the sense that from the heart of J. C. the Church was born (cf. S. Tromp, De Nativitate Ecclesiae ex Corde Iesu in Cruce, in Greg., 13 [1932], pp. 489-527) and in it was symbolically expressed the fact that from the Body of C. rivers of living water flowed (Io. 7, 39).

β)

ξ) The manifestations of the new life. - The Apostles in their preaching present themselves as witnesses of the new life of J., and constantly connect their apostolate with the risen J.: cf. Act. 4, 33; 2, 32; 3, 15; 13, 31; I Cor. 9, 1. The Apostles furthermore feel that they owe the gift of the Holy Spirit to the influence of the Risen One, whom they call "life-giving spirit" (I Cor. 15, 45; cf. Act. 2, 33). The christology of the first apostolic preaching calls J. the C. and Son of God (Act. 2, 36; 13, 33; for its whole content in relation to the resurrection cf. J. Schmitt, Jésus ressuscité dans la prédication apostolique, Paris 1949). The three lines of their catechesis mentioned above, the Apostles saw them concretely in the facts of the risen J. J., rising again, manifests himself as Son of God and the C.: to this miracle he had appealed as to the supreme proof (Mt. 12, 39 sign of Jonah; Jn. 2, 19 the rebuilt Temple) and now he manifests the glory of the Father in his face (II Cor. 4, 6). He manifests himself as such with miracles (the catch of fish, Jn. 21, 1-14 provokes faith: it is the Lord, ibid. 7, 12) with foretelling the future (ibid. 18) with knowing things far off and the hearts of the Apostles, which provokes the exclamation "My Lord and my God" (Jn. 20, 27-28). The risen J. attributes to himself in explicit statements the messiahship and the divinity: to the disciples of Emmaus (Lk. 24, 26-27); to the Apostles (ibid. 44-49), to the disciples through Mary Magdalene (Jn. 20, 17), to the Apostles in sending them as the Father has sent him: ibid. 21.

J. manifests himself as the giver of the Spirit of the Father; he gives its first fruits in the act of communicating the mission received from the Father and the power to forgive sins (Jn. 20, 21-23). He promises it, commanding the Apostles to remain in Jerusalem until they are clothed with "power from on high" (Lk. 24, 49: which is the power of the Holy Spirit, Acts 1, 4-8). J. thus fulfills the other messianic prophecy, which promised for his days the outpouring of the Spirit of the Lord: Is. 32, 15; Joel 2, 28-32 [Hebr. 3, 1-5]. The outpouring of the Spirit brought with it confirmation in the apostolate, especially in its office of bearing witness to the Risen One: Acts 1, 8: "you will receive the power of the Holy Spirit, who comes upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." The new life that they testify to they have seen and touched with their own hands (cf. I Jn. 1, 1-3) and therefore, connecting this experience with that of J. before his death, they derive from it the conviction of the identity of the new life with the previous one, of its concrete reality, still human, though already spiritual. They see him eating with them (Lk. 24, 41-43) and preparing food for them (Jn. 21, 9-14; cf. the impression made on the Apostles, in Acts 10, 42), they hear him often whether he asks for their love (Jn. 21, 15-17), or pities or reproves their weaknesses (ibid. 20, 27; Lk. 24, 13-31; Mk. 16, 14), or corrects their ideas about the character of his Kingdom (Acts 1, 7) etc. While they observe the new life of J., entirely similar to the previous life, the Apostles receive from the Risen One the confirmation of the promises already made to them and receive from him the definitive mission: the primacy conferred on Peter (Jn. 21, 15-18), to all the mission of preaching the Gospel, with the promise of continual assistance and of the seal of miracles (Mt. 28, 18-20; Mk. 16, 15-18) and with the sanction of reward or punishment for those who believe or do not.

The explicit revelation that he now makes of the mystery of the Trinity of Persons in God in the one nature is the culmination of his manifestations; the trinitarian formula will mark the meaning of Christian Baptism, entry into the religious society, to which J. with this act gives the definitive form. After having in fact spoken of the things that pertain to the Kingdom of God (Acts 1, 3) for forty days, and having thus completed his work and left to the Apostles the task of transmitting his message of salvation and of teaching men to observe all that he had commanded them, he was taken up to heaven (ibid. 1, 9; Lk. 24, 51; on the fact of the Ascension and on the problems of literary and historical criticism cf. V. Larranaga, La Ascensión del Señor en el Nuevo Testamento, Madrid 1943).

e) Conclusion. - J., the man born in Palestine under the Empire of Augustus and who died under that of Tiberius, continues to pose a problem, as he posed it to his contemporaries. Every man to whom his name has come feels the problem of J. No one can reasonably deny the earthly existence of J., nor even the characteristics of his life, since a sound sense of historical criticism imposes the duty of attributing value to the sources that recount his life, and forbids calling them the fruit of the faith of an ecclesial community that arose in the 1st century. Once the existence of J. as it is presented to us by the Gospels is admitted, the problem of the interpretation of this life arises. J. presents himself as one who speaks in the name of God, as the last word of God to humanity, as the one in whom God, who had already revealed himself (and even the interventions in the history of man and of a particular people are unimpeachable, even from a purely scientific point of view), now reveals himself definitively. Of anyone who brings a message from God, man instinctively asks that he show that God is with him, and he surrounds himself with testimonies. Now a rapid glance at the life of J. shows that he surrounded himself with witnesses, who transmit his word, and that he showed with miracles that God is with him.

Whoever reads the Gospels, even with the most distracted spirit, always seeks in them an answer to the problem of his life, how the life of J. resolves his spiritual problems, how he saves him (such is the personal problem of every man: to be saved). Thus the problem of the interpretation of the life of J. becomes complicated with the problem of every man: how J. saves me and humanity. J. presents himself as Savior, as having in himself the one living God. In him is Yahweh, who continues to offer salvation to man. The life of J. presents itself as a continual and progressive manifestation and self-giving of God in order to save. J. willed to prolong his saving influence through the centuries by means of an institution, in which he will remain present, and from which every man will be able to ask for salvation.

However, the life of J. has a difficulty that to us who are far off seems to compromise its virtue of salvation. Two classes of men are seen before J.: he remains as in a center, from which many always move away, and to which others always draw near. On one side the disciples who, with a continual effort of penetration, led by J. himself, at last penetrate its mystery; on the other the Pharisees and the other leaders of the people who progressively move away, to give him death in the end. Everyone asks himself the reason for such a different attitude, and on which side it is his destiny to place himself, and whether J. C. will be for him salvation or perdition. A careful examination of the texts shows the profound reason for the rejection of the one group and the happiness of the other. Everyone realizes that to penetrate the mystery of J. there is need of faith, humility, the upright heart of the disciples and of the women of Galilee: it is a mystery that, after having seen all its fittingness, must be accepted; accepting it is faith, which passes from the first stages of imperfect knowledge to personal contact with J. C., and to the experience of what he is even today. The progressive assimilation of his mystery is the fruit of salvation, which he even today offers to man. If at first the demand of the holiness of God who reveals himself in him and the irradiation of the glory of God that shines in his face can disturb and unsettle and perhaps even drive away those who have loved darkness more than light (Jn. 3, 20), at a second moment, as soon as the mystery is accepted, J. inserts himself into the life of each one and begins to work: the mystery of J. no longer disturbs, but comforts and saves. J. becomes the Savior of each one who accepts him. For the bibl. see: VI. J. C. in historiography.

Silverio Zedda

II. JESUS CHRIST, DIVINE LEGATE.

I. THE MESSIANIC CLAIMS

Who is J.? What did he say concretely about his personality and his mission?

When J. appeared, the messianic hopes of the Jewish people had reached the highest degree of intensity. The New Testament books, rabbinic literature, and even some pagan books bear witness to this.

When the Magi arrived in Judea to see the Messiah, Herod asked the doctors of the law "where the C. was to be born," not whether the C. was to come (Mt. 2:1-4). The prophetess Anna, who was in the temple at the moment of the presentation of the child J., "spoke of him to all who were awaiting the redemption of Jerusalem" (Lk. 2:38). The old Simeon too "was awaiting the consolation of Israel" (ibid. 25). John the Baptist on the banks of the Jordan announced the imminent establishment of the Kingdom of Yahweh, and many believed that the Baptist himself was the promised Messiah (ibid. 3:15-17; Jn. 1:19-28).

The messianic expectation also emerges from various attitudes taken toward J. by the disciples of the Baptist, by the people, and by the leaders of Judaism (cf. Mt. 11:2-3; 12:23; 17:10; Mk. 11:7-10; 14:61; Jn. 4:25; 6:14, etc.). In the Jewish books of the period, descriptions of the person and mission of the C. abound. From them one can infer how imminent everyone felt the appearance of the restorer of Israel to be (cf. various citations in DThC, VIII, cols. 1126-32). Another proof of this ardent expectation is the appearance of many agitators who passed themselves off as envoys of the Most High. Among many, one may recall Judas the Galilean in A.D. 6 (Josephus, Ant. Iud., XVIII, 1, 1 and Acts 5:37), a certain Theudas (ibid. 5:36), another Jew who came from Egypt and managed to attract around himself thousands of assassins in the time of the procurator Felix, and a scribe named Matthias (Josephus, op. cit., XX, 3, 6; Bellum Iud., II, 13, 5 and Acts 21:38). The expectation of a great liberator had passed from Judaism into the pagan world as well, according to the testimony of Suetonius and Tacitus. "Percrebuerat Oriente toto - says Suetonius - vetus et constans opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tempore Iudaea profecti rerum potirentur. Id, de imperatore romano, quantum eventu postea patuit, praedictum, Iudaei ad se trahentes rebellarunt" (Vespasian, 4; cf. Tacitus, Hist., V, 13).

It would seem that rationalist criticism, which claims to explain everything naturally, should not find too much difficulty in admitting the messianic consciousness of J. in such an environment. But it is not so. The rationalists see quite well that the religious and moral figure of J. cannot fit into the framework of the aforementioned agitators. He is too holy to be an impostor or a revolutionary politician; he is too wise and balanced to be a deluded man. Therefore, if a messianic consciousness is recognized in him, it must be considered authentic, that is, of supernatural origin.

J. claimed to be the Messiah, and the messianism he proclaimed has a character all its own that immeasurably transcends the ideas dominant in that era.

Having come out of the desert, where he had spent forty days, J. immediately begins to gather disciples. He reveals himself to them as the C. announced by the Prophets, so much so that Andrew, from the very first day, can say to his brother Simon: "We have found the Messiah." J. confirms the opinion of the first disciples by saying: "... you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man" (Jn. 1:35-51). A few days later, on the shores of the Lake of Tiberias, he calls Peter and his brother Andrew, who were fishing, and says to them in categorical form: "Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men" (Mt. 4:18-19). The group of disciples grows day by day. Soon he will choose twelve, send them to preach in his name, and say to them: "Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me" (Mt. 10:40). All this shows that J. was fully aware of being the Envoy of the Most High and that he intended to initiate a vast movement of a supernatural character.

Shortly after the beginning of his preaching, he goes to Nazareth, where he had lived for many years as a simple craftsman. The fame of what he had done in the regions of Galilee was widely spread among his fellow townsmen. He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath to take part in the customary festive assembly, took the scroll of the Holy Scriptures, and began to read a passage from Isaiah. It was the passage in which the prophet outlines the divine consecration of the coming C., and his doctrinal and merciful function among the people (Is. 61:1-2). When the reading was finished, J. returns the scroll to the attendant, and explains those verses by saying: "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing" (cf. Lk. 4:16-21). And he meant: "Today with your ears you have heard the one of whom Isaiah wrote, that is, you have heard the C. foretold by the Prophet."

To designate himself, J. often uses the expression "Son of Man." It occurs in the Gospel 84 times, both in the Synoptics and in St. John (cf. F. Roslaniec, Filius hominis, Rome 1920, pp. 42-52, 65-66); and from the analysis of the relevant texts it is deduced that it is connected with messianic attributes. And indeed, in the Synoptics, J., describing the final Judgment, announces that the "Son of Man" will come majestically as supreme king, "together with his angels," to judge the human race (Mt. 25:31-34). Interrogated by Caiaphas, he does not limit himself to confessing that he is the C., but adds: "You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven" (ibid. 26:64; cf. Mk. 14:62; Lk. 22:69). In the healing of the paralytic, J. declares that the "Son of Man" has the power to forgive sins, and performs the miracle to show the reality of that power (Mt. 9:6-7; Mk. 2:10-12; Lk. 5:24-25). When the Pharisees accuse his disciples of having violated the Sabbath rest, J. defends them, adding that the "Son of Man" is also master of the Sabbath," that is, of the Sabbath law held by all to be divine (Mk. 2:28). The title "Son of Man" therefore demands a messianic explanation. The Gospel of St. John fully confirms this conclusion; indeed - more clearly than the Synoptics - it presents the "Son of Man" as a preexistent being, of heavenly origin, as the only-begotten of God who assumed human nature (1:51; 3:13-16). In the Gospels, therefore, "Son of Man" means "King-Messiah" and "incarnate Word." And since the Master, from the first days of his public ministry, attributes this title to himself (in that sense), it means that his messianic consciousness is clear and distinct from the very beginning.

Reproached because his disciples did not practice fasting and because on one occasion they had violated the Sabbath, J. responds as arbiter of the law itself: The disciples - he says - do not fast because they are together with the "bridegroom" in the period of the messianic wedding: they will fast later, when the bridegroom is taken from them; as for the precept of Sabbath rest, let it be known that the Son of Man is also master of the Sabbath (Mt. 9:14-15; 12:1-8).

J. demands a supreme love, greater than that owed to parents and children: "Whoever loves mother and father more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son and daughter above me cannot be worthy of me" (ibid. 10:37). This love must be realized through the observance of "his" laws: "If you love me, keep my commandments" (Jn. 14:15). Not only does he present himself as the author of the "New Law," but he declares himself to be the supreme and universal judge, into whose hands the Father has transferred every judgment, including the one that will take place at the end of the world (ibid. 5, 22, 27; Mt. 25, 31-46). His attitude before the Law and the Kingdom of God has no precedent, not even in the greatest prophets of Israel: he speaks in his own name and with sovereign authority; he presents himself as the herald and the bringer of a new order that must last until the end of the ages; he is conscious of being the supreme teacher of humanity, the announcer of the Good News, the unique source of spiritual well-being among the peoples; he claims for himself the most universal and most absolute judicial powers.

All this proves that he intended to affirm in an ample, categorical and unequivocal form his own messianic dignity.

One day some disciples of the Baptist, who was languishing in Herod's prisons, presented themselves to J. and asked him: "Are you the one who is to come?". In answer the Master performs many miracles in their presence, then, applying to himself two prophetic passages concerning the marvelous works of the Christ (Is. 35, 5-6; 61, 1), he adds: "Go and report to John what you hear and see: the blind regain their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again and to the poor the good news is announced. And blessed is he who does not separate himself from me" (ibid. 11, 2-6). No answer could have been more decisive.

In the conversation with the Samaritan woman, the woman having said among other things that the Messiah must come, who is called C., J. answers: "I am he, the one speaking to you" (Io. 4, 25-26). The same declaration he would have to make to the citizens of Sychar, where he stopped to preach for two days. Indeed the fourth Evangelist reports that many of them believed in him, and said to the woman: "We no longer believe because of your word: in fact we ourselves have heard, and we know that this man is truly the Savior of the world" (ibid. 4, 41-42).

Finding himself one day near Caesarea Philippi, J. confidentially questioned the Apostles about his personality. Simon Peter answers: "You are the C., the Son of the living God". J. fully approves this answer, and by this clearly shows his messianic consciousness (Mt. 16, 13-19).

Above all in the Jerusalem discourses, delivered before the leaders of Judaism, or reserved for the faithful disciples, the Master repeatedly affirms his divine mission. He speaks in the name of Jahveh, his doctrine has been manifested to him by the heavenly Father, no one can obtain salvation except through him: these are the concepts on which he insists with the greatest force (cf. Io. 7, 14-18, 37-38; 8, 21-36, 51; 10, 18; 14, 10; 15, 15; 16, 5-15).

Nor does he limit himself to presenting himself as "Revealer", but even as "the light of the world" (ibid. 8, 12), "the resurrection and the life" for all who will follow him (ibid. 11, 25-26), "the mediator" who makes our prayers effective before the Most High (ibid. 14, 13, 14; 16, 23-24), "the true life" to which it is necessary to remain united like branches in order to draw the supernatural sap (ibid. 15, 1-6), the C. sent by the Father (ibid. 17, 3).

Brought before the Sanhedrin, the high priest solemnly questions him to know whether he is the C., the Son of God: "I adjure you by the living God that you tell us if you are the C., the Son of God". J. answers him: "You have said it.

Indeed I tell you that you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mt. 26, 63-64). On this affirmation the members of the Sanhedrin based the condemnation.

Therefore from the present brief inquiry, omitting other passages and categorical affirmations, this critically incontestable conclusion emerges: J. always had a clear and precise awareness of being the Messiah awaited by the Jews; from the very beginning and in the most varied forms he repeatedly affirmed that he was the Revealer, the Legate sent by God for the salvation of souls.

II. THE TEST OF MIRACLES

The aforementioned affirmations of the Master have undeniable value if one keeps in mind his religious-moral conduct, the perfect balance of his faculties, and the fulfillment of the ancient prophecies.

But with this the demands of our spirit are not entirely quieted. The affirmations of J. are too extraordinary. We must expect that God would intervene in a more singular manner in the life of his Legate, in order to render himself a greater guarantor of his mission.

Has God marked the life of J. with the seal of his omnipotence?

Anyone who reads the Gospel is struck from the very first pages by the extraordinary facts that accompanied the life of C. An angel announces to the Mother the virginal conception; a host of angels intervenes at his birth; an unusual star guides some magi from the East to his cradle; a mysterious dream reveals the snares of King Herod; at the Baptism a heavenly voice proclaims his divine filiation, and so the prodigies follow one another up to the Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven.

For our purpose it is sufficient to limit the inquiry to those worked directly by J. They can be divided into different categories. Some concern inanimate or irrational nature; e.g., the changing of water into wine at the wedding banquet of Cana (Jn. 2, 1-11), the storm calmed on the lake of Tiberias (Mt. 8, 23-27), the twofold multiplication of the loaves (ibid. 14, 13-21; 15, 32-38), the twofold miraculous catch of fish (Lk. 5, 4-10; Jn. 21, 1-11),

Jesus walking on the waves (Mk. 6, 48-51). Others were performed to free the possessed, very numerous in those times (Mt. 8, 16; 8, 28-34; 17, 14-18, etc.). About fifteen concern instantaneous healings from various infirmities: such as, for example, that of the leper (ibid. 8, 2-4), of the centurion's servant, paralyzed and almost dying (ibid. 8, 5-13; Lk. 7, 1-10), of the paralytic of Capernaum (Mt. 9, 1-8), of the two blind men (ibid. 9, 27-31), of the deaf-mute (Mk. 7, 31-37), of the blind man of Jericho (ibid. 10, 46-52), of the paralytic of Jerusalem (Jn. 5, 1 ff.), of the man with dropsy (Lk. 14, 1-4), of the man born blind (Jn. 9, 1 ff.).

The resurrection of three dead persons is also narrated: of the only son of the widow of Nain (Lk. 7, 11-17), of the daughter of Jairus (Mt. 9, 18-26) and of Lazarus (Jn. 11, 1-44).

All the Evangelists recall many other miracles without stopping to describe them. In Mt. 4, 23-24, we read: "And he went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom and healing every disease and every infirmity among the people. And his fame spread throughout all Syria, so that they brought him all the sick, those afflicted with various diseases and pains, demoniacs, lunatics and paralytics, and he healed them."

And at ch. 15, 30-31: "And great crowds came to him, bringing with them the lame, the maimed, the blind, the deaf and many others, and they put them at his feet; and he healed them, so that the crowd wondered when they saw the mute speaking, the maimed whole, the lame walking and the blind seeing: and they glorified the God of Israel."

Mark in turn (3, 9-10): "And he told his disciples to have a boat ready for him because of the crowd, lest they should crush him: for he had healed many, so that all who had diseases pressed upon him to touch him." Luke writes (4, 40-41): "When the sun was setting, all those who had any that were sick with various diseases brought them to him. And he laid his hands on every one of them and healed them: and demons also came out of many, crying and saying: You are the Son of God..." John in the first conclusion of his Gospel notes: "Many other signs did J. do in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book..." (20, 30).

It can therefore be affirmed that the miracles performed by C. amount to some hundreds. None of the Evangelists wished to give us a complete account of them; indeed each freely chose among those same ones that entered into the primitive catechesis: this is another guarantee of the mutual independence of these writers. This increases the value of their testimony.

The Gospels are historical books worthy of the highest consideration. Two Evangelists were eyewitnesses and two drew their information from those who had known J. It follows that the miraculous facts of the Gospel really happened. On the other hand, the naturalness and simplicity of the description, the serenity and objectivity of the observations, the absence of any real apologetic concern, the comparison with the strange and wondrous narratives of the apocrypha are a luminous confirmation of their high historical value.

But do these portentous works truly attest to a special intervention of divine omnipotence? Be-

do they penetrate the mysterious forces of nature? After so many discoveries in the physical and physiological field, can modern people believe in the supernaturalness of Christ's miracles as the simple and uneducated crowds of Palestine believed in them?

Setting aside an analysis of the individual miracles (cf. for this the Gospel commentators and L. Fonck, I miracoli del Signore nel S. Vangelo, Rome 1914), it is enough to consider them as a whole, keeping in mind their number and their variety. Even if some prodigy should leave one perplexed about its transcendent character, the majority are such as to exclude any reasonable and prudent doubt. Who indeed could attribute to the forces of nature the resurrection of a man dead for four days, the multiplication of five loaves so as to feed a great crowd, the instantaneous healing of persons ulcerated by leprosy, the restoring of sight to the blind by a mere word? Such facts totally exceed the capacity and the order of natural forces: they absolutely postulate the free intervention of the Creator (v. MIRACLE).

The Gospel prodigies are therefore historically certain facts; they transcend the capacity of created nature and postulate a special intervention of the Divinity.

One last question remains: in what relation are the miracles to the person of Jesus? Are they really ordered to accrediting him among men as the Christ and Son of God? Christ himself established this, and in an unequivocal way.

The Master presents his prodigies as a divine testimony on the basis of which men must believe that He is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that therefore his doctrine is revealed. Let us recall some of his declarations.

When the Baptist from the Herodian prison sent some disciples to ask him whether he was "the Coming One," that is, the Christ, or whether they should await another, Jesus answered: "Go and report to John what you hear and see: the blind regain their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again, and the good news is given to the poor. And blessed is he who does not fall away from me" (Mt. 11:2-6). Jesus therefore appeals to the miracles, more eloquent than any other testimony, to prove his messiahship.

To the paralytic of Capernaum he immediately forgives the sins committed. — Forgive sins! who can do that if not God? — murmur those present. How does Jesus justify himself? "So that you may know that the Son of Man has the power on earth to forgive sins (he says to the paralytic): Rise, take up your bed and go home" (ibid. 9:6-7).

To the leaders of Judaism, murmuring because he performs miracles on the Sabbath, he answers: "I have a testimony greater than John's: the works indeed that the Father has given me to accomplish, these works that I perform (that is, the prodigies) testify about me that the Father has sent me" (Jn. 5:36). And elsewhere: "If I do not perform the works of my Father (that is, singular, divine, miraculous works), do not believe me; but if I perform them, and you do not want to believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father" (ibid. 10:37-38). The miracles therefore, in Christ's thought, are divine works that demonstrate his mission.

Besides, is it ever possible that God has granted to an impostor or to a deluded man a thaumaturgic power so vast and eminent as is found in Jesus Christ? "No one can perform these prodigies, if God is not with him," thought Nicodemus with his good sense, and so thinks anyone who is not prejudiced by sophisms. Miracles come from the Supreme Being and are like a halo around the thaumaturge: if God has adorned Jesus with so much splendor, it means that he has approved his conduct and his teaching, and therefore his messiahship, which was, as it were, the soul and foundation of all his preaching. Not only that: Jesus has affirmed that he is the Only-begotten of God, equal to the Father and worthy of the same honors. If this were not true, we would have a mere man who deifies himself: Jesus would be the founder of an idolatrous cult. But then, could God have enriched him with so many miracles? They therefore demonstrate that Jesus is Son of God in the proper sense.

III. THE MIRACLE OF THE RESURRECTION

The triumphant demonstration, however, of the messiahship and divinity of J. is constituted by the miracle of his Resurrection. J. himself in fact, and then the Apostles, presented this Resurrection as a fact of capital importance insofar as it shows the divine origin of the evangelical message; it is the most principal object of faith and the unshaken foundation of the hope of believers.

During his public ministry J. spoke several times of his Death and Resurrection. When after many prodigies the Pharisees had the impudence to ask for a sign from heaven, he answered: "No other sign will be given except that of Jonah the prophet. For as Jonah was for three days and three nights in the belly of a sea monster, so the Son of Man will be for three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Mt. 12:39-40; cf. 16:4). After Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi, he began to teach more openly that he had to suffer much from the elders, the chief priests and the scribes, be killed and then rise again on the third day (ibid. 16:21). The same prean-

he announced to the three disciples who had witnessed the Transfiguration (ibid. 17, 9), then to the Twelve together, while they were still in Galilee (ibid. 17, 22-23). Even on the last journey toward the capital, as well as at the supper that preceded the Passion, he spoke of his Death and Resurrection (ibid. 20, 17-19; 26, 31-32).

These forewarnings were not a mystery even to his adversaries. In fact, on the morning after the crucifixion, the chief priests and Pharisees went to Pilate to ask him to have the tomb guarded, since — they said — "we have remembered that that deceiver said while he was still alive: 'After three days I will rise again'" (ibid. 27, 62-63).

Well then, would J. have insisted so much on this fact if he had believed it to be of no importance for the followers of his message? If he wanted miracles to be considered as an argument for his divine mission, how would he not have attributed probative value to the greatest of miracles, the Resurrection? And note that J. does not speak of a metaphorical Resurrection, but a real one, just as his passion and his death are real: He will raise up the sanctuary of his body; he will come out of the tomb on the third day, like Jonah...; and this is the greatest proof of his transcendence (ibid. 12, 39-40).

The Apostles, faithful interpreters of C.'s teaching, regarded his Resurrection in a truly impressive way.

Immediately after the Ascension they withdraw to the Cenacle, cast lots and elect Matthias in place of Judas, so that — says Peter — "he may be established as a witness of the Resurrection together with us" (Acts 1, 22). Having seen J. risen again: this is the fundamental object of the preaching of the Twelve. For this reason the prince of the Apostles in his first discourse proclaims with energy: "Men of Israel, hear these words: J. of Nazareth... you killed him, piercing him by the hands of the wicked; but God raised him from death... This J. God raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Exalted therefore at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured him out as you see and hear" (ibid. 2, 22-33).

The apostle Paul writes to the faithful of Corinth: "If it is preached of C. that he has risen from death, how can some of you say that there is no Resurrection of the dead? If there is no Resurrection of the dead, then neither has J. risen. Now, if C. has not risen, empty is our preaching and vain is your faith; indeed, we are found to be false witnesses of God, because we testify against God that he raised C., whereas he did not raise him if truly the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, neither has C. risen. Now if C. has not risen, vain is your faith: you are still in your sins... But behold, C. has risen from death, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep" (I Cor. 15, 12-20).

The Resurrection of J. is also mentioned in very many other places of the New Testament: this proves the extraordinary importance that this fact had in apostolic preaching.

But since the Resurrection presupposes the Death, before examining the historicity and reality of the appearances of the risen C., one must demonstrate that he truly died as a result of the Crucifixion.

The reality of J.'s Death cannot be called into doubt. All the Evangelists assert that J. died and was buried. This fact is taken as most certain also by other authors of the New Testament, especially by Paul, who openly declares that in this he reflects the primitive tradition.

When Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Great Council, asked the Roman procurator for the body of J. in order to give it honorable burial in his own tomb, Pilate first summoned the centurion to ascertain the death of the condemned man: "and having summoned the centurion — notes Mark — he asked him whether he were already dead. And having learned it from the centurion, he gave the corpse to Joseph" (Mk. 15, 42-47).

The soldiers sent to break the legs of the three crucified men, having seen that J. had expired, did not think it appropriate to give him the blow of the club; nevertheless one soldier, for greater certainty, pierced his side with the lance (Jn. 19, 32). If J. was not dead, he necessarily had to die from the lance thrust, lethal by its very nature.

A solid argument is also found in the hatred of the Judges, who, after having schemed so much for the crucifixion of the Rabbi of Nazareth, would certainly not have left the victim alive. Even if on other occasions the executioners could be negligent, one can be sure that this time they did not abandon the object of their hatred without well ascertaining the death.

Moreover, it suffices to reflect on the circumstances that preceded and accompanied the torture of the cross. J. had been scourged to the blood by order of the procurator in order to move the crowd to pity; nailed to the cross, he continued to shed more blood, while a burning thirst devoured him. To all this add the soldier's lance thrust. How then could he have survived? He would have died at the very least in the tomb, where he was laid — notes John — bound with wrappings according to the Jewish custom and covered with a hundred pounds of spices brought by Nicodemus (ibid. 19, 39-40). The ointments alone would have been sufficient to suffocate him.

J. having really died, he also really rose again, as he had foretold. At the dawn of the third day the tomb was found empty; and the reason given for this by the Evangelists is because J. came out of there alive, as the appearances that immediately followed demonstrate.

The Gospels in fact mention about ten appearances of the risen J. to different persons, in different circumstances and places, over a span of forty days. He appeared to the Magdalene who was weeping near the tomb found empty (Mk. 16, 9; Jn. 20, 11-18), to the pious women (Mt. 28, 9-10), to Peter (Lk. 24, 34), to two disciples on the road to Emmaus (ibid. 24, 13-35), to the Apostles, except Thomas, in the cenacle (ibid. 24, 36-43; Jn. 20, 19-25), again to the Apostles, including Thomas, to whom the Risen One ordered to place his hands in his wounds (ibid. 20, 26-29), to five Apostles and two disciples on the lake of Gennesaret (ibid. 21, 1-24), to the Eleven in Galilee (Mt. 28, 16 ff.), again to the Apostles on the day of the Ascension into heaven (Lk. 24, 50-52).

At times in these appearances J. lingers a long while, walks, speaks familiarly, eats, shows his wounded hands and feet, has himself touched, etc. Luke, in the introduction of Acts (Acts 1, 3), summarizing concisely the manifestations of the Risen One, says: "to whom (the Apostles) he also showed himself alive after his Passion with many proofs (ἐν πολλοῖς τεκμηρίοις), appearing to them for forty days, and speaking of the Kingdom of God."

St. Paul, then, in I Cor., written around the year 55, recalls various appearances of the risen C.: "Now — he writes — I make clear to you, brothers, the gospel that I announced to you, and which you received and in which you persevere and by which you are saved, if you hold it as I announced it to you; unless you have believed in vain. I delivered to you therefore, in the first place, what indeed I had received, that C. died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried and that he rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures; and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. After that he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, of whom most are still living, others have closed their eyes. After that he appeared to James, then to the Apostles together; and last of all, as to the abortive one, he appeared also to me" (I Cor. 15, 1-8).

This testimony is of the greatest value, not only because of the Apostle's authority, but also because of its conciseness and its antiquity. Paul recalls in categorical form the appearances of the risen C. as a historically incontestable fact, so true that in his time several of those who had seen the Risen One were still alive. The Apostle declares that he drew his knowledge of these appearances from the official tradition: "I handed on to you," he says, "what I in turn received (ὁ καὶ παρέλαβον)." Paul, already a follower of the rabbinic schools, uses here the technical term with which the Palestinian Jews indicated that their doctrine was faithfully drawn from the tradition of their elders (cf. G. Kittel, Der historische Jesus, Berlin 1931, p. 64). Therefore with the phrase "ὁ καὶ παρέλαβον" he means that he learned the appearances not from anonymous sources, not from vague and unchecked reports, but from the authentic teaching of the first heralds of the Gospel.

It is inadmissible that a man of Paul's temper should have accepted facts of such capital importance lightly. He had certainly not lacked the opportunity to verify them. Three years after his conversion (around 39) he had spent fifteen days in the company of Peter, and on that occasion he had also met with James (Gal. 1,

18-19). About ten years later he had taken part in the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:1 ff.). Moreover Paul knows well that his preaching is identical to that of the Twelve; so much so that at the conclusion of the account of the appearances he can write: "Therefore whether it was I or they, so we preach, and so you believed" (1 Cor. 15:11).

Consequently, from the Pauline testimony it follows that the conviction that C. had risen was at that time universal and most certain among the followers of the Gospel; this conviction, from the very first Christian origins, cannot be explained unless one admits the fact of the Master's Resurrection.

C. therefore has risen. And this is the greatest among the prodigies, which by itself suffices to prove luminously the messiahship of J.

Fabio Fabbri

III. JESUS CHRIST IN DOGMATIC THEOLOGY.

The task of dogmatic theology is to consider J. C. both in his person and in his intimate constitution (Christology), and in his salvific work on behalf of man (soteriology).

Christology, therefore, will study the being of J. C., which is theandric, intrinsically constituted by the divine nature and the human nature, united in the single person of the Word (v. INCARNATION); the mode of this union (v. HYPOSTATIC UNION): the consequences that derive from it: in J. C. there are two operations (v. MONENERGISM), two wills (v. MONOTHELITISM), the communication of idioms (v. IDIOMS, COMMUNICATION of), a single filiation (v. SON OF GOD), freedom and impeccability (v. FREEDOM OF J. C.; TEMPTATION OF J. C.), the right to adoration (v. below, ch. IV), substantial and accidental holiness, divine and human knowledge: beatific, infused, acquired (v. PSYCHOLOGY OF J. C.), instrumental power and theandric operations (v.), the pains and sufferings not unbecoming to the dignity of the Incarnate Word (v. AGONY OF J. C.).

Soteriology, in turn, will study and explain how the salvific work of J. C. had its epilogue in the death of the Cross (v. LIMBO; DEATH OF J. C.), which was a true sacrifice (v. SACRIFICE), which merited for men (v. MERIT OF J. C.) liberation from sin (v. REDEMPTION). In accomplishing the work of salvation J. C. actualized in perfect degree his priesthood (v. PRIESTHOOD OF J. C.), and began the solemn exercise of his royal powers (v. KINGSHIP OF J. C.).

Against the Catholic doctrine on these subjects, many heresies arose from the earliest times of Christianity. Theology, therefore, studies and keeps watch over all these erroneous systems and opinions, and against them sets forth the fullest refutation. The heresies and heretics are treated under the individual entries: Arianism; Docetists; Ebionites; Gnosis; Manichaeism; Modernism; Monophysites; Liberal Protestantism.

IV. THE CULT TOWARD JESUS CHRIST.

The cult toward the God-Man, J. C., is legitimate. It is clear that to him, the second Person of the Most Holy Trinity and therefore true God, belongs the cult as to the other two Persons subsisting with him in the same divine nature. But what cult can and must be rendered to C. as Man, that is, to his Humanity? The solution of the problem depends on the concept of the hypostatic union (v.). Those who do not admit the true divinity of C. (Arians, rationalists, modernists), either deny him all cult or grant him a veneration like that granted to the saints. Similarly those who separate the human too much from the divine in C., as the Nestorians already did, go no further than dulia in the cult of his Humanity.

The Church, against ancient and modern aberrations, has defined, on the basis of written and oral revelation, that to the God-Man belongs a true cult (adoration = λατρεία), which is not divided in two, one for C. God and one for C. Man, but is one and indivisible, as one and indivisible is the Word with his Humanity (Council of Constantinople, II, can. 9). A doctrine that is further specified in the condemnation of the Synod of Pistoia (Pius VI, const. Auctorem fidei, 1794); which, in the Jansenist manner, wanted to distinguish a cult rendered to the Word and one rendered to his Humanity as to a simple creature (prop. 61). Pius VI insists on the unity of the act of adoration that goes together to the Word and to his Humanity.

From these dogmatic definitions theology rightly draws these conclusions: a) C. as divine Word is worthy of perfect adoration (latria); b) also as Man C. is worthy of such adoration, because C.-Man is nothing other than the Word subsisting in the human nature, which has no personality of its own, but is hypostatically united with the Word in a single being; c) therefore the two natures of C., insofar as they are proper to the single Person of the Word, are together the object of a single cult of adoration. Certainly the Humanity of C. is a creature, but it does not constitute a being of its own, because it subsists only in the Person of the Word. The cult, even if it materially touches the nature, goes of itself to the Person, which is its formal object. Therefore the Humanity of C., by virtue of the hypostatic union, is to be adored with a single cult together with his Divinity; but this single cult is directed to the Divinity in itself and for itself, to the Humanity in itself, but by reason of the Word, to which it is joined.

This doctrine fully justifies not only the traditional cult toward the Humanity of C. in its integrity, soul and body, but also the cult of any part of that same most holy Humanity, as, for example, the cult of the Sacred Heart.

Pietro Parente

#### V. - IL PEDAGOGO DIVINO.

The appearance of J. C., God-Man, on earth and the universal promulgation of the "good news" brought into the vision and evaluation of philosophical, moral and religious problems a profound upheaval and bold and effective innovations, whose reverberation even pedagogy could not help but undergo. Therefore J. C. is rightly called the "divine Pedagogue," and he was so both for his doctrine and for the method he used in presenting and teaching it (cf. Clement of Alexandria, Pedagogus, I, chaps. 7-12: PG 8, 311-71).

I. THE NEW VALUATION OF MAN AND ITS PEDAGOGICAL CONSEQUENCES

Jesus Christ announced a transcendent, unique, personal God, no longer merely master and judge, but also eternal Love, who created the universe and its creatures in time, creatures that are not abandoned to themselves for even a single moment, but continually preserved, watched over and protected. Not only that: God willed to raise man to the supernatural state, clothing him with the Grace of the dignity of his adoptive son, with a right to the inheritance of his goods. He is therefore the good Father, who knows his little sheep, the weaknesses of which they are molded, the insufficiency of their efforts, who understands them and moves toward them, sustaining them, consoling them, restoring them.

Hence a new valuation of man, insofar as he is considered as a son of God, a member of the great kingdom that Jesus Christ came to found in this world, but which is not of this world. All men therefore form a single family, in which each one is a brother or sister of all the others; mutual love is raised up to indicate the characteristic of the Christian (Jn 13:35); and the supreme proof of love will be the sacrifice of one's own life for others (ibid. 15:13). Hence the destruction of every barrier of distinction and privilege that paganism had raised between man and woman, between husband and wife, father and children, free and unfree, masters and slaves, because in every individual dwells a soul that has an infinite value and dignity, even when it dwells in the most abject or repugnant body. Hence also the extension to all classes of instruction and education, which ceased to be a privilege of a fortunate few; hence still further the search for and very often the preference of Christian educators for the poorest, the sickest, the most abandoned or neglected or despised. And not only when it is a matter of physical miseries, but also and above all when it is a matter of moral miseries.

Particularly worthy of note is the revaluation of the dignity of the child, who is no longer to be considered as a simple graceful flower, or, worse, naturalistically, as a charming animal, from which, even in the full vigor of psychic life, every restraint and every spiritual and religious life must be kept away; but as a flower beloved by God (Mt 19:13), to be preserved from even the slightest shadow of scandal (Lk 17:2) and to be taken as a model, to which to become similar in sincerity and serene candor, if one wishes to enter the Kingdom of heaven (Mt 18:3). The Christian educator finds here on the one hand the stimulus to the respect and regard that he must bear toward the pupil, and on the other the stimulus to zeal and encouragement, with which to fulfill adequately his noble but arduous mission, even in the most tedious and hardest hours.

II. THE REASSESSMENT OF THE VALUE OF LIFE

Having come from God, man tends, through the events and the labors of his existence, to reach God, the supreme goal, which, once won, will give him possession of the full happiness for which he yearns. Life, therefore, is not an end in itself, but a preparation for another, better one. To the conquest of that, however, the energies of evil are opposed, which each person feels within himself and does not wish to overcome. Man, in fact, when faced with the idea of duty and of renunciation or with an effort of self-overcoming, of self-conquest, although he categorically feels the necessity of translating that idea into reality through his own free and spontaneous action, rebels, does not struggle, yields and falls, or at least delays or minimizes the progress of his perfecting.

Hence some important pedagogical consequences: 1) Life must be not only knowing, but doing; not only science, but wisdom; and man has worth not for the science he possesses, but for the good he accomplishes. With this the Hellenistic theory is overturned, which placed intelligence at the center of the personality, directed to contemplating the world of concepts, and made virtue consist in the knowledge of the good, whereby science and virtue were identified, leaving aside the moral activities of the will. The Christian, on the other hand, does not limit himself to knowing the truth, but proceeds to put it into practice with his will: « Qui facit veritatem, venit ad lucem, ut manifestentur opera eius, quia in Deo sunt facta » (Io. 3, 21).

Therefore he detests the science that puffs up and praises the wisdom of the unlearned, who rise up to seize the Kingdom of heaven. The Christian educator, then, will subordinate instruction to education; the cultural formation of the mind to the strengthening of the will; in other words: science to wisdom. 2) Life is necessarily also a struggle, above all against oneself, nor is the ideal reached unless one knows how to thwart oneself and impose an effort upon oneself. For this reason, against the naturalism of paganism, indeed against every naturalism, Christ authoritatively places happiness in things that would seem to be its negation (cf. the Sermon on the Mount, the perfections added to the old law [Mt. 5-7]): poverty, sorrow, forgiveness, humility, purity. Whoever, in order to be free, refuses every bond and escapes every restraint, does nothing but fasten upon his wrists the shackles of the most degrading slavery, that of bad habits and vice; whoever, on the other hand, knows how to accept manfully and bow to the most austere discipline, finds freedom in obedience. The good is loved, but first it is often hated; it makes one weep bitterly before giving the smile of joy; and duty often makes the heart bleed before gladdening it with the deepest satisfactions. The Christian pedagogue finds here the best reasons for accustoming his pupils not to fear effort, struggle, the renunciation of so many whims and so much inertia and laziness, and to love, instead, duty, discipline, trial, because only thus will they truly become men. 3) Christ has set as the goal of individual perfection, and consequently also of every social progress, a height that is practically and theoretically unattainable, the very perfection of his heavenly Father (Mt. 5, 48). This means that whatever perfection one manages to realize in one's own formation, it does not represent a definitive stage, an oasis that allows rest, as if it were the final height to be reached; but it is only a point of arrival, a step for climbing ever higher with constancy and perseverance. A most effective and salutary pedagogical maxim: whoever halts or even merely wavers and thinks of saying: enough! in the work of education and spiritual and moral formation, as also in the field of knowledge and research, runs the risk of being lost; like one who lingers too long along the slope of the mountain, feels his strength diminish for the rest of the ascent and will never reach the goal.
III. EARTHLY GOODS BROUGHT BACK TO THEIR TRUE VALUE.
- By lifting men's gaze beyond the brief confines of the earth to fix it on the ineffable happiness of the hereafter, J. C. overturned the value attributed to the goods of the world (riches, honors, well-being, satisfactions, fortune), the object of ruthless struggle on the part of individuals and nations, and brought them back to their rightful place: they are means and not ends. Therefore, in the face of them, neither the contempt of the cynic, nor the ostentatious apathy of the stoic; but the esteem of the man of good sense, the care and the concern to lawfully conquer them, preserve them and increase them, since they are so many gifts of God; but above all the strength to rise above them in adverse circumstances. Even in this doctrine the Christian educator finds a sure foundation for forming his pupils to a virile character, which emulates but does not envy; which does not yield to the blast of the storm, but continues to hold the helm firmly; he will instill in them the Christian pride of knowing how to master difficulties, rebuild life, and draw from adversities themselves a new and stronger incentive to persevere. Moreover, even as he strives to dry tears and soothe the sting of wounds, he will seek to transform pain and sorrow into a source of expiation, of reparation and of apostolate.

IV. THE REASSESSMENT OF THE INTERIOR LIFE

In assessing the merit of individuals, G. C. does not stop at success, at the quantity of work, at mere outward correctness; but he scrutinizes the inner sentiments and the most hidden intentions. For the "divine Pedagogue" the widow's mite is worth more than the Pharisee's gold coin (Mk. 12:42); outward fidelity to the law is not enough, if the heart is a sepulcher, full of putrefaction (Mt. 23:1-39); just as it is not sufficient to restrain the rapacious hand or the gesture of passion, if one does not seek to uproot also the inner desire for goods or for the woman who belong to others (ibid. 5:28). No truly Christian pedagogy will exempt itself from putting such a clear doctrine into practice: not to be content with showy results, purely for display; but to descend into the inner depths, to separate the seeds of good from those of evil, to cooperate in the full flowering of the future man of character — frank, conscious of what he is and what he is worth, consistent in words and deeds with his faith.

V. THE MODEL

Jesus Christ puts example before teaching. Indeed he said: "I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you do also" (Jn 13:15). Example is more powerful than the word, and the conduct of the educator makes a greater impression on the minds of the pupils than his speech. The pupils are moved and follow when the educator knows how to make the truth he wishes to teach so much his own that he almost identifies himself with it; then he will know how to infuse into his word a compelling force; whereas the beauty and elegance of speech will avail nothing when it attempts to replace the goodness of the deed or to conceal the lack of a living conviction. Now Jesus Christ not only taught the truth, but is himself "the Way, the Truth and the Life" (Jn 14:6). 2) He knows how to act from without, but even more from within. He brings about in a particular way what is the deep aspiration of every true educator: not to make the weight of an external authority felt, but to bring it about that the pupil himself cooperates in his own education; to overcome the distance that lies between his spirit and the spirit of the pupil, identifying himself with him so fully as to act with him and not merely upon him. All this Jesus Christ accomplishes with the cooperation of his Grace, inviting, persuading, inwardly strengthening firmness and energies. The human educator will draw all the closer to this divine model the more he knows how to invigorate his word and his example with the fruitful efficacy of prayer. For this reason the best educators were and still are the saints.

VI. THE METHOD

Since he had to bring the most difficult truths to the humblest minds, J. C. adopts a method: 1) simple; no trace of abstruseness or pretentiousness; but a familiar tone of conversation, which takes each person from his most sensitive side with a yielding and affectionate flexibility; 2) intuitive; he has recourse by preference to the circumstances of daily life, such as unfolded before the eyes of his hearers, in order to draw from them even the loftiest deductions (the lilies of the field and the sparrows of the air and Providence, the golden ripening harvests and the apostolate, the tares and the judgment of God, etc.); he makes use of parables and similitudes in the form of a narrative, which are of an unattainable beauty and refinement (the Pharisee and the publican, the prodigal son, the lost sheep, etc.); he employs comparisons, which seize upon the quick an interesting situation that touches his hearers closely (the cruel servant and the master, the rich man feasting and Lazarus, the traveler and the Samaritan, the miraculous catch and the apostolate, the multiplication of the loaves and the Eucharist, etc.); 3) progressive; nothing that savors of inconsiderate precipitation; every maxim is inculcated at the most suitable moment ("I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now" [Jn. 16:12]), every truth is developed little by little, taken up again, amplified, until the hearers are led to an ever deeper reflection and finally to full acceptance (e.g., the truth about his divine nature and person and his messiahship); 4) dialogical; J. C. often leads his hearers, by questioning and insisting, to discover the truth almost by themselves (e.g., in the parable of the Samaritan, on the behavior of the various persons who met the unfortunate man of Jericho; even more typical is the conversation with the Samaritan woman [Jn. 4:1-42], led little by little to admit her guilty conduct); 5) authoritative; he spoke in so persuasive a manner, so firm and resolute and sure, that even his enemies were obliged to confess "Never has a man spoken like this" (Jn. 8:45-46). The qualities of this method will produce the same beneficial effects even in the most varied circumstances of time and place, because they are founded on the clearest and most lucid knowledge of the psychology of crowds and of individuals.

VI. JESUS CHRIST IN HISTORIOGRAPHY.

I. JESUS CHRIST IN JEWISH LITERATURE

In vain would one search the most ancient rabbinic writings, such as the Mishnah, the Talmud and the Midrashim, for a biography or a profile of G. C. Only from patristic literature, particularly from Justin's Dialogue with the Jew Trypho and from Origen's polemic against Celsus' True Discourse, does one infer the slanderous attitude of the Jews toward the person of C.

In the Talmud there is sometimes an allusion to the activity of G. of Nazareth, without ever naming him directly: at most he is spoken of as a certain individual or as Balaam (the name of the ancient soothsayer mentioned in Num. 22-24) or with scarcely reverent adjectives, such as "madman, bastard" and the like. Sometimes the allusion shows through in the evident parody of Gospel sayings or episodes (cf. Bekhorot 8b); still more frequently Christians are alluded to as heretics or as despised Nazarenes. Summing up the various slanderous insinuations, the profile of G. C. or Nosri (= Nazarene) would be reduced to these fundamental lines. His origin is doubtful, since he is "the bastard" par excellence, because he was born of a hairdresser named Mary, married to Pappos or to Stada, and of a certain Pantera. In Egypt G. C. would have learned magic from a Joshua son of Perachiah. He was killed at Lydda as a magician and apostate. From this and from what is said of the Christians it is legitimate to conclude that the ancient rabbis conceived of G. as a renegade, who would have claimed to exercise a reforming activity with respect to ancestral Judaism; in practice his action was reduced to that of a degenerate heretic. And indeed in the twelfth petition of the Shemoneh Esreh the Christians are equated with the "apostates", the "proud" and the "heretics".

These insulting elements converged in a work, which remained for a long time as the synthesis of the thought of orthodox Judaism on the matter, namely in the Toldot Yeshu (= Generations or History of G.). The little book must have circulated already in the 8th-9th centuries in various recensions. Its only value consists in the documentation of a spiteful attitude against G. C., depicted as a swindler and a ruffian. The various recensions of the work and the use made of it by medieval rabbis demonstrate that such a sentiment persisted only too long.

A very different profile is inferred from the celebrated text of the Jewish Antiquities (XVIII, 63-64), usually called Testimonium Flavianum. In it

J. C. is called "wise" and his thaumaturgical virtues are acknowledged together with the effectiveness of his preaching; his Resurrection "on the third day" is admitted and his divinity is openly hinted at ("if indeed one must call him a man": εἰ γᾶσθρα αὐτὸν λέγειν χρῆ). With great probability, for moral-psychological reasons, the majority of scholars regard this text as interpolated, at least in the features that allude to the divinity of J. C. In any case, even if it is acknowledged as authentic (cf. G. Ricciotti, Flavio Giuseppe, I, Turin 1937, pp. 173-85), it can be considered only as an effect of the character of the Jewish historian, who gathers strange reports without worrying much about them, not as the expression of a philo-Christian current or of an objective attitude in the midst of Judaism.

In the Jewish polemicists of the Middle Ages, speaking of J. C. is avoided as far as possible, while they insist on claiming the holiness of the Old Testament and the glories of Mosaism against the Christians. When he is spoken of, allusion is usually made to the profile drawn by the Tōlēdhāth Jēšīa. Nevertheless some scholars, such as Maimonides (Mišnē Tōrah, XIV, 6), expressed themselves in a respectful manner. Only in rather recent times has a notable interest in the person of C. been observed among the Jews. The fruit of this interest are certain studies, of which only the principal ones are cited in the bibliography, of differing value and tendencies. Sometimes the irenic and prudent procedure is to be admired (cf. G. Salvador, M. C. G. Montefiore, M. J. Klausner, I. Zolli), but usually these works can no longer be considered as the official or unofficial expression of Judaism. They are the result of serious scholars, who have attempted to penetrate the mystery of J. C.; but often such investigations have been conducted along the lines of the various exegetical-philosophical currents prevailing according to the moment in the rationalist field.

Angelo Penna

II. JESUS CHRIST IN CATHOLIC HISTORIOGRAPHY

1. From the beginnings to the 14th century

The first historiographical work on Jesus Christ that can truly be called a "Life," in the sense understood today, does not go back beyond the 14th century. For a long time, in fact, Christians either did not dare or did not think to compose a continuous biography of the Savior, content with the four Gospels, to which they gave all their faith and which, even thus separated from one another, offered the most varied material for their reflection or for brief points of exhortation. Very soon, however, certain works appeared that could be called forerunners and preparers of later works.

First of all the Diatessaron (v.), or harmony of the four Gospels, placed and arranged in their passages so as to present a continuous narrative (2nd century; cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl., IV, 29, 6); the ten Canones or tables of Eusebius of Caesarea (PG 22, 1275-92), who, connecting himself to Ammonius of Alexandria but following a different method, arranges the Gospel passages in four, three, two, or one column, according to whether the passage is common to the four Evangelists or to three or to two or is proper to one alone, in order to facilitate the simultaneous reading of the Gospels, as if they formed a single account; the Evangelicae Harmoniae of Victor of Capua (d. ca. 574; PL 68, 251-358), clearly dependent on Tatian.

The Fathers, then, even if in their particular works or in the various courses of homilies they used the Gospels rather for theological purposes, for the teaching of the truths of the faith, or for parenetic, ascetic-mystical, allegorical purposes, cannot however be said to have neglected to shed light on certain particulars of place and time concerning the life of Jesus. St. Jerome, for example, in his Commentaria in Evangelium secundum Matthaeum (PL 26, 15-218), while also scattering here and there, when the occasion presented itself, "spiritualis intelligentiae flores," offers predominantly a "historica interpretatio" and seeks to classify in order of time the miracles of Jesus, which the Evangelist relates all in succession (cf. Mt., chs. 8 and 9); St. Augustine in the De consensu Evangelistarum (PL 34, 1041-1230) lingers to reconcile the parallel passages of the Gospels and to resolve the difficulties they raise; the same had already been done in part also by Eusebius of Caesarea in his other work: Quaestiones et solutiones evangelicae (PG 22, 879-1006).

The Middle Ages kept, on the one hand, to the same line of concordances or harmonies (e.g., the Carmelite Guido of Perpignan [d. 1342] with his Quattuor in unum, printed later at Cologne in 1531 under the title Concordia Evangeliorum, and G. Gerson [d. 1429] with his Monotessaron, seu unum ex quattuor Evangelii, printed at Cologne around 1471); and, on the other hand, gave impulse to a new literary genre, the Meditations on the life of Our Lord, in which the aim pursued is eminently ascetic, but a certain chronological order is also noticeable in the sequence of the various events. Thus we have the Meditaciones vitae Christi, once attributed to St. Bonaventure but in reality by the Franciscan Giovanni da Calvoli, which offer to the reader's affection not only episodes taken from the canonical Gospels but also from the apocrypha or from private revelations, or even founded on simple verisimilitudes. To the same literary genre, even if it is no longer a matter of meditation but only of pious reading, one can easily trace those passages contained in the legendaries of the saints that narrate the life of the Savior (e.g., in the Legenda aurea of Giacomo da Varazze).

2. From the 15th to the 18th century

Meanwhile an energetic step forward, marking an important progress, was made by the Carthusian Ludolph of Saxony (d. 1377) with his Vita Iesu Christi, in which there is already a better and more developed historical framework; but the aim remains clearly devotional (each chapter is itself almost like a meditation and ends with a prayer) and the apocrypha and verisimilitudes still supply the gaps and silences of the Gospels. From its first appearance in print (Strasbourg 1474) the editions, versions, and compendia of the work multiplied until the second half of the 19th century (at least 88 editions of the Latin text) and pious souls always found in it pasture for their devotion. The same success was enjoyed by the De gestis Domini Salvatoris, composed along the same lines by the Augustinian Simone Fidati da Cascia (d. 1348) between 1338 and 1347. Printed in Latin in 1485, it was translated into classical Italian by his intimate disciple and secretary Giovanni da Salerno (Florence 1496; Rome 1902, edited by N. Mattioli).

The invention and diffusion of the art of printing was naturally bound to favor the multiplication of similar works. One may cite, for example, several Italian incunabula, often anonymous, some unique or very rare, in which it is worthy of note that the life of Jesus Christ is always accompanied by the life of Mary: Vita di G. C. e della Vergine Santa Maria (Bologna, Baldassarre degli Arciguidi, 10 Dec. 1474); Vita di G. C. e della gloriosa Vergine Santa Maria (Vicenza, Giov. Lionardo Longo, 20 March 1477, and Leonardo Achates de Basilea, 23 Oct. 1481; Venice, Bernardino Rizzo, 18 Aug. 1489); Vita della gloriosa Vergine et di G. C. (Venice, Niccolò Girardengo, last day of May 1480); Vita della Vergine Maria e del suo figliolo G. C. (ibid., Pietro de Piasi cremonese, 22 Jan. 1484); Vita di G. C., della Vergine Maria e di s. Giovanni B. (ibid., Pietro de Piasi, 18 March 1486); Maria S. Virgo, Vita della preziosa Vergine Maria e del suo figliolo G. C. (ibid., Giovanni Rosso da Vercelli, 30 March 1492 and Giovanni de Cereto da Trino, 24 Sept. 1493); anonymous, Vita de la gloriosa Verzene Maria (ibid., Bernardino Vitali, 21 Dec. 1500). In Latin: Hieronymus (?), De infantia Salvatoris (Rome, Johannes Genseberg, n.d.); anonymous, Infantia Salvatoris, seu Vita B. Mariae Virginis (s. n. t., perhaps Florence, Bartolomeo de' Libri, ca. 1497). Then in the 16th century, alongside new Concordiae (e.g., by C. Jansenius, G. Buisson) and exegetical commentaries of the greatest utility (e.g., A. Salmerón, S. Barradas) many new Lives of Jesus are found, but generally of a popular and devotional character (e.g., L. of Granada, P. Ribadeneira). Certain novelties are also noticeable: that of Lives set forth in poetry: G. Bonus, De vita et gestis Iesu Christi (Rome 1520); G. Vida, Christiados libri sex (ibid. 1536); V. Filicaia, Vita del Nostro Salvatore Iesu C. (Venice 1540), and that of accompanying the text with illustrations: anonymous, Doctrina, vita et passio Iesu Christi (Frankfurt 1537, with 73 woodcuts); J. Corrozet, La Nativité, Vie, Passion, Mort et Résurrection... de Jésus-Christ (Paris 1549, with 181 woodcuts); best of all, and much reproduced afterward, the 151 plates arranged by the Jesuit G. Nadal, first according to the liturgical order of the Gospels of the Sundays: Adnotationes et meditationes (Antwerp 1593), then according to the order of the life, Evangelicae historiae imagines... in ordinem temporis vitae Christi digestae (ibid. 1593), reproduced later by C. Costantini, G. C. Via, Verità e Vita (Rome 1944).

In the 17th and 18th centuries the new Lives of Jesus Christ take preferably two orientations: the spiritual and the historical-exegetical, and multiply in an extraordinary manner, so much so that it is impossible to follow their appearance and diffusion. As examples of the spiritual orientation, one may cite: Martin of Cochem, Das Leben Christi (Frankfurt 1677); J. Croiset, Vie de Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ (Lyons 1723); and of the historical-exegetical orientation: G. S. Menochio, Historia sacra della vita... del nostro Redentore G. C. (Rome 1633); L. Forer, Das Leben und Leiden Jesu Christi (Munich 1637); Bernard of Montereul, Vie du Sauveur du monde Jésus-Christ (Paris 1637); A. Calmet, Histoire de la vie et des miracles de Jésus-Christ (ibid. 1720).

Thus we come to the best work of this period: the Histoire de la vie de N-S. J-C. by the Jesuit François de Ligny (3 vols., Avignon 1774), reprinted many times, translated into many languages, abridged in various ways, but always read and loved in preference to the others; it reproduces, in fact, in their entirety all the Gospel texts, linking and blending them, so that the commentaries may shed more light, in a continuous paraphrase in narrative form. One might even say that it closes the cycle of biographies of Christ, written substantially for a pious purpose, in order to open another, more laborious one, brought about by the rise of biblical rationalism.

3. In the 19th and 20th centuries

To the spirited attacks of rationalists of the most varied stripes, the Catholics who opposed them with new Lives, composed while keeping to the same ground as their adversaries, were at first not many.

One may recall F. L. Stolberg, Geschichte der Religion Jesu Christi (15 vols., Hamburg-Vienna 1806-1818); J. E. Kuhn, Das Leben Jesu wissenschaftlich bearbeitet (only vol. I, Mainz 1838); J. N. Sepp, Das Leben Jesu (7 vols., Regensburg 1842-46), which, however, leaves somewhat to be desired in the scientific field; A. E. de Genoude, Vie de J.-C. et des Apôtres, tirée des Sts Evangiles (Paris 1836); J. J. Bourassé, Histoire de N.-S. J.-C. (ibid. 1862); S. E. Freté, N.-S. J.-C., sa vie et ses enseignements (2 vols., ibid. 1892). Abbot A. Cesari in his Ragionamenti sulla vita di G. C. (Verona 1817), extensive and of literary value, remains rather still in the devotional field.

The appearance, on the other hand, of E. Renan's Vie de Jésus (Paris 1863), marks a painful date; it brings about, however, also a revival, not yet extinguished, indeed ever more vigorous, of broader studies, extensive research, critical and philological deepening, not only for the purpose of rebutting the adversaries with the same weapons, but also for a more strictly scientific purpose, one that meets and satisfies all the demands of modern methods.

Leaving aside the numerous works written in direct confutation of Renan, those will be recalled here, for each nation, which best satisfy present-day demands.

For France: a first phase is constituted by L. Veuillot, Vie de N.-S. J.-C. (Paris 1864; Italian trans., Florence 1883), a simple, not at all polemical, candid and lively exposition of the truth; H. Wallon, Vie de N.-S. J.-C. selon la concordance des quatre Evangiles (ibid. 1864), solid and erudite; F. Dupanloup, Vie de N.-S. J.-C. (ibid. 1869), brief, lively, closely adhering to the Gospels. The second phase, more mature and more experienced, opens with C. Fouard, Vie de N.-S. J.-C. (2 vols., Paris 1880, repeatedly reprinted and translated; Italian trans., Turin 1913-15), of sure information, of classical and penetrating style, easy and very interesting to read; the scientific discussions being relegated to notes. There follow then: E. P. Camus, Vie de N.-S. J.-C. (3 vols., Paris 1883, reprinted several times; Italian trans., Brescia 1900), more extensive than that of Fouard, with a greater wealth of detail and more evocative; L. Bougaud, J.-C. (in vol. XI of Le christianisme et les temps présents, Paris 1884; Italian trans. Turin 1899), rather apologetic, written with the heart, without technical discussions, but equally effective; H. Didon, Vie de J.-C. (Paris 1890; Italian trans., Siena 1893), of literary value; but of rather oratorical style and not always exegetically well founded; H. Lesêtre, N.-S. J.-C. dans son Evangile (Paris 1892), simple and clear, without display of erudition, but truly the work of a scholar; T. Pègues, J.-C. dans l'Evangile (ibid. 1898), a fusion of the four Gospels, without modifications to the text, with notes and explanations; E. Jacquier, Notre-Seigneur d'après les Sts Evangiles (Lyons 1900); a work of popularization, but composed by a learned and expert person; only the text of the Gospel, well divided, accompanied by substantial notes; A. D. Sertillanges, Jésus (ibid. 1900), brief, but dense with thought; J. Berthe, J.-C. (ibid. 1903; Italian trans., Florence 1904), a popularizing work, but conducted with love and sound criticism; M. Lepin, J.-C., sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris 1912), brief, but of a sound criticism that settles every question; L. C. Fillion, N.-S. J.-C. d'après les Evangiles (ibid. 1898; Italian trans., Turin 1910), brief, without either critical or dogmatic apparatus, but a solid and sure work; Vie de J.-C. Exposé historique, critique et apologétique (3 vols., ibid. 1922; Italian trans., 3 vols., Turin 1934), a work which to the narration of the facts, placed in their proper historical setting and expounded in their true sense, joins the confutation of the adversaries' errors; M. Morice, L'âme de J.-C. (Avignon 1926), a psychological study; L. de Grandmaison, J.-C. (2 vols., published posthumously, Paris 1928), a work which does not set out the life of Christ in sequence, but proves and defends its most salient aspects: the message, the person, the works, the religion; the best apology, the most learned and best informed against the assaults of modern criticism. Of it

Fr. J. Huby gave an abridged edition (ibid. 1929, Italian trans., Brescia 1932); M.-J. Lagrange, L'Evangile de J.-C. (Paris 1928; Italian trans. Brescia 1930), «a rapid commentary on the Synopsis (in Greek, Paris 1926; in French, ibid. 1927; Italian trans., Brescia 1932) with some historical indications, adhering to the more or less certain, more or less probable or even merely conjectural order of the facts» (cf. preface); J. Lebreton, La vie et l'enseignement de J.-C. (2 vols., Paris 1931; Italian trans., Brescia 1934); the discourses of Christ have a preponderant part in it; but one notes in it a solid information, a charming style, and an intimate, profound piety; a complement to this work and an orderly synthesis of the doctrine of Christ is the volume by the same Lebreton, Lumen Christi, la doctrine spirituelle du Nouveau Testament (Paris 1947); F. Prat, J.-C., sa vie, sa doctrine, son oeuvre (2 vols., ibid. 1933; Italian trans., Florence 1948), a work which maintains a strictly biographical character and tone, but which reveals at the same time an exquisite critical sense, a fine art, a serene unction; J. Bonsirven, Les enseignements de J. (Paris 1947), a happy synthesis of what, of the doctrine of Christ, is found scattered in the Gospels and in the commentators; H. Daniel-Rops, J. en son temps (ibid. 1944; Italian trans., Florence 1949), a widely circulated work, full of warmth and life, accompanied, however, always by great prudence and critical sense. One might also add Fr. Mauriac, Vie de J.-C. (Paris 1936; Italian trans., Milan 1937), but it is a literary work, episodic, rich in psychological analysis and nuances, of a restrained emotion, which, however, from time to time knows how to become sharp. Nor can two other authors be passed over in silence, who, speaking from the pulpit, knew how to expound with sound critical sense the history of Christ: H. Leroy, J.-C. sa vie, son temps (17 vols., Paris 1894-1914; Italian trans., Giarre 1909-16), a vast homiletic commentary, founded on a very extensive erudition; H. Pinard de la Boullaye (9 vols., Paris 1929-37; Italian trans., Turin 1931-40), where he treats apologetically, but with sure erudition, critical and theological sense, the principal aspects of the life of Christ.

For Germany, one may cite: P. Scheff, Sechs Bücher des Leben Jesu (Freiburg im Breisgau 1874), anti-Renan in tone; J. Grimm, Das Leben Jesu nach den vier Evangelien dargestellt (7 vols., Regensburg 1876-99; 2nd ed. with the collaboration of J. Zahn, ibid. 1890-99), a diligent and careful work, but too diffuse; J. B. Lehmann, Leben Jesu (Freiburg im Breisgau 1887; Italian trans., Prato 1890), is a well-conducted and devout gospel harmony; M. Meschler, Das göttliche Heiland. Ein Lebensbild (ibid. 1906), inspired by devotion, for which the earlier work Das Leben Unseres Herrn Jesus Christus in Betrachtungen (2 vols., ibid. 1890) can serve as a commentary; P. Dausch, Das Leben Jesu (Münster in Westphalia 1911); A. Meyerberg, Leben Jesu (Lucerne 1922), both of a popular character; F. William, Das Leben Jesu im Lande und Volke Israel (Freiburg im Breisgau 1933; Italian trans., Turin 1935), which "lingers over the vivid and attractive description of the places and customs of Palestine at the time of the Savior"; J. Sickenberger, Leben Jesu nach den vier Evangelien (Münster in Westphalia 1933), a work of value for its erudition and critical sense; I. Felder, Jesu von Nazareth (Paderborn 1937; Italian trans., Turin 1938), of a popular character; R. Guardini, Der Herr (Würzburg 1940; Italian trans., Milan 1949), meditations on the person and life of Jesus Christ, brought close to the needs and problems of today; I. Schuster and J. B. Holzammer, Handbuch zur biblischen Geschichte (8th ed., II, Freiburg im Breisgau 1925; Italian trans. Turin 1935).

For England: G. Coleridge, The Life of Our Lord (22 vols., London 1874-92), with spiritual aims; A. Godier, The public Life of Our Lord Jesu Christus (3 vols., London 1931; Italian trans., Verona 1946).

For Spain: R. Vilariño, Vida de Nuestro Señor Jesu Cristo (Bilbao 1912); I. Gomá i Tomás, Jesu Cristo Redentor (Barcelona 1933), in which the aspect of the Redemption is always emphasized; A. Fernández, Vida de Nuestro Señor Jesu Cristo (Madrid 1948).

For the United States: A. J. Mass, The Life of Christ (St. Louis 1891); J. O'Brien, The Life of Christ (Paterson 1944).

For Italy: leaving aside the biographies of Jesus Christ written for purposes of edification, especially for the people, which are the most numerous, those composed with a genuine critical concern are not numerous: V. Fornari, Vita di G. C. (3 vols., Florence 1869-93; 4th ed., edited by G. Fornari, 5 vols., Turin 1930), is not, properly speaking, a continuous narrative of the life of Jesus Christ on earth, although this is not lacking, indeed it forms the center of the work; but the divine Word made Man is considered as the firstborn of all creatures, the type and model of every created being; not history, therefore, but philosophical oversight; P. Chiminelli, Vita di G. C. (Florence 1939), a work conceived as "a song of faith, hope and love for the Son of God," well set out and conducted, learned and sure; G. Boson, Vita di N. S. G. C., in Il libro della fede, Padua 1941, pp. 269-403; G. Ricciotti, Vita di G. C. (Milan 1941; repeated editions and versions in many languages), a work whose need was intensely felt, conducted with critical acumen, with full mastery of the subject, in a plain style and commented upon by precise and well-chosen illustrations; C. Cecchelli, Mistero del C. (Rome 1943), a historical-apologetic work, which aims to bring out the idea that Jesus Christ truly becomes a mystery if one does not explain him in the manner indicated by faith; L. Tondelli, G. C., studi (Turin 1936) and G. secondo s. Giovanni (ibid. 1944), historical-theological-exegetical works, which develop the principal aspects of the Savior's life; I. Giordani, G. di Nazareth (2 vols., Turin 1945-46), adapted above all to modern circumstances, in which the imitation of Christ is so neglected and deviations from the straight line of conscience multiply beyond measure; F. Magri, G. C. La vita, la dottrina, le opere nella storia e nella critica (Milan 1945), the fruit of thirty years of work; good information and sound critical sense. Here one may cite the work of G. Papini, Vita di G. C. (Florence 1921), a work rather in the manner of tableaux, where the individual episodes offer the author the occasion to scourge without mercy the vices and to exalt, in a deeply felt and lyrical style, the beauty of virtue, become a rare pearl on earth; the light Dantesque transparency of Paradise joins with the harsh reproach of Hell and the intimate sense of repentant humility of Purgatory.

Celestino Testore

III. JESUS CHRIST IN RATIONALIST CRITICISM

For centuries Christians did not dare attempt a biography of G. C. Even the exegetical study of the four Gospels, while it did not neglect the historical element, was directed first of all to a theological or else ascetic-mystical purpose. Only in the 14th century did the interminable bibliography on the life of G. C. begin, when the Carthusian Ludolph of Saxony (d. 1377) composed the first Vita Iesu Christi. From that time such studies multiplied, but always following the Gospels as an unimpeachable source and with an eminently ascetic-parenetic aim. This chain is broken in the 18th century with the rise of biblical rationalism.

The first attempts at an explanation of G. C. in the "rationalistic" sense were the fruit of English philosophical deism (v.) and of German Enlightenment (v.). Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768), professor of Oriental languages at Hamburg, composed the first systematic demolition of the

The J. C. of the Gospels. In a work of fully 4000 pages with the significant title Schutzschrift für die vernünftigen Verehrer Gottes ("Apology of the rational worshippers of God") he believed he had explained the problem of J. C. with his deism and with the equipment of the Semitic languages. Of the work, left in manuscript, various extracts appeared (known as "Wolfenbüttel Fragments" because published anonymously) edited by Lessing (1774, 1777, 1778) and by C. A. E. Schmidt (1787). For Reimarus, J. C. was a political agitator and a deluded man. The traditional profile, consecrated by the Gospels, would be nothing other than the effect of manifold frauds and deceits. This publication aroused a veritable scandal. The weakness of the positive part appeared at once. The sole merit of Reimarus was that of arousing an intense awakening of scientific investigations on the subject. He was refuted repeatedly not only by Catholics. Among the Protestants I. S. Semler distinguished himself in the controversy, who was likewise inspired by English deism but rejected the absurd conclusions of Reimarus, adopting a "critical historicism" of pure rationalistic stamp.

H. E. G. Paulus (1762-1851) set out to apply the principles of the Enlightenment (Aufklärung) to the religious problem and to the person of J. C. in particular. He rejects the simplistic idea of the failed demagogue in order to present a J. C. preacher of a very lofty ethic. Paulus also accepts the facts narrated by the Evangelists; he merely declares that they must be interpreted according to rational principles, contrary to every idea of the supernatural. The exegete must distinguish between the episode as judged by the simple Apostles and Evangelists and the reality of the fact. The judgment of the sacred author, based on a naive conception of the supernatural, would be false, while the fact in itself would reflect an episode in no way superior to the forces of nature. Therefore all of Paulus's attention is directed to the rational, or rather naturalistic, explanation of the supposed Gospel miracles (e.g., Lazarus was not dead, but fallen into a deep lethargy). F. Schleiermacher (1768-1834) in his lectures at the University of Berlin in part continued the attitude of Paulus, but introducing into it a profound religious sense and a Protestant mysticism, as appears from his Life of J., published posthumously (1864).

The rationalist-naturalistic method of Paulus was followed by the rationalist-idealistic one of D. F. Strauss (1808-74), a disciple of Hegel. In his Das Leben Jesu kritisch bearbeitet (Göttingen 1835-36) he considered the traditional J. C. as the fruit of a "myth", that is, of an idealization by the first Christians. In practice Strauss eliminated as "mythical" all the miraculous or supernatural elements, while nevertheless preserving the historical reality of the personage J. C. To support his thesis he lowered considerably the period of composition of the four Gospels. In later works, especially in the Leben Jesu für das deutsche Volk bearbeitet (1864), he softened his assertions, but in practice he remained attached to his idea of a more or less mythological J. C., the expression of the faith of the first Christian generations, which thus altered certain historical data.

The importance assigned by Strauss to the first Christian communities in the formation of the "myth" around J. C. stimulated a more attentive study of the beginnings of Christianity. F. C. Baur (1792-1860), founder of the new Tübingen school and a convinced Hegelian, attempted in various writings to elucidate this crucial historical period. He, who wrote no Life of J., saw in the texts of the New Testament not the expression of a "myth" formed for the most part unconsciously (Strauss), but the conscious adaptation of definite currents or parties. Baur fixes the evolutionary cycle according to the principles of Hegel: thesis-antithesis-synthesis. The first moment is represented by Petrinism of a rather Judaizing character, the second by Paulinism, so named from St. Paul, defined as the typical exponent of the Hellenistic-universalistic current. In the third phase, documented especially by the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, there would have been a conciliatory rapprochement (= synthesis). Therefore the traditional figure of J. C. would be the result of an opportune compromise between antagonistic ideologies. The criticism of Baur, which would be continued by the various Tübingen scholars, was more than anything else destructive. Once the historical reliability of the sources was devalued, often declared spurious or assigned to late periods, and a lively antagonism of parties admitted from the very origins of Christianity, the conclusion could be nothing other than a painful agnosticism regarding the authentic profile of J. C., who is almost eclipsed by the figure of Paul, whose importance and innovative spirit are exaggerated.

And indeed, the logical consequences of such premises were immediately deduced by a disciple of Baur, that is, by Bruno Bauer (1809-82), who in his Kritik der Evangelien und Geschichte ihres Ursprungs (Tübingen 1850-55) and in other writings on the Gospels came to deny the very historical existence of J. C. He would have been not a historical personage idealized ("mythical" in Strauss's sense), but a simple "myth" in the common sense of the term.

The conclusions of Baur and of Bauer provoked general protests. From many quarters an accentuated skepticism began to manifest itself, or else an open disdain toward the direction of the new historical-exegetical studies, conducted along the lines of deism or of the Enlightenment or else along those of the philosophy of Kant and of Hegel. Numerous writers, usually grouped for practical convenience under the designation of the "liberal school", set out to investigate more deeply Judaism and Hellenism at the beginning of the common era and to frame the study of the Christian sources differently. The program in itself was praiseworthy, but it should be noted that the repudiation of the principles of Kant or of Hegel for the interpretation of the origins of Christianity did not at all imply the renunciation of the "lay dogma" of the impossibility of the miracle and of the supernatural in general. Finally it is well to bear in mind that many "liberal" authors, more or less explicitly, follow the philosophical theory of Schleiermacher and of A. Ritschl (1822-89), which reduces religion to a pure subjective sentimentalism. All of these admit a historical and real J. C., but with contours as imprecise as can be. Ordinarily an attempt is made to emphasize the psychological-moral value of the doctrine of J. C., who is described as a reformer. Among the most representative scholars of the "liberal school", with more or less notable shadings, one may catalogue Th. Keim (1825-78), Ed. Reuss (1804-91), Bernhard Weiss (1827-1918), H. I. Holtzmann (1832-1910), A. Harnack (1815-1930), not to speak of numerous other secondary authors.

Only stylistic beauty and crystalline clarity caused the enormous success of E. Renan's "famous" Vie de Jésus (1st ed., Paris 1863). In reality Renan, while claiming to be independent of any school, did nothing but popularize in many points the results of German criticism. His "Jesus" is something evanescent: so little would be known of his true history. He, according to Renan, was more than anything else an "enchanter," who fascinated the disciples and the masses. He was the preacher of a rational and pure religion, without cumbersome cultural forms and without an external magisterium, and the fervent worshipper of God, imagined as "heavenly Father." Presented thus as a "Jesus" not very different from that of the "liberal school," Renan is wholly preoccupied with demolishing the miraculous accounts of the Gospels, resorting to the various systems inaugurated by Reimarus, Paulus, Strauss, etc.

From the study of Jewish apocalyptic literature arose the most violent reaction to the liberal school. Johannes Weiss (1863-1914) and William Wrede (1859-1906) in their respective works Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes (1892) and Das Messiasgeheimnis in den Evangelien (1901) presented Jesus Christ not only as a reformer, but also as a preacher of an imminent end of the world, that is, an eschatological Jesus Christ, the adjective also serving as the denomination of the new school. Jesus Christ would have been the major exponent of the great eschatological current, which pervaded Jewish thought at that time. This profile was accepted with slight nuances especially by Albert Schweitzer and by Paul Wernle in Germany. In France it was spread by the apostate Alfred Loisy (1857-1940) and in part by M. Ch. Guignebert; then it passed into Italy, particularly through the work of the modernists, such as E. Buonaiuti (v.) and A. Omodeo.

At the beginning of the century, through the work especially of Wilhelm Bousset (1865-1920) and Richard Reitzenstein, the school of the "history of religions" was established in New Testament exegesis. These authors, including those who wrote directly on Jesus Christ, such as Bousset (Kyrios Christos, Göttingen 1913) and M. Ch. Guignebert (Problème de Jésus, Paris 1914), concerned themselves little with the historical person considered, in order to attempt to explain all of Christianity as an effect of religious syncretism or of the influence of a particular cultic or mystery tendency. In practice one returns to the idealized Jesus Christ ("mythical" in Strauss's sense), although one starts from different premises. Equally evanescent and almost inconsistent appears the figure of Christ for the supporters of the "form method" (v. FORME, STORIA delle) or Formgeschichtliche Methode, who, all preoccupied with the various forms or literary genres, present conclusions as skeptical as possible on the historical value of the ancient documents concerning Jesus Christ.

The attitude of Bruno Bauer, who went so far as to deny the historical existence of Jesus Christ, did not remain isolated, but was shared by the Dutchmen A. Pierson and A. Lohman, by the Germans A. Kalthoff (1902) and P. Jensen (1906, 1910), by the Englishman J. M. Robertson (1900 ff.) and by the American W. B. Smith, who published a voluminous work in German on "pre-Christian Jesus" (1906). With greater ferocity this negative position was maintained by A. Drews in his Mito di G. and in an even more paradoxical way by L. Couchoud in the Mystère de Jésus (Paris 1924). For Couchoud, Jesus Christ is not "a divinized man, but a God progressively humanized." It is the recent mythological school, although it is permissible to speak of a school, since very few have taken it seriously and everything leads one to believe that this vain historical-exegetical attempt has already been superseded.

Angelo Penna

VII. JESUS CHRIST IN ICONOGRAPHY.

I. IN THE EARLY CHRISTIAN PERIOD

The primitive Church did not hand down any authentic image of J. C. At the beginning, the Jewish aversion to images may have contributed to this, but the same is also found once Christianity penetrated the Greco-Roman world; there one remains in a position of defense against the pagan cult of simulacra, and therefore every image is forbidden. Indeed, in the Christian communities it was long regarded as ἐθνική συνήθεια (Irenaeus, Haer., 1, 25, 6; Eusebius, Hist. eccl., 7, 18, 4; Epiphanius, Logos against the images). The first images of J. C. are reported not in a Christian milieu, but in a pagan one or one open to pagan influences (Historia Augusta. Vita Alex. Sev., 29, 2; Carpocratians: Irenaeus, Haer., 1, 25, 6; Hippolytus, Refut., 7, 23; Epiphanius, Haer., 27, 6).

1. Images of J. C. from the pre-Constantinian period

To the motives mentioned that opposed the figuration of J. C. a third is added. In general, people remained indifferent to showing Christ outwardly (Clement of Alexandria, Paed., 3, 3, 3; Strom., 6, 151, 3); more important was to make known what he means for men. And for such expression the symbol seemed more appropriate. This, then, is why the symbol stands at the origin of the history of the image of J. Thus we have indeed the figure of the καλός ποιμήν, of the Good Shepherd (Mt. 18, 12-14; Lk. 15, 3-7; Jn. 10, 11-16). This is the primitive depiction of the Σωτήρ, of the Savior who saves from sin and from death. Examples of it are found in Callistus (Wilpert, Pitture, pls. 25; 35, 2; 38; 66, 2), in Praetextatus (id., op. cit., pl. 17); in Priscilla (id., op. cit., pl. 21, 1); in the baptistery of Dura Europos (Excavations report, 5 [1932], pls. 41-49). Furthermore, in the sarcophagi of the Via Salaria, of La Gayolle, of S. Maria Antiqua in Ravenna (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 1, 1-3; 2, 2) and numerous other examples of strigillated sarcophagi in F. Gerke (Die christlichen Sarkophage der vorkonstantinischen Zeit, Berlin 1941, pp. 340-42). For their interpretation cf. Clement of Alexandria (Protr., 11, 116, 1); in the heart of the Lord there is always the desire to save the human flock; therefore the good God sent the Shepherd (Clement of Alexandria, Paed., 1, 53, 2; Acta Perpetuae, 4; inscription of Abercius [v.]). The image of the Good Shepherd has suggested the forgiveness of sins, and therefore liberation from the dark powers that hinder the salvation of souls: for example, the slab of Beratius Nikatoras (cf. I. Quasten, Die Grabinschrift des Beratius Nikatoras, in Römische Mitteilungen, 53 [1938], p. 50). The same image is later placed in relation to penance, as, for example, in Tertullian (De Poenit., 8; cf. H. Achelis, Altchristliche Kunst, in Zeitschr. f. neutest. Wissensch., 16 [1915], p. 1).

In the sarcophagi of the end of the 3rd century the primitive meaning is lost. Along with the young Shepherd appears the bearded one, and the scene is represented idyllically. On the other hand, in the more recent cemetery frescoes the figure takes on greater proportions, as in Domitilla, in the cubiculum of the great staircase (Wilpert, Pitture, pl. 63, 2); such too are the statues of the Good Shepherd in Rome, in Constantinople and in Athens. In Constantinople the Shepherd is used as an ornament of fountains (Eusebius, Vita Const., 3, 49) and Tertullian indicates him depicted on cups (De pudic., 7, 10).

Analogous is the representation of Christ-Orpheus, as, for example, in the cubiculum of Orpheus in Callistus (Wilpert, Pitture, pl. 37, with a sheep). More recent monuments also add wild beasts, as in Domitilla (id., op. cit., pls. 229, 5; 243, 2). So too the statuettes of Athens and Istanbul and the mosaic floor of Tyre, today in Istanbul (G. Mendel, Musées impér. Ottomans. Catalogue des sculptures grecques, romaines et byzantines, Constantinople 1912-14, n. 1306). For the interpretation, Clement of Alexandria wrote: "Those who were as dead and had no participation in the true life, became alive again only on hearing that song" (Protr., 1, 4, 4).

Related to the Shepherd is also the image of the Fisherman. The fundamental thought is always that of σωτηρία, obtained in Christ. "He is the fisherman of mortals who let themselves be freed from the sea of evil"; thus Clement of Alexandria describes him (Paed., 3, 101, 3). Examples are offered by the paintings in Callistus (Wilpert, Pitture, pl. 27, 2-3); by the sarcophagi of La Gayolle, of S. Maria Antiqua, of Ravenna, of Via della Lungara (id., Sarcofagi, pls. 1, 2-3; 2, 2; 19, 6); later in mosaic in the former tomb of Iulius Tarpeianus beneath the Vatican Basilica. The scene is willingly joined with baptismal images, as in one of the cubicula known as those of the Sacraments in Callistus and in the aforementioned sarcophagi of S. Maria Antiqua and of Via della Lungara. Hence one understands the expression of Tertullian: "Nos pisciculi secundum ἰχθύν nostrum Iesum Christum in aqua nascimur" (De Bapt., 1). And the Fisherman is also willingly set in comparison and contrast with the Good Shepherd, as in the sarcophagi of La Gayolle and of Via della Lungara. This depiction, however, never reaches the importance of that of the Good Shepherd. Indeed, in more recent monuments it appears in the background, as in the sarcophagi of S. Maria Antiqua and of Ravenna, and at the same time it loses its allegorical content, until it disappears entirely in the 4th century.

Just as the Fisherman Christ is linked with baptismal figures, so the fish Christ is linked with convivial figures. The point of origin is the banquet of the disciples with the Risen One at the lake of Tiberias (Jn. 21, 1-14), which had moreover been represented in the multiplication of the loaves. This banquet of the disciples with the Risen One is repeated in the Sunday Eucharistic celebration; the fish becomes not only a symbol of the life offered by Christ, but also of Christ himself. Indeed St. Peter Chrysologus expresses himself thus: "A fish was also Christ... who, after his Resurrection, assured for his own, that is, for the disciples, the banquet that dispenses life" (Serm., 55).

The image receives a double meaning in the letters of the Greek word ἰχθύς, which are identified with the initials of the name of Christ: "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior." Let us recall the representation of the two fish in Callistus (Wilpert, Pitture, pls. 27, 1; 28) and for the interpretation the inscriptions of Abercius and of Pectorius (F. J. Dölger, ἰχθύς, Münster 1922, especially II, p. 448 ff.). There is furthermore also the image of the Shepherd in the act of milking and dispensing cheese, as one reads in the Acta Perpetuae, 4 and sees in the paintings in Callistus (Wilpert, Pitture, pl. 24, 2; where there are sheep and pails for milking) and in Marcellinus and Peter (id., op. cit., 93); a special meaning is assumed in the most remote period by the figure of the Teacher. Here one must recall the importance of γινώσκειν Θεόν in Greek religiosity, especially in gnosis (E. Norden, Agnostos Theos, Leipzig 1929; G. Kittel, Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, s. v. γινώσκειν).

Through γνῶσις Θεῶ man reaches salvation, and thus the state of spiritual slavery is essentially ἄγνωσιν. For the Neoplatonists too, the path to reach the contemplation of God, to θέα, passes through γνῶσις. This explains the numerous philosopher sarcophagi of the 3rd century (H.-J. Marrou, Moussikos Aner, Paris 1938; Fr. Cumont, Recherches sur le symbolisme funéraire des Romains, Paris 1942, p. 253). For the equivalent of the concept "occupat in terris sapiens, sed vivit in astris" cf. H. Diehl, Inscriptiones Christ. latinae veteres (Berlin 1925-31, no. 3433). In the New Testament one must bear in mind what is read in the Gospel of St. John: to know God means to live (Io. 17, 3); his doctrine is donum Dei (4, 10); it is living water springing up into eternal life (4, 14). In the Martyrium Polycarpi (17) J. C. is called βασιλεὺς καὶ διδάσκαλος. In the Acta Apollonii (41) J. C. is the διδάσκαλος καὶ σωτήρ. Justin in his dialogue with Trypho (8, 1) conceives Christianity as the true philosophy. Clement of Alexandria (Protr., 11, 112, 1 ff.) presents J. C. as παιδαγωγός. Origen (De princ., 1, 2, 24; Iob., fragment 22, 2: PG 12, 1036; De orat., 23, 2 [ὀδηγός]) and often Eusebius too, present him as Teacher of virtue. The sarcophagi of La Gayolle and of Ravenna allude to J. C. as teacher, in which the Teacher appears next to the orant (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 1, 3; 2, 2), the closing slab of a loculus in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (id., op. cit., pl. 3, 4). Other monuments, on the other hand, suggest the Christian μαθητής, as, for example, the central figure of the sarcophagus of Ravenna (id., op. cit., pl. 2, 2), and the sarcophagi of S. Maria Antiqua and of the Via Salaria (id. op. cit., pls. 1, 2; 1, 1); likewise the figures carrying the scroll in certain catacomb paintings, as in Callistus (id., Pitture, pls. 24, 1 and 39, 2). The representations of the Samaritan woman at the well allude to the biblical Teacher: such are the frescoes found in the cemeteries of Callistus and of Praetextatus (id., op. cit., pl. 29, 2 and 19) and in Dura Europos; the inscription of Pettorius mentions "the water of wisdom". Occasionally the concept is combined with that of the Shepherd, as in the hypogeum of the Viale Manzoni (G. Wilpert, Le pitture dell'Ipogeo di Aurelio Felicissimo presso il Viale Manzoni in Roma, in Atti della Pont. Accad. rom. di archeol., Memorie, 3rd series, 1 [1924], pl. 12); in the inscription of Abercius the disciples of the holy Shepherd are mentioned. The same concept is found in Clement of Alexandria (Protr., 11, 116, 1) and in Origen: "Magistri Pastoris sequamur exemplum" (In libro Iesu nave, hom. 7, 6).

Rare, on the other hand, is the representation of J. C. as imperator; in fact only in the conversation with the Samaritan woman painted in the cemetery of Praetextatus does the Lord wear the scarlet chlamys (Wilpert, Pitture, pl. 19), according to the allegory of Tertullian in Ad Mart., 3, and in De corona, 11; of the Acta Cypriani, 6, and of the Acta Marcelli, 1; etc.

2. The image of J. C. in the period of the tetrarchy and in the Constantinian period

In this period the image of J. C. detaches itself completely from the previous representations; the type current in the 3rd century disappears, together with all the primitive symbolic ones. Orpheus appears only rarely; the fisherman has disappeared entirely and only the image of the Shepherd survives (Wilpert, Pitture, pls. 61, 67, 72, 73, 100, 130, 131). On this point one may consult Eusebius (Theoph., 2, 83). In place of the primitive symbols comes the biblical image; thus in the foreground are healings and miracles mostly upon the multitude, as seen in the zone sarcophagi and in that cubiculum of the cemetery of Sts. Marcellinus and Peter with healed women (G. P. Kirsch, Un gruppo di pitture inedite del cimitero dei SS. Pietro e Marcellino, in Riv. di arch. crist., 7 [1930], pp. 210-14). Significant is not so much the individual figure as the power of J. C. which becomes visible precisely in the multitude; indeed, next to the oldest representation of the σωτήρ stands that of the οὐεργέτης, that is, of the benefactor of men. At the same time interest also arises in the image of J. C. But for lack of any tradition, the figure that appears can only be ideal. Thus, alongside the young thaumaturge of the 3rd century, arises the image of C. as a young man with short curly hair, as seen in the Lateran sarcophagus 161.

The image of J. C. as teacher also undergoes notable changes: the type of the philosopher Teacher disappears and rare is the image of the Teacher in the sermon on the mount, as seen in the polychrome fragments of the Museo delle Terme; there C. is bearded with a bare shoulder, of the type of the wandering Chinese preacher (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pl. 220, 1). Often, on the other hand, one encounters the image of C. with the scroll, among 6 or 12 Apostles; the oldest example is in the cemetery of Sts. Marcellinus and Peter (id., Pitture, pl. 96; but for the dating cf. J. Kollwitz, Christus als Lehrer und die Gesetzesübergabe an Petrus in der konstantinischen Kunst Roms, in Römische Quartalschrift, 44 [1936], p. 45). This image comes to take the place of the Shepherd in the center of the vault; it is also often found elsewhere and becomes the most important image of C. of this time (Wilpert, Pitture, pls. 148, 155, 170, 177). The frequent reproduction of the image, its meaning by no means sepulchral and its placement in the apsidal curves (id., op. cit., pls. 126, 193), attest that from the beginning it took its place and was fused into the places reserved for divine worship; probably the apse of the Lateran Basilica was also adorned with it.

Rarer are the images with an act of profound devotion. Three sarcophagi in Florence, Arles and S. Sebastiano offer examples (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 287, 1; 38, 3, 40); more recent are the frescoes in Domitilla (id., Pitture, pls. 124-25). Figures with a suppliant gesture in the act of prayer are seen in a fresco of Domitilla (id., op. cit., pl. 196), in a slab of the Museo delle Terme (id., Sarcofagi, pl. 204, 3) and in a fragment of the Museum of Berlin (id., op. cit., pl. 294, 4).

3. The image of J. C. in the last Constantinian period

The dominant figure in this period is that of the Basileus. In the struggle with Arianism the subordination of the earlier period is overcome. The essential result of Nicaea is the equality of the Son with the Father. It follows therefore that the same honors belong to the Son as to the Father. And it is precisely this equality of honors that is continually emphasized in the Councils that followed that of Nicaea: «Deum de Deo, Regem de Rege, Dominum de Domino» (Hilary, De synod., 29). At the same time, however, the sentiments of the distance between creature and Savior grow in the liturgy; the mysteries become φυβερά μυστήρια (M. J. Lubatschiwsky), Des hl. Basilius liturgischer Kampf gegen den Arianismus, in Zeitschr. für kath. Theologie, 66 [1942], p. 20; J. A. Jungmann, Die Stellung Christi im liturgischen Gebet, Berlin 1925). This new aspect of J. C. finds its expression in the image of the heavenly King; this is precisely a characteristic of this time because the great experience of this generation is the Christianization of the Empire. Under the aspect of the earthly emperor the heavenly Basileus is also represented; the insignia and titles of the emperor himself are attributed to him. The nimbus, the globe, the raised right hand, the purple mantle, etc. now become the permanent attributes of the image of J. C. At the same time the figurations of the Apocalypse, which once had poured upon the C. the predicates and ceremonials of the Hellenistic cult for the king, take on a new meaning. Christian art also borrows those motifs that describe the Kingdom of C. as a heavenly Kingdom, that is, the image of the heavenly city, the rivers of paradise, the palms. The great innovation of this period is the image of the delivery of the law. Two variants are known: the delivery of the law to Peter and that to Paul. The first is widespread especially in Rome: the best example is that of the mosaic of St. Constance (Wilpert, Mosaiken, pl. 4); there are moreover numerous minor monuments, such as sarcophagi (in St. Sebastian, in the Vatican; cf. Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 149, 121, 4, 39, 1) or gilded glasses.

In such monuments C. is bearded, stands on a mountain, from which the four rivers of paradise flow, holds his right hand raised (for the gesture cf. H. P.

L'Orange, Sol invictus imperator, in Symbol. Oslonens., 14 [1935], p. 86); with his left he delivers to Peter the law of the heavenly Kingdom, while on the other side Paul assists, applauding. The archetype is that of the court ceremonial on the occasion of the appointment of a minister, as, for example, is seen in the missorium of Theodosius in Madrid (cf. R. Delbrück, Consulardiptychen, Leipzig 1929, pl. 62; for the literature J. Kollwitz, Oströmische Plastik der theodosianischen Zeit, Berlin 1941, p. 157). The frequent and uniform reproduction leads to the conclusion in favor of a great original model, that is, the mosaic in the apse of the Constantinian Basilica of St. Peter. The subsequent restoration still allowed the original composition of the three figures to be recognized (cf. E. Müntz, Les éléments antiques dans les mosaïques romaines du moyen-âge, in Revue archéologique, 2 [1882], p. 144, n. 1).

The delivery of the law to Paul, on the other hand, is represented especially in the Ravenna sarcophagi, such as, for example, those of St. Maria in Porto fuori, of St. Francesco, and the one depicted in Classe (G. Dütschke, Ravennatische Studien, Leipzig 1909, nos. 72, 56, 80). An example from Constantinople is the slab of Bakirköf in the former Museum of Istanbul (G. Mendel, op. cit., n. 1328; J. Kollwitz, op. cit., p. 153, pl. 48). Constantinople is also the homeland of the archetype, which differs from the preceding one by the C. without a beard and by the absence of the apocalyptic elements. The oldest representation of the teaching to the apostolic college also appears in this period with a new composition. J. C. in youthful aspect and without a beard is seated on a throne wrapped in clouds that open the sky; he is the Pantocrator, the Lord of the world. The examples are offered not only by the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus but also by others (cf. Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 13, 28, 1 and 3; 29, 3; 121, 4). This representation too is inspired by a scene of the imperial court: the emperor, as lord of the world, enthroned above the sky (e.g., the Arch of Galerius; cf. also Eusebius, Vita Constantini, 4, 69, 2) and moreover the depictions of C. with the apostolic college, especially in the cemetery frescoes (Wilpert, Pitture, pls. 155, 2; 193).

In this period the theme of the Passion also develops in Christian art. The oldest preserved example is the beautiful Lateran sarcophagus 171 (id., Sarcofagi, pl. 146, 3. For the whole ensemble cf. H. V. Campenhausen, Die Passionsarkophage, Marburg 1929; F. Gerke, Die Zeitbestimmung der Passionsarkophage, in Archeol. Ertesitō, 52 [1939], p. 191). At the center stands the Crux invicta; C. is again without a beard, represented as victor (for this scene of victory cf. J. Kollwitz, op. cit., p. 135; for the concept emperor and victory cf. J. Gagé, La théologie de la victoire impériale, in Rev. hist., 171 [1933], p. 1; Σταυρός νικοσπούς, La victoire impériale, in Revue d'hist. et de philosophie religieuse, 13 [1933], p. 370).

The cycle of the miracles continues in this period. New are the typological comparisons of scenes of the Old and New Testaments. In the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus and in the former Lateran 174, now returned to the Vatican Grottoes, opposite the sacrifice of C. stands that of Abraham; in the Lateran sarcophagus 164 the sacrifice of Cain and Abel stands together with that which characterizes the passion of the Apostle.

4. The image of J. C. in the Theodosian and post-Theodosian period

The already notable impulse given to representation in the preceding period continues to grow stronger: the devotional image becomes the characteristic theme of this time. The influence exerted by the representations at the imperial court, such as are seen, for example, on the obelisk of Istanbul, is evident everywhere. On account of these tendencies the scene of the handing over of the law becomes increasingly rare. Christ enthroned at the center of the scene is surrounded by acclaiming Apostles (sarcophagus of Pignatta, of Barbaziano, of Exsuperantius; cf. H. Dütschke, op. cit., nos. 86, 14, 15); or by Apostles in the act of offering the crown (sarcophagus of Rinaldo, op. cit., no. 13). For the acclamation scene cf. E. Peterson, Σίς Θεός, 1926, 141; for the offering of the aurum coronarium cf. E. Cumont, L'adoration des Mages et l'art triomphal de Rome, in Atti della Pont. Accad. rom. di arch. Memorie, 3rd series (1832-33), p. 90; J. Kollwitz, op. cit., p. 51; Th. Klauser, Aurum coronarium, in Römische Mitteilungen, 59 (1944); 63 (1948), p. 129. The circle of the devout tends to widen and other acclaiming figures and figures offering crowns appear (Ravenna sarcophagus in Classe; cf. H. Dütschke, op. cit., no. 80). In Rome the handing over of the law is combined with the apostolic college; Christ at the center on the mountain is now surrounded by all Twelve Apostles in the sarcophagi that have the towers of the city in the background (e.g., the sarcophagi of Milan, Paris, Ancona and Mantua, in H. U. v. Schönebeck, Der Mailänder Sarkophag und seine Nachfolger, Rome 1935). The depiction of the Apostles in S. Pudentiana is rich in apocalyptic descriptions, such as the heavenly city, the apocalyptic animals (Wilpert, Mosaiken, pl. 42, 3). But the simple composition of the early times still persists, as, for example, in S. Aquilino in Milan (cf. M. van Berchem-E. Clouzot, Mosaïques chrétiennes du IVe au IXe siècle, Geneva 1924, fig. 60). To each different influence corresponds a varying figure of Christ; at times he has a youthful appearance without a beard, at other times he is bearded.

All these representations, however, reveal the connection with the older theme, but at the same time new images appear: Christ with the Cross is again surrounded by acclaiming Apostles (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 35, 1; 37, 1-5; 243, 1).

The archetype is perhaps constituted by the statue of Constantine victorious mentioned by Eusebius (Vita Constantini, 1, 40). The Cross in the midst of the acclaiming Apostles also now appears on monuments (sarcophagus of children in Istanbul: A. Müfit, Ein Prinzensarkophag aus Istanbul, Istanbul 1934, pls. 4 and 5); the column of Arcadius (J. Kollwitz, op. cit., no. 7); furthermore the Cross appears within a crown supported by angels (A. Müfit, op. cit., pls. 2 and 3; J. Kollwitz, op. cit., no. 6).

The decorative art of the apses in the 5th and 6th centuries is inspired by the representation of J. C. in glory. He stands at the center, on the clouds, lord of the world, as, for example, in the apse of SS. Cosmas and Damian (Wilpert, Mosaiken, pl. 102) or seated on the globe, as at S. Vitale in Ravenna (M. Van Berchem-F. Clouzot, op. cit., fig. 184), at S. Lorenzo fuori le mura (ibid., fig. 241); or standing, as in Naples at S. Giovanni in fonte (ibid., fig. 120). He is surrounded by a procession of Apostles or angels: from the sides saints approach bearing crowns (e.g., Sts. Cosmas and Damian) or to receive from him the crown of life (St. Vitale).

Their archetypes were the coronations of soldiers or of victors in the circus performed by the emperor (for example, the representation on the obelisk of the hippodrome of Constantinople; G. Bruns, Der Obelisk auf dem Hippodrom zu Konstantinopel, Berlin 1935, fig. 77). Often the composition continues on the walls of the triumphal arch with figures from the Apocalypse, such as the throne of the lamb, the seven candlesticks, the twenty-four elders, as, for example, in Rome in the basilicas of S. Paolo fuori le mura and of SS. Cosmas and Damian (M. Van Berchem-E. Clouzot, op. cit., figs. 100-101). The theme of the victory of Christ is varied either by representations of Christ with the Cross, as in the former Ravenna mosaic of S. Michele in Affricisco, now in Berlin (ibid., fig. 217) or with images of Christ treading on lions and dragons, as at Ravenna in the archiepiscopal oratory of S. Andrea (Wilpert, Mosaiken, pl. 89). For the symbolism of these representations cf. E. Weigand, Zum Denkmälerkreis des Christogrammimbus, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 32 (1932), p. 72.

Unusual here is the representation of Christ with an officer's cuirass, because all the other images represent him with the pallium; only the imperial attributes attest his special dignity. Almost always now Christ is represented in mature age and bearded. Ravenna, however, remains fixed on the type of the young Christ and only in the mosaics of S. Apollinare nuovo in the procession of the saints is he depicted with a beard. From the 4th century onward, alongside the themes mentioned, the figure of the Child in the lap of his mother also appears, as at Ravenna in S. Apollinare nuovo and at Parenzo; there a procession of angels surrounds the throne.

The theme of the Passion in the late Constantinian or early Theodosian period finds a new formula on a cyclic-historical basis. The first testimony is offered by the tympanum of the Lipsanotheca of Brescia (J. Kollwitz, Die Lipsanothek von Brescia, Berlin 1933, pl. 1). To the historical intention is joined the realistic form and for the first time, in the course of the centuries, the scene of the Crucifixion is encountered, as in the ivories of the Passion in the British Museum in London (O. M. Dalton, *Catalogue of the ivory car vings of the British Museum, London 1909, no. 291), in the door of St. Sabina (J. Wegand, Das altchristl. Hautportal an der Kirche der hl. Sabina, Trier 1900, pl. 4). The cycle has a second central nucleus in the figures of the women at the tomb and of the appearances of the risen C., as in the ivories of Munich and Milan (J. Sauer, Die altchristliche Elfenbeinplastik und verwandte Denkmäler, Berlin-Leipzig 1926-29, fig. 5; R. Delbrück, Consulardiptychen, cit., pl. 68), in the door of St. Sabina, in the sarcophagus of Servanne (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pl. 15). The coryphaei of this development are, for example, the mosaics in St. Apollinare Nuovo (C. Ricci, Tavole storiche dei Mosaici di Ravenna, Rome 1934) or the miniatures of the Rossano codex (G. Haselof, Codex purpureus Rossanensis, Berlin 1898). If the earliest monuments present a type of C. without a beard, the later ones instead offer a bearded type, as, for example, in Rome the door of St. Sabina, in Ravenna St. Apollinare Nuovo; furthermore the Rossano codex. Less ancient is the cycle of scenes relating to the infancy of C.; the earliest period knew only a few representations, such as the offering of the Magi, the manger, the shepherds. Several ivories offer simple narrative scenes, such as the five-piece diptych of the treasury of the cathedral of Milan, the Verden casket in the South Kensington Museum, in London, the chair of Maximian in Ravenna. Here too painting may have been the inspirer of this evolution. A second stylized composition, inspired by courtly art, is that of the triumphal arch of St. Mary Major in Rome. The birth of C. here becomes that of an imperial prince, to whom the Magi offer imperial gifts (on the relations between the adoration of the Magi and the scenes of homage of the barbarians to the Emperor cf. F. Cumont, art. cit., in Atti della Pont. accad. rom. di arch. Memorie, 3rd series, 3 [1932-33], p. 99). In St. Mary Major, C. is brought to the temple of the goddess Roma; on the idea of the renovatio mundi in relation to this temple cf. J. Gage, Le templum Urbis et les origines de l'idée de renovatio, in Mélanges Cumont, I, Brussels 1936, p. 319); the arrival of C. in Egypt takes on the character of a festive reception (E. Peterson, Die Einholung des Kyrios, in Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie, 7 [1929-30], p. 682). For the whole ensemble cf. A. Grabar, L'empereur dans l'art byzantin, Paris 1936, p. 211; J. Kollwitz, Das Bild von Christus dem König in Kunst und Liturgie der christl. Frühzeit, in Theologie und Glaube, 35 (1947-48), p. 113.

Between the cycle of the Passion and that of the nativity are interposed the episodes of the miracles. C. remains youthful there until the late period, even if in the scenes of the Passion of the same cycle the bearded type is found as in the door of St. Sabina and in St. Apollinare Nuovo. At the end of the development stand the icons of C. of Camulia (Cappadocia) cited between 560-74, of Edessa, which appears in Evagrius ca. 593, and that of the Sancta Sanctorum, mentioned from the 8th century (for the whole cf. E. P. von Dobschütz, Christusbilder, Leipzig 1899). Such icons give the image of a man of ca. 30 years, with thick hair parted at the center of the head, with a short, pointed beard. The fact of considering them acheiropoieta (v.) guarantees their fidelity; such icons have a mysterious power; they are venerated with incense, carried on the imperial chariot and taken as protection against enemies on the field.

329; E. Peterson, Christus als Imperator, in Catholica, 5 (1936), p. 64; J. Kollwitz, Christus als Lehrer und die Gesetzesübergabe an Petrus in der konstantinischen Kunst Rom, in Römische Quartalschrift, 44 (1936), p. 45; F. Gerke, Christus in der spätantiken Plastik, Berlin 1940; J. Kollwitz, Ostromische Plastik der theodosianischen Zeit, ibid. 1941, especially p. 145; id., Das Bild von Christus dem König in Kunst und Liturgie der christ. Frühzeit, in Theologie und Glaube, 35 (1947-48), p. 95.

Giovanni Kollwitz

II. IN THE MEDIEVAL AND MODERN PERIOD

Consecrated iconographically, then, from the very first centuries of the faith, the type of Christ was from the 4th to the 6th century defined ever more clearly; and while in the East the type of the bearded Christ immediately prevailed, in the West it was accompanied by the other type of the youthful and beardless Christ. Sometimes indeed, as has been said above, the two types appear simultaneously in the same decorative series. Thus at Ravenna in S. Apollinare Nuovo (beginning of the 6th century), where the Redeemer appears beardless and youthful in the mosaics where the miracles he performed are narrated, and bearded in the scenes of the Passion. And the two types continue to coexist still in the 8th and 9th centuries in Carolingian art (v. CAROLINGIA, ARTE), where in the miniatures the image of the beardless Redeemer with a youthful appearance is frequent. After that age, however, even in the West the type of the bearded Christ came to assume an ever greater diffusion, especially in Italy and above all in Rome, also because of the frequent contacts that were had there with the East. Thus in the Roman mosaics of the 9th century and still in the paintings of the 11th and 12th centuries, in which that bearded type seems to prevail which, from the miniatures of the Rossano codex to the frescoes of S. Urbano alla Caffarella near Rome (11th century) and of S. Angelo in Formis near Capua (11th century), had been the favorite of the painting of a more popular taste and which pursued narrative aims.

Meanwhile in the East, where, as has been said, the type of the bearded Christ decisively prevails from the 6th century onward, this type assumes aspects of the highest dignity and majestic beauty which in the solemn gigantic images of the Pantocrator have expressions of severity sometimes suffused with melancholy, while where the events of the Gospels are narrated, it appears surrounded by the Apostles or, seated on a throne among the saints, acquires tones of the most human sweetness.

And it is such an Eastern type of Christ, with a face characterized by the elongated oval, the broad forehead, the thin nose, the large almond-shaped eyes, the long hair and the small beard often parted in two, that is diffused in Italy by the mosaicists and the Byzantine or Byzantinizing painters who worked between the 11th and 13th centuries in St. Mark's in Venice, in the churches of Sicily and Campania, in the great Roman basilicas. This type is then adopted and in a certain sense fused, as regards the most human new expression, with the type already favored in Italy by those painters who pursued precisely narrative aims and who belong to the current that may be called that of popular art. From this sort of typological fusion, to which a corresponding stylistic evolution corresponds, derives the iconographic type of Christ as it appears at the close of the Romanesque age in the West in the work of Pietro Cavallini (v.). It has a face whose features are marked by proud masculine beauty, illuminated by a light of the highest spirituality deriving from an absolute inner peace, from the perfect mastery of every human contingency.

This bearded type, majestic, serene, already prevails in the second half of the 12th century also in the sculpture and painting of the other regions of Europe, especially in France, where it is frequently encountered in the decorations of the portals, for example, of the cathedral of Chartres and then of Amiens. At Reims, on the other hand, in a sculpture of the portal of the Cathedral one also encounters an image of the Redeemer still in youthful and beardless aspect, but this is evidently a reminiscence derived from some ancient sarcophagus.

From the 14th century onward the image of the Redeemer, although without differing in type from that consecrated precisely in the West during the 12th century by the art which, summing up the vital forces of the East and the West, was advancing toward the glory of the Renaissance, in parallel with the evolution of artistic forms, tends ever more to humanize itself; and the Redeemer, always bearded, with the oval of the face regular, illuminated by large sweet and intelligent eyes, the complexion of a rosy hue but with golden reflections, with long blond or at least light-brown hair like the beard, excels over the other images for the majesty and dignified beauty that is expressed by his whole person. Giotto in his paintings of the Arena chapel at Padua, Simone Martini, Pietro and Ambrogio Lorenzetti, Andrea Orcagna, Giovanni da Rimini and dozens and dozens of other painters, as well as Giovanni Pisano and Arnolfo and Lorenzo Maitani among the sculptors, define that type which on the threshold of the 15th century Masaccio and the Beato Angelico would take up again, leading it to the highest expressive dignity; then Piero della Francesca, Antonello da Messina and so many other very great masters of that happy age for Italian art would still repeat it, varying the tone of its expression but not the type; and so on up to Leonardo in the Last Supper in Milan, up to Raphael in the sublime image of the Transfiguration, up to Correggio in so many of his paintings, up to Titian, up to Michelangelo himself, who has left most beautiful sculpted images of the Redeemer and who in that supreme one, which dominates the Last Judgment, in the Sistine Chapel, takes up again with impetuous boldness the type of the youthful and beardless Christ. No longer, however, the youthful Christ in the peaceful attitude of a serene philosopher, but with his right hand raised in a gesture that is at once of exhortation, of blessing, of indignation.

Then, during the 17th and 18th centuries, the naturalistic taste of the age leaves its mark, though without varying the traditional type, also on the particular physiognomic intonation of the Redeemer. Thus the athletic figure of the Redeemer bound to the column, in the Flagellation painted by Caravaggio for the church of S. Domenico Maggiore in Naples, will have features composed so as to convey the sense of a proud sorrow borne with manly fortitude, while the one depicted in the Supper at Emmaus which is in the Brera Gallery in Milan, a work by the same Caravaggio, will have a face, in its very human sadness, illuminated with a highly spiritual light. On the other hand, while the images of the Redeemer left in so many of his paintings by Federico Barocci express feelings of sweetness sometimes mawkish, those painted by Guido Reni are marked by a veristic taste destined more than anything else to arouse feelings of piety. Thus in the numerous Crucifixions attributed to him and which find an equivalent in the field of sculpture in those modeled by Gian Lorenzo Bernini for the altars of the basilica of St. Peter's.

With the second half of the 18th century, while certain realistic aspects of the scenes in which the Redeemer appears are sometimes emphasized, as in the episodes of the Passion painted by Gian Battista and Gian Domenico Tiepolo, his face may sometimes assume expressions of the most human, gentle sweetness. Thus in the very famous Sacred Heart painted by Pompeo Batoni and preserved in the church of the Gesù in Rome.

After the neoclassical fashion had passed, during which even the image of the Redeemer, as in Canova's reliefs and in the paintings of Appiani and Camuccini, took on expressions attuned to the current taste, which desired that expressive modes proper to the sculpture and painting of the ancients be evoked, the very face of the Redeemer, through the work of the "Nazarenes" (v.) and of the other purist painters and sculptors active in the first half of the 19th century, regained the features it had had in the 15th century through the work of the masters who had preceded Raphael on the path of art. The features, but not the spirit that animated those images, for a certain stiff coldness in the expressions of figures drawn and painted with extreme skill and according to every good academic rule almost always deprives those images of the expressive warmth that was proper to the distinguished models. The Romantic artists, but even more so the verists of the second half of the 19th century, attempted the most lofty theme several times, not without nobility of intent. And while they sometimes obtained fairly appreciable results, even when they lingered to describe with realistic precision the events of the New Testament — and it suffices to cite the Crucifixion by P. Gagliardi in S. Girolamo degli Schiavoni in Rome, G.'s Pietà by Duprè in the Camposanto of Siena, or the one in the chapel-ossuary of Foggia, the work of E. Luppi — when they sought expressive novelties basing themselves also on ideas developed in the field of historicism, such attempts obtained no appreciable result.

What has been said above refers to the expression of the Redeemer's face as it has been consecrated by the tradition and faith of twenty centuries. It is in any case interesting to observe how even in his clothing the character of his image remains substantially unchanged over the course of the centuries. In fact, in almost all representations, and from the most ancient times, he wears a white tunic over which sometimes a pallium or a mantle of various colors is thrown; it will be purple after the crowning with thorns. On the Cross he had a white loincloth at his sides, yet some of his images — such as the Crucifix of Lucca — instead have a long tunic that conceals his body from neck to feet (v. CROCE).

On the particular character taken on by the figure of G. in the representation of the various episodes of his life narrated by the Gospels, see the relevant entries.

Emilio Lavagnino

VIII. JESUS CHRIST IN FOLKLORE.

I. JESUS CHRIST IN FOLKLORE

In the oral tradition of the common people there is preserved a notable body of legendary motifs concerning the life of G., from his birth down to the various episodes of his preaching, Death, Resurrection, and indeed down to his vengeance (the destruction of Jerusalem) and the Last Judgment. It is a kind of popular apocryphal gospel that sometimes genuinely reflects one or another of the motifs contained in the various apocryphal gospels, but most often presents entirely fanciful elements.

In Christmas carols and even more in certain lullabies, scenes from the life of the Holy Family and from G.'s early childhood are evoked, with graceful details and with episodes in which the figure of the child G. is presented with delicate and moving touches.

A whole particular series of prose narratives, of the fairy-tale type and sometimes with touches of good-natured comedy, presents J. traveling around the world together with the Apostles and especially with St. Peter.

«Among the Christian peoples the different character of the inhabitants of various countries is mostly attributed to the good or bad welcome they gave to Our Lord or to other sacred figures» (Lanzoni).

A false «letter of Our Lord» is still being circulated by means of broadsheets, in which precise and entirely imaginary details are given about his Passion and Death, with the exact number of the blows, the slaps, etc. Widely disseminated since the Middle Ages is a «letter (equally apocryphal) of Our Lord on Sunday rest». This epistle, turned into a prayer and versified, still circulates in the oral tradition of the people in certain regions of central Italy. In certain deprecatory formulas and popular prayers (e.g., against the mice that damage the countryside) as many as 70 different names of J. are listed.

Legendary poems in verse, of epic or epic-lyric tone, instead develop the episodes of the Magdalene, of the Raising of Lazarus or of the Passion and Death, sometimes attaining other peaks of poetry. On a slightly higher plane of culture, but without leaving the popular sphere, one may place the cantari in ottava rima which, from the 14th to the 16th century, narrated the principal episodes of the life of J. with greater fidelity to the Gospel texts or to works of devotion but often also with the introduction of fantastic elements: it suffices to recall the one about the «vengeance of Our Lord», which puts into verse a complicated legend entirely woven of imaginary motifs about the destruction of Jerusalem.

The popular cult of J. reveals itself, with characteristic manifestations, in all the principal feasts such as Christmas, Easter, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, as well as in brief prayers of popular tone, and even in the interjections and invocations of everyday language («J. I.», «Gesummaria»). Strange beliefs concerning the miraculous works of J. or his teachings are also reflected in proverbs and popular sayings (e.g.: «C. said: beware of those marked by me»). Numerous, moreover, is the series of miracles that popular tradition attributes to him, especially as an image of J. crucified.

II. CHRIST'S DEATH

One of the most widespread manifestations of popular devotion in the ceremonies of Holy Week is the dramatic procession known as that of the Dead Christ, or, in some places, of the mortorio. It takes place, as a rule, on the evening of Good Friday and often continues until late into the night; hence the frequent and characteristic use of torches and illuminations.

There are numerous varieties in which the procession appears in the different regions of Italy and beyond, but its essential core is the bier bearing the wooden image of the dead Christ: this image is followed by that of Our Lady of Sorrows and often also by many other groups of statues, which recall the different moments of the Passion. Sometimes men on horseback take part, dressed as ancient Roman soldiers, others on foot, also in costume, representing sacred or even symbolic figures, and throngs of children carrying in their hands the symbols of the Passion (the crown of thorns, the nails, the hammer, the lance, etc.), besides the clergy, the various confraternities with their banners, the representatives of the civil and military authorities, and, often, the municipal band. During the procession it was customary to sing the "orazione della Madonna," an ancient popular narrative song about the passion of Christ. This type of procession, with more or less dramatic aspects, already existed in the Middle Ages and in every country of Europe where the sacred drama flourished; while the true representations with living characters gradually disappeared, this processional form instead survived, because it responds to various needs and is adaptable almost everywhere. A fine and precise description of one of these processions of the Dead Christ may be read in D'Ancona (v. bibl.). - See plates XVIII-XXIV.