CHRISTOLOGY - Msgr. Correa

CHRISTOLOGY |1
TABLE OF CONTENT
INTRODUCTION
A. The Objectives of the Course

B. The Sources of Christology
C. Teaching Strategies
D. Examinations and Grades
PART I. JESUS BEFORE CHRISTIANITY

(Material Reference: “Jesus Before Christianity,” Albert Nolan, St. Paul Press,
India, 2007)
A. The Perspective
B. The Intentions of Jesus
C. The Kingdom of God
a. The Kingdom and Money
b. The Kingdom and Prestige
c. The Kingdom and Solidarity
d. The Kingdom and Power
e. The Coming of Kingdom
D. The Confrontation
1. Jesus and Politics
2. Jesus and Material Goods
3. Jesus and Violence
4. On Suffering and Death
5. The Man who Emerges
6. Faith in Jesus
PART II. JESUS IN CHRISTIANITY

(Material Reference: Thomas P. Rausch, “Who is Jesus an Introduction to
Christology,” Claretian Pub., 2005, chapter 8-9)
A. New Testament Christologies

1. Easter Christologies
COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

CHRISTOLOGY |2
2. Son of God Christologies

3. Pre-existence Christologies
4. Conclusions
B. From the New Testament to Chalcedon
1. Faith and Hellenistic Culture
a. The Challenge of Greek Philosophy
b. Gnosticism and Docetism
2. From Nicaea to Chalcedon
a. Nicaea I (325)
b. Constantinople I (384)
c. Ephesus I (431)
d. Chalcedon (451)
C. SOTERIOLOGY: SIN AND SALVATION

(Material Reference: “Who is Jesus: An Introduction to Christology,” Thomas
P. Rausch. Claretian Pub., 2005 pp. 165-178)
1. Sin and Salvation in Scripture

a. The Fall
b. Sin in Paul
c. New Testament images of Salvation
2. Sin and Salvation in Christian History
a. The Eastern Fathers
b. The Western Fathers
D. NEW APPROACH TO SOTERIOLOGY

(Material Reference: “Who is Jesus: An Introduction To Christology”.
Thomas P. Rausch Claretian Pub., 2005, Chapter 11)
1. Overview
2. Insight of Rausch

CHRISTOLOGY |3
REPORTING...
PART III. JESUS IN OUR COMMUNITY: CHRISTOLOGY IN CONTEXT
A. Christ in the Philippines

1. Christ and Popular Devotion
2. Christ and Corruption in the Church and Society
3. Christ and Poverty
4. Christ and the Population
5. Christ and the OFWs
B. Towards A Christological Model For Filipinos
1. The Purification of Popular Devotions: Christocentric
2. The Continuous Struggle for a Just Society
3. Quest for Human Dignity
4. The Filipino Family: The Custodian of Christian Values
5. The Filipino as Missionary
CONCLUSION
THE PRIEST: THE IMAGE OF CHRIST IN THE WORLD
1. The Identity of the Priest
2. The Consecration of the Priest
3. The Mission of the Priest

CHRISTOLOGY |4
INTRODUCTION
A. The Objective of the Course
Theology is both speculative and practical. However, for pastoral reasons, we need to
always emphasize its practical nature. Theology that is not useful is not good theology at
all. In general, our objective is how to make Christology relevant to ur lives. We aim to
develop a Christology beyond worship and devotion. Consequently, the objectives of the
course are:
1. To know Christ and deepen our knowledge of him. It is important to know the
“historical Jesus”: the circumstances surrounding his person, his ministry and his
relationships. It is also equally important to know his intentions and his hopes for
humanity he came to serve. The more we know him, perhaps the better we will be
disposed to respond to his challenge to share his vision by our faith.
2. To deepen our faith in Jesus. Faith is a gift. It is an invitation to the fullness of life in
this world and in the next. Faith is not a static and, many times, a meaningless
“profession” of belief. To believe in Jesus is listen to his words and to embrace
hopefully the reality of those words. As future ministers, it is imperative to become
men and women of faith, men and women who accept the words of Jesus and give
others the vision of the reality of those words. This is the kind of faith that stands the
chance to transform ourselves, our community, and our world.
3. The course intends to inspire others to live the words of Jesus and to live like Jesus
himself. St. Paul, after having dedicated himself to the ministry, says. “it is no longer
I who lives but Christ lives in me.” The great Mahatma Gandhi had an admiration for
Jesus and was inspired by the teachings of Jesus in his struggle for peaceful
transformation. One time he said to the effect that, it is a pity Christians do not live
the teachings Christ. Hopefully, knowing Jesus and believing in him would inspire us
to become an ‘alter Christus”- another Christ. How do we become another Christ in
this day and age? This is a good question that we will continually reflect on in this
class.

CHRISTOLOGY |5
B. The Sources of Christology

No doubt the best source of Christology is Jesus himself, both as the “historical Jesus”
and as the “Jesus of Faith.” In addition, the Church provides us with an authoritative
interpretation of the teachings and deeds of Jesus.
1. The Historical Jesus

Regarding the “historical Jesus,” the book of John P. Meier, the “Marginal Jews” that
comes in four volumes, gives us a lot of helpful insights into the circumstances
surrounding the person, the life, and works of the man named Jesus. In my opinion,
this is the best book so far in this field.
John P. Meier is a Biblical scholar and Catholic priest. He attended St. Joseph’s
Seminary and College (B.A., 1964), Gregorian University [Rome] (S.T.L., 1968), and
the Biblical Institute [Rome] (S.S.D., 1976). He is author of the series A Marginal
Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (4 v.), six other books, and more than 60
scholarly articles. Meier is professor of New Testament and holder of the William K.
Warren Foundation Chair in the Department of Theology at the University of Norte
Dame. Before coming to Norte Dame, he was professor of New Testament at the
Catholic University of America.
(from Wikepedia, John P. Meier) Meier’s series A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the
Historical Jesus begins by invoking the methods of modern historical research to
“Recover, recapture, or reconstruct” the “historical Jesus.; meier suggest that such
research might admit agreement of Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and Agnostic
scholars as to “who Jesus of Nazareth was and what he intended” (v. 1, 1991, p. 1).
Volume 1 (1991) differentiates the historical Jesus from the Biblical Jesus. It analyses
sources, including the New Testament and non-canonical works. The latter include
the agrapha, the apocryphal gospels (such as the Gospel of Thomas), Josephus, and
other Jewish and second-century Roman works.

CHRISTOLOGY |6
POINTS TO REMEMBER:
A. Meier’s work represents the best, albeit controversial in Catholic biblical

scholarship. It may well be part of Catholic biblical tradition, taking Catholic
“tradition” in an extended sense. It has established historical the existence of Jesus.
B. Christian Tradition in its strict sense, understood theologically, is one of the

sources of faith. Christology draws data from this sources as well as from the “living”
Church’s tradition that are in the form of “inspired” works in theology, the intimate
religious experiences of today’s “saints”, and the development in the teachings of the
church. (Video: Jesus, The Missing Years).
2. The Biblical Jesus

The biblical Jesus is the “Jesus of Faith.” This is Jesus as we find him in the synoptic
gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), the fourth gospel of John. These accounts on the
ministry and life of Jesus were written some seventy years after his death and were
addressed to different Christian communities. Written in various literary styles, they
contain the revelation who is Christ himself and to elicit faith in his person and works
and hope in his promises. “Scripture provides the privileged witness to the life, death,
and resurrection of Jesus Christ and to the decisive beginnings of the Church’s faith.
Indeed, in the New Testament we come to know Jesus Christ in and through the
expression of the faith of the early Church. And that scriptural expression of the
Church’s faith is the normative beginning of tradition.” (Brain O. MacDermott, Word
Become Flesh, p. 31).
3. Jesus from Tradition

Tradition with a big “T” is generally considered as the “unwritten Word of God”.
Indeed, John the Evangelist said to the effect that it’s hard to contain in a book all that
Jesus said and did. That leaves us with the words and deeds of Jesus that were
transmitted orally or in the form of customs that were directly or indirectly inspired
by Jesus himself. The data on Jesus taken from tradition is not limited alone to the

CHRISTOLOGY |7
early days of Christianity. As McDermott puts it: “Tradition is… the living process of
transmission of God’s self-revelation in the life, liturgy, prayer, action, thought, and
writing of the Church down through the centuries as that life is guided by the Holy
Spirit.” (McDermott, p. 31).
We include here the writings of saints and how, in their lives, they lived the different
mysteries of Christ. The actual living of the Christian mystery is a great source of
Christology in that it provides us with information how Christ was lived “in context”,
so to say. Tradition, then is a veritable source of Christology.
4. Magisterium
In as far as Catholic theology is concerned, the Magisterium is a significant source of
Christology. By it, we refer to the teaching office of bishops on union with the Pope.
The magisterium lays down the norms and guidelines. It is the source of catholic
Christological doctrines defined in collegiality and with the guidance of the Holy
Spirit. However, we have to insist that, as in Scripture, magisterium could not
possibly “contain” the totality of Christ. Even the magisterium cannot put Christ in a
box, so to say. Christ works also among peoples from different religious persuasions
and beliefs. Their teaching maybe is great source too of Christology. After all, this is
what ecumenism is all about: unity in diversity; Christianity in plurality. To claim to
own Christ in his totality is religious bigotry.
C. The Sources of Christology
The strategy that we will use in class is one that is suitable for realizing our objectives.
Presentation. Generally speaking, it will consist in classroom presentations. You may

interrupt the presentation anytime, and I encourage you to participate actively in
discussions. Participation is a sign of your interest in the course and your eagerness to
learn.

CHRISTOLOGY |8
Movies. I will show some movies as part of the presentation. I have not yet determined
what movie to show. If there is a film that you think will be helpful, don’t hesitate to let
me know.
Reports. “Part III”, letter “A” will be reported by groups. I encourage you to do
presentation like I do. Many of you will end up teaching in the future. now is the time to
learn how to do presentations if you have not learned it yet. I recommend
OpenOffice.org. it is like Power point. But unlike Power point, it is free. You can
download it on your laptops.
Theological Reflection. This is an important part of the class as this one of the best ways
of integrating the course. The reflection should be no less that two pages and no longer
that four pages long, single spaced. I will give a special workshop on how to do
theological reflections after the introduction. Submission of the reflection is once every
two weeks
Examinations. Periodic examinations will be oral. I believe that that this is the best way
to measure the student’s understanding of the subject matter. Periodic examination refer
to mid-term exams and final exams.
Computation of Grades. The computation of grades is as follows:
Final exams 35 %
Mid-term exams 25 %
Theological reflection 20 %
Reports 10 %
Class participation 10 %
Total 100 %

CHRISTOLOGY |9
PART I JESUS BEFORE CHRISTIANITY
A. PERSPECTIVE
The kind of perspective that Albert Nolan proposes is like having no idea whatsoever
who Jesus is, like a pagan from some remote place who has no idea at all of the man
called Jesus. Since we have already heard a lot about Jesus, the challenge that a student in
Christology faces is the erasure of pre-conceived ideas about Jesus in order to capture
him, so to say, in his purity.
“Jesus cannot be fully identified with that great religious phenomenon of the Western
world known as Christianity. He was much more than the founder of one of the world’s
greatest religions. He stands above Christianity as the judge of all it has done in his
name.” (Albert Nolan, Jesus Before Christianity, p. 19).
“Fr. Nolan was born in Cape Town, South Africa. Inspired by the nooks of
Thomas Merton, he became a Dominican priest in 1954. For him, theology must
come from the grassroots. Editor of the magazine “Challenge” and was involved
with “Kairos Document”, an example of contextual and liberation theology.”
B. THE INTENTIONS OF JESUS

Nolan asks: What was Jesus trying to do? What did he hope to achieve for the
people amongst whom he worked in first century Palestine?.... One of the best
way of uncovering Jesus” intention would be to look for evidence of his decisions
and choices… This we have at the beginning of all the gospels:” (Nolan, p. 29).
1. Jesus Elected to be Baptized By John
Who is John the Baptist? What does he stand for? Why does Jesus align himself
with the Baptist and not other voices and movements at the time?
Historical Background: Jewish Leadership
Palestine came under Roman control in 63 BC. The Romans selected Herod to be
the native ruler. Jesus was born during the reign of Herod, later considered the
Great. When he died (4 BC), his kingdom was divided between his three sons
(Herod Philip, Herod Antipas, and Herod Archelaus).

CHRISTOLOGY | 10
Herod Archelaus became an impotent leader and he was removed by the Romans.
A Roman Procurator was tasked to govern Judea and Samaria. This was the
beginning of direct Roman rule that ended in the total destruction of the temple,
the city, and the Jewish nation in 135 AD. During the Roman rule, Jesus was
around 12 years old.
The Jewish discontent that blossomed into a rebellion began with the issue of
taxes. Pious Jews objected on religious ground. God alone is king. Their land and
resources belonged to God. Paying taxes to the Romans would be unfaithful to
God. To God belonged taxes not to Caesar. The first rebellion was led by Judas
the Galilean. He inspired the birth of religious freedom fighters that came to be
known as Zealots: faithful Jews, zealous for the law and for the sovereignty and
kingship of God.
The Pharisees shared the vision of the Zealots of Roman free Palestine. But
unlike the Zealots, the Pharisees rejected violence for a practical reason: they
stand no chance against the mighty Roman army. Their objective was the reform
of Israel itself. The presence of the Romans was for them a punishment from God
for not being faithful to the law and traditions. Consequently, they separated
themselves from those who were not faithful to the laws and traditions. They paid
taxes to the Romans out of fear. Their morality was legalistic; they believed in the
afterlife and looked forward to the coming of the Messiah who loud liberate them
from the Romans.
Unlike the Pharisees, the Essenes went to the extreme in their religious practices
and observances. The separated themselves completely from the world for fear of
worldly contamination. They lived in the desert as ascetics and observed celibacy.
Religious purifications, originally reserved meticulously. They were a very
exclusive group, barring anybody outside their sect and outsiders were abhorred
and considered “sons of light” and the only true remnants of Israel who only
loved and respected each other and nobody else. Like the Zealots and the
Pharisees, the Romans were looked as “sons of darkness” that should be

CHRISTOLOGY | 11
destroyed in due time. Warlike like the Zealots, they also waited for the Messiah
to lead for the great battle against the Romans.
Fr. Roland de Vaux, OP (1903-1971) was a French Dominican, former director

of the Ecole Biblique, led a Catholic team that worked on the Dead Sea Scrolls.
His tem excavated the ancient site of Khirbet Qumran was the ancient settlement
nearest the caves where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. Destroyed by the
Romans in the year 68 AD. De Vaux believed that Qumran was settled by the
Essenes.
The Sadducees, another group of influential Jewish leaders, tended to be on the

“conservative” side of the things in comparison to the Pharisees. They refused
what they thought as novelties at that time like belief in the afterlife and the
resurrection of the dead. They refused the idea of heaven and hell, reward and
punishment. These are found in this life. They tried to preserve the status quo, and
were very cooperative to the Romans. A good reason for this perhaps was the
desire to retain their wealth because many of them belonged to the aristocracy
chief priests and the elders.
The elders were noble lay people who were landed. They were the old rich and
they included scribes and rabbis. They were not priests but were educated as
lawyers, theologians, and teachers. They were the upper class rulers.

CHRISTOLOGY | 12
JOHN - The Baptizer – The Prophet – The Martyr
John is usually depicted as a nice guy in Christian literature. But he was not nice
at all in real life. He was not nice to Herod; he was never nice to the Pharisees, the
Sadducees and perhaps to the Essenes who espoused violence to expel the
Romans. In general, he was neither nice to Israel. He was, in the words, of Fr.
Nolan, a “sign of contradiction”. He was a contradiction because he was:
1. A Prophet. Like his predecessors, John was a prophet of doom and destruction.
And before John came to the scene, there was no real and trustworthy prophet;
there was only an echo of hid voice. John was no doubt a prophet according to the
Old Testament model of prophet: his lifestyle, his way of speaking, and his
message speak of themselves and;
2. His Message was straightforward: God is angry at Israel and plans to destroy it
(Mt. 3:8; Mt. 3:10). His plan will be executed by one who is to come. Their being
chosen people is not a guarantee of salvation from God’s wrath: “God can destroy
Israel and create a new people.” (see, Mt. 3:9). However, God could change his
mind if all Israelites repent or change (metanoia). John’s idea of change was not
the equivalent of ritual purity. His idea of change was moral: share with others
(tunics); honesty (tax collectors); personal integrity (criticism of Herod).
3. Baptism was not ritual purity but a sign of repentance and a guarantee of
deliverance from God’s anger (Mk. 1:4)
4. The Roman Issue was not the concern of John. Instead he attacked Israel and its
leaders for their unfaithfulness to God. Politically speaking, this did not sit well
with Herod especially whom John criticized for divorcing his wife, a Nabataean,
in favour of Herodias. The Nabataean had an alliance with Herod. It was
destroyed partly because of the divorce. For Herod, John was making matters
worst.
Jesus’ Choice
Clearly, it was the intention of Jesus to align himself with John the Baptist
because John was the only leader who made a strong impression on him. Nolan

CHRISTOLOGY | 13
says: Jesus may not have agreed with john in every detail… But the very fact his
baptism by John is the conclusive proof of his acceptance of John’s basic
prophecy: Israel is heading for an unprecedented catastrophe. And in choosing to
believe this prophecy, Jesus immediately shows himself to be in basic
disagreement with all those who rejected John and his baptism: the Zealots,
Pharisees, Essenes, Sadducees. (p. 380)
2. Jesus Elected to Serve the Poor, the Sinners and the Sick – The Lost House of
Israel
“I Came to Serve and Not To Be Served”
In the opinion of Nolan, Although Jesus was baptized by John he never brought
anybody to John for baptism nor he himself baptized anybody as John did. Jesus
decided to take the route of service towards the marginalized in Jewish society:
the poor, the blind, the lame, the crippled, the lepers, the hungry, the miserable,
sinners, prostitutes, tax collectors, the persecuted, the downtrodden.. the list goes
on. Generally, they are the lower classes or the oppressed.
“The upper or ruling class were enormously wealthy and lived in great luxury and
splendor. Between the middle and the upper classes there was an immeasurable
economic gap. The upper classes would include the royal household of the
Herods, whose wealth was derived from taxation, the aristocratic priestly ministry
(chief priests), who lived off the tithes and Temple tax, and the lay nobility
(elders) who owned most of the land”.
“Jesus came from the middle class. He was not by birth and upbringing one of the
poor and oppressed…. However, the orthodox Jews from Galilee”.
“The remarkable thing about Jesus was that, although he came from a middle
class and had no…disadvantages himself, he mixed socially with the lowest of the
low and identified himself by with them. he became an outcast by choice….Why
did Jesus do this? Why would a prophet associate with the rabble who know
nothing of the law? the answer comes across very clearly in the gospels:
compassion”. (Nolan, pp. 51-52)

CHRISTOLOGY | 14
Compassion
According to Nolan, the word compassion is not employed in the gospels can but
“you can feel the movement of compassion.”
“He was moved with compassion for the crowds and healed the sick” (Mt. 14:14).
“He was moved with compassion because they were distressed and dejected like
sheep without a shepherd.” (Mt. 9:36)
“Do not cry”, he said to the widow of Nain. The compassion of Jesus extended
likewise to the leper, the blind men, and to those without food. In the words of Fr.
Nolan, Jesus had an unrestrained compassion…for the poor and the oppressed.”
Jesus felt compassion because of the suffering of the poor and the oppressed.
Compassion was the answer of Jesus to sufferings.
“Jesus like Jeremiah, was moved to tears. But what could be done? It is all very
well to feel compassionate and sympathetic but how could anyone do anything
about it?
Healing…
John called for conversion through Baptism; Jesus did something more practical
and down to earth: he healed. Sickness was a huge problem during his time. The
services of doctors were beyond the poor because they could not afford. But even
if they could, the doctors were limited in their knowledge of health care. This
explains the presence of many exorcists, sin diviners, and witchdoctor who
claimed to have driven evil spirits in the form of different kinds of diseases.
However, Jesus was different from others healers in that “he touched” the sick
person, “took them by hand” or “laid hands on them”. and he never used nay
“ritual formulae” or incantations common among healers.
Moreover, unlike other healers who made use of their own appeal-holiness,
personal esteem - Jesus relied on the strength of faith. What effected the cure was
the faith of the sick person and not really the prayer of the healer (Cfr. Mt. 21-22).

CHRISTOLOGY | 15
“Your faith has healed you” was the mantra of Jesus. This separates Jesus from
the rest of healers. This point to the fact that healing was achieved by Jesus not by
incantations, rituals, or even some special relationship with God but by the faith
of the person. A lot of possibilities open to one who has faith: he can move
mountains and more.
The faith is apparently not to be equated with the recitation of creeds of beliefs.
Like a creed, it is a conviction and more:
“It is a particular kind of conviction and it receives its power from the kind of
conviction that it is. Faith is a good and a true conviction. It is the conviction that
something can and will happen because it is true that goodness can and will
triumph over evil. In other words, it is the conviction that God is good humanity
and that God can and will triumph over evil. The power of faith is the power of
goodness and truth, which is the power of God.” (Nolan, p. 58)
Forgiveness…
An integral part of the compassion of Christ is forgiveness. Although John the

Baptist condemned sinners, Jesus was one with them. this is a fact recorded in all
four Gospels: “This man they said entertains sinners and feasts with them.” (Lk.
15:2) “And you say, look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and
sinners. “Moreover, because Jesus was looked upon as a man of God and a
prophet, they would have interpreted his gesture of friendship as God’s approval
of them. Their sinfulness, ignorance, and uncleanliness had been overlooked and
were no longer held against them” (Nolan, p. 67).
In Jewish mentality, sins are, “debts (owed) to God” as a result of some

transgressions of the law committed personally or by one’s parents or ancestors. It
does not matter whether the sin was committed by mistake or deliberately. It is an
unforgiving situation where a person or even a race is condemned for life and
have no way out. The Samaritans were in this situation. Their “Jewishness” was
contaminated and they will forever be indebted to God.

CHRISTOLOGY | 16
The sick, the public sinners, the poor, and others similarly situated were in the
same condition. For Jesus, “forgiveness means cancellation or remission of one’s
debts to God. To forgive (aphiemi) in Greek means to remit, release or liberate.
To forgive someone is to liberate them from the domination of their past history.”
(Nolan, p. 68).
“Jesus’ gesture of friendship made it quite clear that this (forgiveness) was
precisely what he had in mind. He overlooked their past and refused to hold
anything at all against them. He treated them as people who were no longer, if
ever, indebted to God and therefore no longer deserving of rejection and
punishment. They were all forgiven” (Nolan, p. 68).
Clearly, for Jesus, healing and forgiveness are expressions of is compassion.

(Homily: compassion, DVD, Les Miz)
C. THE KINGDOM OF GOD

“Many Christians have been misled for centuries about the nature of God’s ‘Kingdom’ by
the well-known mistranslation of Lk. 17:21: ‘The kingdom of God is within you.’ Today
all serious scholars and translators agree that the text should read: ‘The kingdom of God
is among you or in your midst.’….The kingdom of God, like any other kingdom, cannot
be within a person; it is something within which a person can live. Somewhere in the
background behind Jesus’ use of the term ‘kingdom of God’ there is a pictorial image. He
speaks of people entering or not entering into the kingdom.’ (Mk. 9:47; 10:15, etc)
“This is further confirmed by the fact that the ‘kingdom’ of Satan which us opposed to
the ‘kingdom’ of God is explicitly referred to as a house or a city.”
“There is also a parallel between the ‘kingdom’ and the temple. The temple which Jesus
will build in three days (i.e. soon) is not a temple built with human hands (Mk. 14:58), it
is a new community.” (Nolan, pp.79-80)
“When God’s ‘kingdom’ comes, God will replace Satan. God will rule over the whole
community of humankind and confer the ‘kingdom’ or ruling powers upon those who

CHRISTOLOGY | 17
will serve God’s purposes in society. All evil will be eliminated and people will be filled
with the Spirit of God…The difference is between a community of humankind in which
evil reigns supreme and a community of humankind in which goodness reigns supreme. It
is a question of power and the structures of power. There may be many good people in
the world now, but evil still has the upper hand, Satan is still in power.
“As Jesus understood it, Satan ruled the world. It was a perverse and sinful generation
(Mk. 8:38 parr), a world in which evil reigned supreme. This was evident not only in the
sufferings of the poor and the oppressed and in the power which evil spirit had over them;
it was also evident in the hypocrisy, heartlessness and blindness of the religious leaders…
and in the merciless, avarice and oppression of the ruling classes….
Jesus saw his liberating activity as a kind of power struggle with Satan, a warfare against
the power of evil in all its shapes and forms. His healing activity was a kind burglary of
the house or ‘kingdom’ of Satan (Mk. 3:27). This was possible because something
stronger than Satan was at work….Jesus was convinced that the ‘kingdom’ of God will
eventually triumph over the ‘kingdom’ of Satan and replace that ‘kingdom’ here on
Earth.” (Nolan, pp. 80-82)
1. The Kingdom of God and Money

Wealth and the “kingdom” of God do not go together; just as mammon and God are
opposed to each other. If you love one, you must necessarily reject the other. No buts
and ifs. In the words of Nolan, “the pursuit of wealth is diametrically opposed to the
pursuit of God. Mammon and God are like two masters. If you and serve one, you must
of necessity reject the other. No compromise is possible.” (p. 83)
This demand is the most difficult in the gospels because the kingdom of God is the
kingdom of the poor. Consequently, the rich, if he remains rich, will be out of place.
Using the image of a camel, its size will make it impossible to enter the eye of the
needle. So does a person whose wealth is sizable. What is needed is a miracle that is
equivalent to a radical change of heart in the mold of St. Francis of Assisi.

CHRISTOLOGY | 18
A disciple who wants to serve the Lord wholeheartedly is expected to give up his
possessions and leave everything; Home, family, land, boats and nets. (What happening
now is just the opposite: after several years in ministry, priests would acquire land, build
a home, and purchase modern day boats---cars).
The disciple is also demanded to share whatever he has. This is what the miracle of the
loaves is all about. “Jesus was preaching to a large gathering of people in a lonely place.
It was time to stop for a while and eat. Some had no doubt brought food, others
not….The miracle was that so many people should suddenly cease to be possessive
about their food and begin to share….” (Nolan, p. 85)
The state of poverty is not the ideal state of life. Jesus was concerned that others are
deprived because of the selfishness of some people. Sharing will change this situation
and turn it into something where nobody is in want of the basic necessities in life.
Jesus was moved to do this because of compassion for the poor and the oppressed. This
was his motive when he asked the rich young man to give up his possessions. Origen in
his book Matthaeum, commented: “But the rich man scratched his head and it pleased
him not. And the Lord said unto him: ‘how can’t thou say, I have kept the law and the
prophet? For it is written in the law: thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, and lo,
many of thy brethren….are clad in filth, dying of hunger and thine house is full of many
good things, and naught at all go out of it unto them.”
2. The Kingdom and Prestige

Actually, in the Palestine of Jesus, prestige was the most dominant value. Money came
next. Quoting J. Duncan M. Derret, Nolan points out that, “in the oriental world to this
day prestige is more important than any other factor and people will commit suicide
rather than forfeit it.”
“The society was so structured that everyone has a place on the social ladder.
Nothing at all was ever said or done without taking that status or rank of the persons

CHRISTOLOGY | 19
concerned… A constant recognition of status was essential. People loved off the honor
and respect which others gave them.”
“Status and prestige were based upon ancestry, wealth, authority, education, and
virtue. They were signified and maintained by the way you dressed and were addressed,
by who you entertain socially and who invited you to their table and by where you were
placed at a banquet or where you sat in the synagogue.” (Nolan, p 89).
“Jesus roundly contradicted all this. He saw it as one of the fundamental structures of
evil in the world and he dared to hope for a kingdom in which such distinctions would
have no meaning. 'Blessed are you when people hate you, drive you out, abuse you,
denounce your name as criminal....(Lk 6:22). 'Woe to you when the world speaks well
of you...(Lk 6:26)
“Jesus' criticisms of the scribes and Pharisees was not primarily a criticism of their
teaching but a criticism of their practice---in practice they lived for the prestige and
admiration given to them by others....
“Everything they do is done to attract attention, like wearing broader phylacteries and
longer tassels, like wanting to take the place of honor at banquets...front seats in
synagogues, being...greeted and called Rabbi (Mt 23:5-7).
Jesus presents a child as an exemplar of “littleness”, the opposite of greatness, status

and prestige. Children during the time of Jesus are “status-less”. They are simply
insignificant. But for Jesus, they mean a lot. In fact, to them belongs God's kingdom.
“Jesus' love for the poor and the oppressed was not an exclusive love; it was an
indication of the fact that what he valued was humanity not status or prestige. The poor
and the oppressed had nothing to recommend them except their humanity and
sufferings. Jesus was also concerned about the middle and upper classes—not because
they were especially important people but because they too were people. He wanted

CHRISTOLOGY | 20
them to strip themselves of their false values, of their wealth and prestige, in order to
become real people. Jesus wished to replace the 'worldly' value of prestige by the 'godly'
value of people as people.” (Nolan, 93).
“A further indication of the way in which Jesus valued people as people would be his
attitude to women. In the society of his time, 'to be born female was a disadvantage, the
sign, perhaps, that an expectant mother's or father's prayers were not answered. Women,
like children, do not count....Jesus stood among his contemporaries...as someone who
gave women exactly the same value and dignity as men.” (Nolan p. 93).
“The kingdom of God, then, will be a society in which there will be no prestige and no
status, no division of people inferior and superior. Everyone will be loved and
respected, not because of one's education or wealth or ancestry or authority or rank or
virtue or other achievements, but because one like everybody else is a person....Those
who could not bear to have beggars, former prostitutes, servants, women and children
treated as their equals, who could not live without feeling superior to at least some
people, would simply not be at home in God's kingdom as Jesus understood it. They
would want to exclude themselves from it.” (Nolan, p. 94)
3. The Kingdom and Solidarity

After prestige and money, solidarity is an important human factor in Jewish society.
Solidarity may be understood in terms of “collectivity” where a “family, tribe, or nation
is thought of as a kind of corporate person sometimes identified with the king, who
speaks and acts on behalf of the group and sometimes identified with the common
ancestor from whom the group is descended.” (Nolan, p. 95).
“The basic unit that lived together as one corporate being was the family including all
one's relatives. Ties of blood and of marriage were taken seriously indeed. Not only
were all members of the family regarded as brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers to
one another but they identified themselves with one another.

CHRISTOLOGY | 21
“The harm done to one member of the family was felt by all. The shame of one affected
all. Anyone could say to an outsider, 'Whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you
do to me' or 'whenever you welcome one of my kinsmen you welcome me'...
“On the same principle, if one's kin had been insulted or murdered, one felt obliged to
avenge the injury. The vendetta or blood feud still existed in Jesus' time, albeit in a
mitigated form. The principle of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth still held good
in those days.”
“The point is that the kingdom of Satan differs from the kingdom of God not because
they are two different forms of group solidarity but because Satan's kingdom is based
upon the exclusive and selfish solidarity of groups whereas God's kingdom is based
upon the all-inclusive solidarity of the human race. 'You have learned how it was said:
you must love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say this to you: love your
enemies (Mt 5:43-44)....
“Jesus extended one's neighbor to include one's enemies. He could not have found a
more effective way of shocking his audience into the realization that he wished to
include all people in this solidarity of love.”
Solidarity?
The Scandal of Division

CHRISTOLOGY | 22
Christ has billions of followers but the distance between his adherents is abysmal:
Catholics—1.2 billion
Breakaway Catholic Churches—28 million
Protestants—670 million
Modern Christian Movements—588 million
Eastern Orthodox—210 million
Oriental Orthodox—75 million
Anglicans—82 million
Non Trinitarianism—27 million
Nestorians—1 million
4. The Kingdom and Power

Power is a necessary component of any society. Society without room for power just
can't exist. “A society must have a structure and that structure will have something to
do with power. The issue of power and the structures of power (who has power over
whom and who can decide what for whom) is what we today call politics. (Nolan, p.
107)
“Jesus prophesied that the divine political power of the future would be in the hands of
the poor and the little ones: 'Blessed are the poor because yours is the kingdom of
God'(Lk 6:20).
“However, this does not mean that in the power structure of the kingdom of God the
oppressor and the oppressed are simply going to change places and therefore continue
the oppression. Power in the kingdom of God will be totally different from power as it
is exercised in the kingdom of Satan....The power of Satan is the power of domination
and oppression, the power of God is the power of service and freedom....The structure
of the kingdom of God will be determined by the power of the spontaneous loving
service which people render to one another.” (Nolan, p.108)

CHRISTOLOGY | 23
“There is no mistaking the two quite different ways in which power and authority are
understood and exercised. It is the difference between domination and service. The
power of this new society is not a power which has to be served, a power before which a
person must bow down and cringe. It is a power which has an enormous influence in the
lives of people by being of service to them. It is the power which is so unselfish that it
will serve others even by dying for them.” (Nolan, p. 109)
The Scribes had made the Sabbath, like so many other laws, into an intolerable burden.
They were using the Sabbath against people instead of using it for them. The law as
they saw it was supposed to be a yoke, a 'penance', an oppressive measure; whereas for
Jesus it was supposed to be for the benefit of people, to serve their needs and genuine
interests. We have here two different attitudes to law, two different opinions about its
purpose and therefore two different ways of using it. The attitude of the scribes leads to
casuistry, legalism, hypocrisy and suffering. Jesus' attitude led to permissiveness
whenever the needs of people would not be met by observance of the law, and to
strictness whenever this would be best serve their needs. The law was made for us, we
were not made to serve and bow down before the law.” (Nolan, p. 110).
“HE SABBATH WAS MADE FOR MAN, NOT MAN FOR THE SABBATH ...(MK 2:27)”
“In the political structure of the kingdom of God, then, power, authority and law will be
purely functional. They will embody the arrangements that are necessary if people are
going to serve one another willingly and effectively. Every kind of domination and
every form of slavery will have been abolished. 'For I tell you unless your righteousness
(fulfillment of the law) exceeds that of the Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom
of God” (Mt 5:20) (Nolan, p. 112)
“Today, from the human point of view, we see many priests who would rather be served
than serve. Wherever they go, they want to be recognized so that people will defer to
them and serve them. It is important to always carry, so to say, one's identity yet this

CHRISTOLOGY | 24
should not be used to solicit privilege and service from others. We should not allow
ourselves to be spoiled.”
5. The Coming of the Kingdom

Reading Nolan about this topic gives me the impression that it is a difficult one to
explain. Previously, he asserted that the kingdom of God is not “within us” but in “our
midst”. Meaning to say that God's kingdom will be here on earth. Nonetheless, making
it a reality is even more difficult, almost an impossibility from the human point of view.
In this world of ours, no matter what we do for the poor, no matter how much
compassion we show to people, there will always be poverty and violence. So is it
utopian to dream of the God's kingdom here? Nolan says, for human beings it is not
possible but God nothing is impossible. What we need is a strong faith to realize God's
kingdom here on earth. “What makes the kingdom come, then, is heartfelt compassion
and hopeful faith. Today's faith, hope and love are the seeds of tomorrow's kingdom.
Faith seems to be as small and insignificant as a tiny mustard seed but without the seed
of faith there would be no great mustard tree....
“And yet Jesus had no doubt whatsoever that the kingdom would come. People's
persistent unbelief may cause it to be delayed but in the end it will come....In the end the
kingdom will come because sooner or later people will believe....” However, “This is
not to say that Jesus claimed to know the day and the hour of its arrival. According to
Mark, Jesus disclaimed any secret knowledge of the day and hour (Mk 13:32)....
“Why then did Jesus insist on the nearness of the kingdom?....What is not generally
noticed or averted to is that the nearness of some kind of divine intervention was not an
original contribution on the part of Jesus. It was a common enough belief in his time. It
was the belief that drove the Essenes out into the desert to prepare themselves. It was
the belief which inspired the visions and calculations of the apocalyptic writers. The
same belief led the Zealots to expect God to come and give them the victory over the
Romans....” (Nolan, p. 130-131)

CHRISTOLOGY | 25
In view of the crisis created by the Roman presence and the desire by many groups to
get rid of them in their own ways, Jesus took the opportunity to preach transformation in
line with the message of John. In other words, for Jesus, “the nearness of the kingdom
was not a certainty, it was an opportunity” to set things right on a lot of levels: personal,
social, relational, religious and devotional, that would hasten the coming of God's
kingdom. Thus, “What Jesus had to say about the last days was not apocalyptic but
prophetic.” (Nolan, 136)
D. THE CONFRONTATION
This final section from Nolan's book examines how Jesus deals with politics, material
wealth, violence, suffering and death. This section sheds more light on the man Jesus and
invites faith in him. The man who emerges from this confrontation also challenges us to
reexamine our own attitudes and the resulting behavior. As future priests, it is not enough
that we believe in Jesus. Our belief should be complemented by actions in imitation of
Jesus. And any serious imitators of Jesus stands the chance of being crucified like him,
not for the satisfaction of tourists though.
1. Jesus and Politics

The distinction between religion and politics during the time of Jesus was practically
non-existent because all aspects of Jewish life were seen from the perspective of
religion. It is very much like the way Muslims see their lives today. There is no
separation of church and state, mosque and civil law. “The Jews made no distinction at
all between politics and religion. Issues which we would today classify as political,
social, economic or religious would all have been thought of in terms of God and the
law. A purely secular problem would have been inconceivable.” (Nolan, p. 140).
“Nevertheless it is possible for us to say that some of the issues of the time were what
we would call political, provided we remember that for the Jews at that time these issues
would have been conceived in terms of their religion. In this sense it is possible to say
that the relationship of Israel to the imperial power of Rome was a political issue or, if
you like, a religious-political issues....

CHRISTOLOGY | 26
“Jesus wanted Israel to be liberated from Roman imperialism just as much as the
Zealots, Pharisees, Essenes or anyone else wanted it...And Proto-Luke, unlike most
sources, refers constantly to the political liberation of Israel.
“In Proto-Luke the people who features in Jesus' birth and early childhood are referred
to as 'all who looked forward to the liberation of Israel or the consolation of Israel.
(Nolan, p. 141)
“Benedictus is concerned with the God of Israel bringing liberation to his people and
salvation from our enemies, from the hand of all who hate us, to make us without fear,
rescued from the hands of our enemies. The enemies of Israel are without doubt the
Romans. The hope and expectation expressed here is that Jesus 'would be the one to
liberate Israel.
“Jesus set out to fulfill this religious-political expectation though not in a way in which
the people might have expected and certainly not in the way the Zealots attempted to
fulfill it. Jesus set out to liberate Israel from Rome by persuading Israel to change.
Without change of heart within Israel itself, liberation from imperialism of any kind
would be impossible. That had been the message of all the prophets, including John the
Baptist. Jesus was a prophet and he was involved in politics in exactly the same way as
all the prophets had been.” (Nolan, p. 142)
“But what kind of change would liberate Israel? According to Proto-Luke in particular,
Jesus went to a great deal of trouble to persuade the Jews of Palestine that their present
attitude of resentment and bitterness was suicidal. He told them to read the signs of the
times and to judge for themselves instead of relying upon what the Zealots and others
told them....Unless you change you will be destroyed. Because they would not be able
to overthrow the Romans in a military battle, because they would not be able to win
their case against their opponents, the only sensible thing to do was to be reconciled
with them. As Jesus saw it, the only way be liberated from your enemies was to love
your enemies, do good to those who hate you, to pray for those who treat you badly.

CHRISTOLOGY | 27
“This is not a matter of resigning oneself to the Roman oppression; nor is it a matter of
trying to kill them with kindness. It is a matter of reaching down to the root cause of all
oppression and domination: humanity's lack of compassion. If the people of Israel were
to continue to lack compassion, would the overthrowing of the Romans make Israel
anymore liberated than before?....Jesus wanted change that would affect every
department of life....” (Nolan pp. 142-143). Jesus wanted the Kingdom of God to be
realized.
2. Jesus and Material Good’s

“The so called 'cleansing' of the Temple was not a coup or a takeover of the Temple as
the first step toward the conquering of Jerusalem...Nor had it anything to do with
sacrificial rites....The concern of Jesus was the abuse of money and trade....This is what
Jesus saw in the Temple. This is what inflamed his anger.. He noticed only the widow
who gave the last penny and the economic exploitation of people's devotion and piety.
Here were traders serving Mammon and not God—with the permission, perhaps with
the connivance and possibly for profit, of the chief priests who administered the House
of God....Jesus was determined to do something about it. His compassion for the poor
and the oppressed overflowed once more into indignation and anger. (Nolan, pp. 152-
153)
3. Jesus and Violence

In the opinion of Nolan, “Jesus was not a pacifist in principle. There is no evidence that
he thought force or violence should never be used, for any reason or in any
circumstances. He used force (though presumably without bloodshed) to expel the
traders from the Temple. He forced his disciples to leave the meeting in the wilderness.
He told them to carry a sword for their own self-defense. In these circumstances, he did
not tell them to turn the other cheek. The injunctions to turn the other cheek and not to
resist evil are often quoted out of context. In their context they are ways of contradicting
the principle of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. They do not exclude violence
as such; they exclude violence for the purpose of revenge.

CHRISTOLOGY | 28
“Jesus was not a pacifist in principle, he was a pacifist in practice, that is to say, in the
concrete circumstances of his time. We do not know what he would have done in other
possible circumstances. But we can surmise that if there had been no other way for
defending the poor and the oppressed and if there had been danger of an escalation of
violence, his unlimited compassion might have overflowed temporarily into violent
indignation. He did tell his disciples to carry swords to defend themselves and he did
clear the temple with some measure of violence. However, even in such cases, violence
would be a temporary measure with no other purpose than the prevention of some more
serious violence. The kingdom of total liberation for all people cannot be established by
force. Faith alone can enable the kingdom to come.”
4. Suffering and Death

What was the attitude of Jesus to suffering and death?
“Like the righteous, he and his disciples , would have to expect persecution. Like the
Zealots, they would have to be willing to take up their cross and be crucified. Like the
prophets, they would have to reckon martyrdom. But there was more to it than that.
Jesus had a new teaching and, in terms of that new teaching, suffering and death were
closely associated with the coming of the kingdom.
But Jesus went much further than that...As he understood it, one should be willing to
give up one's life for exactly the same reason as one gives up possessions, prestige,
family and power, namely for others. Compassion and love compel people to do
everything for others. But the person who says he or she lives for others but is not
willing to suffer and die for others is a liar and is dead. Jesus was fully alive because he
was willing to suffer and die not for a cause but for people. The willingness to die for
others should be further qualified. It is not a willingness to die for someone or for some
people; it is the willingness to die for all people.” (Nolan pp. 166-169).

CHRISTOLOGY | 29
5. The Man Who Emerges

“When one allows Jesus to speak for himself and when one tries to understand him
without any preconceived ideas and within the context of his own times, what begins to
emerge is a man of extraordinary independence, immense courage, and unparalleled
authenticity—a man whose insights defies explanation. To deprive this man of his
humanity is to deprive him of his greatness.
“There is nothing in the gospels that would lead one to think that Jesus opposed
everyone in a spirit of rebellion for the sake of rebellion or because he had a grudge
against the world. He gives impression throughout of a man who has the courage of his
conviction, a man who is independent of others because of a positive insight which
made every possible kind of dependence superflous.
“There is no trace of fear in Jesus. He was not afraid of creating a scandal or losing his
reputation or even losing his life....
“In view of his explicit teaching about titles and honors, it should come as no surprise to
learn that he wishes to be accepted without any titles at all.” (Nolan, pp. 173-177).
“Jesus wanted others to see what he saw and to believe what he believed. But he had no
doubt about the truth of what he saw and believed. He seems to have been
extraordinarily confident and sure of himself....
“The secret of Jesus' infallible insight and unshakable convictions was his unfailing
experience of solidarity with God, which revealed itself as an experience of solidarity
with humanity and nature. This made him a uniquely liberated man, uniquely
courageous, fearless, independent, hopeful and truthful.” (Nolan, p. 181; 184).

CHRISTOLOGY | 30
6. Faith in Jesus
“Jesus was experienced as the breakthrough in the history of humanity. He transcended
everything that had ever been said and done before. He was in every way the ultimate,
the last word. He was on a par with God. His word was God's word. His spirit was
God's spirit. His feelings were God's feeling. What he stood for was exactly the same as
what God stood for....
“To believe in Jesus today is to agree with this assessment of him....Either you accept
the kingdom as Jesus understood it or you don't. You cannot serve two masters. It is all
or nothing. Second place or half measures are tantamount to nothing. To believe in
Jesus is to believe that he is divine.” (Nolan, p. 198-199)
“We have seen what Jesus was like. If we now wish to treat him as our God, we would
have to conclude that our God does not wanted to serve by us, but wants to serve us.
God does not want to be given the highest possible rank and status in our society, but
wants to take the lowest place and to be without any rank and status; God does not want
to be feared and obeyed, but wants to be recognized in the sufferings of the poor and the
weak; God is not supremely indifferent and detached, but is irrevocably committed to
the liberation of humankind, for God has chosen to be identified with all people in a
spirit of solidarity and compassion. If this is not a picture of God, then Jesus is not
divine. If this is a true picture of God, then God is more thoroughly humane than any
human being” (Nolan. 201).

CHRISTOLOGY | 31
PART II JESUS IN CHRISTIANITY
A. NEW TESTAMENT CHRISTOLOGY

“Christology begins with the Easter experience of the disciples....But their Easter
experience convinced them beyond doubt that God had acted, vindicated Jesus and his
message, delivered him from the bonds of death. This was astonishing news, to be shared
with others. But with their proclamation came necessarily interpretations. What had
happened? What did it mean? Who was this Jesus? How could they make others
understand these events?
“The New Testament offers a multiplicity of Christologies and witnesses to an obvious

development in the Church's understanding of Jesus....The earliest Christologies,
originating in early Christian preaching, are represented by fragments, titles, hymns, and
formulas embedded in later Christian texts like the letters of Paul and the Acts of the
Apostles...”( Thomas P. Rausch. Who Is Jesus? An Introduction to Christology. Claretian
Publication, 2005, p. 125)
For example, Paul repeats an early formula in his letter to the Romans:
....for if you confess with your mouth

that Jesus is Lord
and believe in your heart
that God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved. (Romans 101;9)
“Paul is citing here a creedal formula from the early Palestinian churches, very possibly a
baptismal formula. The formula demands both interior belief and outside confession of
faith in Jesus as Lord, raised from the dead, and source of our salvation....” (Rausch, p.
126)
1. Easter Christology

CHRISTOLOGY | 32
“The earliest Christologies are centered on the Post-Easter Jesus, Jesus as soon to
come in judgment (parousia) or reigning in God's presence (exaltation). Also
typical of this type is the idea that Jesus receives titles such as Messiah, Lord, and
Son of God only after his death. (Ibid., p. 127)
a. Parousia Christology
“Sometimes known as maranatha Christology, Parousia (Second Coming)
Christology represents perhaps the oldest interpretation of Jesus, originating in the
early Aramaic-speaking Palestine communities. The apocalyptic perspective of
these communities was adapted to portray Jesus as soon to come, bringing God's
salvation, but also as judge. A fragment of the early kerygma in Acts 3:19-21
suggests that Jesus will be the Messiah only at his future coming.
Repent, therefore, and be converted, that your sins maybe wiped away, and that
the Lord may grant you times of refreshment and send you the Messiah already
appointed for you, Jesus”
“Two titles, both originally used in an apocalyptic context, are associated with
this Christology, Lord (Kurios in Greek) and Son of Man.” (Rausch, p. 129)
“Lord” as applied to Jesus refers to him as a “salvific figure”. “Son of Man” has
to do with his creative function and pre-existence. “They will see the Son of Man
coming in the clouds with great power and glory” (Mk 13:26).
b. Exaltation Christology
“Exaltation Christology sees Jesus made Messiah, Lord, and Son of God after his
exaltation from the dead....Exaltation Christology is recognizable in Paul's letter
and in the sermons of Peter and Paul in Acts.” (p.129).
From Paul: “The gospel about his Son, descended from David according to the
flesh, but established as Son of God in power, according to the spirit of holiness

CHRISTOLOGY | 33
through resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 1:3-4).
Here, Jesus became Son of God through his resurrection.
From Peter: ”God raised this Jesus; of this we are witnesses...Therefore let the
whole house of Israel know for certain that God has made himLord and Messiah,
this Jesus whom you crucified. (In Acts 2:32-36)
In Acts: “The God of our ancestors raised Jesus, though you had him killed by
hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as leader and savior to
grant Israel repentance and forgiveness of sins.” (Acts 5:30-31)
Some points to remember:

 Exaltation/resurrection happened to Jesus through God's agency.
 The titles such as Messiah, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord are applied to
Jesus after his exaltation.
 These titles do not necessarily refer to the divinity of Jesus but the title
“Lord” is used both for Jesus and Yahweh; thus on the same level as God.
2. Son of God Christologies

“If the early Easter Christologies recognize Jesus as Messiah, Son of Man, and
Son of God only after his death, the Gospels see these titles as applying to Jesus
during his public ministry” (Ibid., p. 131)
Mark—Jesus as the Son of God, the designated divine mediator; could fulfill his
destiny through suffering; the disciples are expected to follow him.
Matthew—brings the title “son of God to a new level...portrayed above all as the
Son who operates in union with the Father and as Son of God and Son of Man, he
is the presence of God in the world.
Luke—without a human father, Jesus is Son of God in a unique sense from his
conception.

CHRISTOLOGY | 34
3. Pre-Existence Christology of John

Considered the highest in New Testament; The Word of God, with God from the
very beginning, the Word that was God, the Word through whom all things were
made, has become flesh, and we have beheld his glory, the glory of the only
begotten Son of the Father.
B. FROM THENEW TESTAMENT TO CHALCEDON
1. Faith and Hellenistic Culture

As the Church in the Post-New Testament period sought to proclaim the Gospel to
the nations, it found itself in a very different world-view, formed by Hellenistic
culture and thought. Furthermore, many of the emerging apologists and
theologians were converts themselves whose intellectual background was
Hellenistic philosophy, not the Jewish Scriptures.
a. The Challenge of Greek Philosophy

It was these new Christians who brought Christianity into a dialogue with the
surrounding culture, defending the faith against its critics.
But the philosophy of the day was not without its own dangers for Christian
theology. The Greek philosophical tradition was highly dualistic...with spirit over
matter...the eternal over the temporal.
Moreover, the philosophy of Plato, popular at the time, tended towards the
contempt of the body.
The Greek philosophical distaste for the world of change was to find expression in
two heterodox theologies known as gnosticism and docetism.
b. Gnosticism and Docetism

CHRISTOLOGY | 35
 Gnosticism (gnosis—knowledge) offered salvation through knowledge

available to the initiated...Gnosticism was highly dualistic in that its
concerns was redemption, not in this world, but by escaping the world's
entanglements, with the liberation of the person from the body and from
material existence. Some gnostics rejected whatever had to do with the body
especially in marriage.
 Docetism (Greek, dokeo—to seem) was a Christological expression of
gnosticism. What docetists could not accept was that the divine word had
become flesh. Thus, they taught that Jesus only seemed or appeared to have
a human body.
Both gnostics and docetists denied the humanity of Jesus.
Some Key Terms
TERMS BASIC MEANING USAGE/SENSE
That which stands under or

give support to an object;
HYPOSTASIS Greek, hupo istemi, “to stand realization; a concrete being
(Greek) under” That supports various
SUBSTANTIA Latin, sub stare, “to stand under” qualities or appearances of
(Latin) a thing. Thus, subsistent
being, a reality existing by
Itself, substance.
Greek substantive of the verb einai Being;distinct entity or

OUSIA “to be, being” nature.
One nature (ousia), three
hypostases (hypostasis)
TERMS BASIC MEANING USAGE/SENSE

HOMOOUSIOS Greek,homo , “same” being One in being, “con
substantial”
HOMOIOUSIOS Greek, homoi, “like” being
Of like being
PHUSIS CHRISTOLOGY | 36
nature Nature, essence
PROSOPON
(Greek) Face, countenance, mask Concrete appearance; parti-
PERSONA Mask, character, individual cular individual; person;
(Latin)
THEOTOKOS
“God-bearer” Mother of God
CHRISTOTOKOS
“Christ-bearer” Mother of Christ
2. From Nicaea to Chalcedon

a. Nicaea 1 (325)
Nicaea was convened almost three centuries after the “Council of Jerusalem” (c.
50). Nicaea may be considered as the first general council. The reason for the
delay was the fact that Christianity was still outlawed. It was only during the reign
of Constantine (Edict of Milan, 313) that Christianity became legal, and it became
a big factor in the unity of the empire. However, there was a threat to the unity
created by the priest Arius who accentuated the humanity of Jesus versus his
divinity. The deliberations of the Council of Nicaea centered on this issue, and the
reason for which it was convened by Constantine himself. The emperor
summoned the council and initially presided over it. Pope Sylvester I (314-335)
was not present but he sent two legates to represent him.
Arius taught that:

CHRISTOLOGY | 37
 Jesus was not eternal and uncreated like God, the Father. Thus, there was a time
when Jesus was not in existence.
 Theological implications: Jesus must have been created by the Father and
therefore the inferior of God. Since Jesus was not a God, he could not save human
beings.
During the council, more or less a dozen Arian bishops attended; there were
about 324 other bishops who rejected the Arian view of the Christian faith led by
Bishop Alexander and Athanasius. The council asserted the following:
 Jesus was equal with his Father. The council used the word, “homo-ousios “ to
mean that Jesus was “one in being” or of “the same substance” as his Father;
 Jesus was not made and, thus not created but co-eternal with the Father and is
begotten (not made) of the same substance as the Father.
However, in spite of the council's teachings, some Arians did not stop but
modified their position arguing further on the similarity of Jesus with the
Father--”homoi-ousios” Adding “i” to “homo”, they contended that Jesus was
“like” God but not God. This position, known as semi Arianism, was also
rejected.
It is interesting to note that the zeal to defend the divinity of Christ led others like
Apollinaris to deny also the humanity of Christ.
b. Constantinople I (381)
Nicaea 1 did not settle the issue related to Arianism. Thus Constantinople 1 was
convened by Emperor Theodosius the Great who considered himself as a defender
of the faith. Theodosius 1 made Christianity the sole, legal religion of the Roman
Empire. Historians are not in agreement as to whether or not Pope Damasus 1
(366-384) sent legates to the council. Nonetheless, it is considered by both East
and West as a true ecumenical council. Constantinople I declared that: Ideas not

CHRISTOLOGY | 38
in conformity with Nicaea 1 are heretical; The relationship between the Father
and the Holy Spirit are the same as the relationship between the Father and the
Son (homo-ousios). Nicaea simply professed its faith in the Holy Spirit
c. Ephesus (431)
After Constantinople 1, more questions arose: “How was Jesus one person both
human and divine? Was he really two separate people at the same time he was
also one merged person? Was he sometimes human and at other times divine?
What were the consequences of these answers for Mary and the incarnation? Was
she the mother of the human Jesus only? (christotokos) or was she the mother of
God (theotokos)?” (Bellito, Gen. Councils, p.22)
With the permission of Pope Celestine 1 (421-432), Cyril of Alexandria presided

and condemned Nestorius who claimed that Mary was the mother of the human
being Jesus but not the mother of God. After some confusion, the eastern bishops
also condemned Nestorius and declared that Mary was the theotokos, the mother
of God and Jesus had a human and divine nature united in only one person.
Doctrinally speaking, Ephesus was significant because it elaborated the so called

“hypostatic union”, the the union of human and divine natures in one person.
Such being the case, since Jesus suffered and died, did his divinity suffer and die
too? Cyril of Alexandria explained that the human Jesus suffered and died, but
not the divine Jesus.
d. Chalcedon (451)
Despite the previous councils and their definitions, doctrinal confusions did not
stop and, 20 years later, the council of Chalcedon convened “to summarize all the
confusion, explanation, and counter-explanation of the125 years since Nicaea I.
The immediate cause was the Christological teaching known as monophysitism.

CHRISTOLOGY | 39
Monophysitism (one nature) teaches that Jesus' divine nature overwhelmed and
canceled out his human nature. The proponent of this theology was the monk
Eutyches from Constantinople.
However, Chalcedon reasserted a fundamental Christian mystery: Jesus is one

person with two natures joined together in a hypostatic union. These two natures
were separate and equal. The divine nature did not overwhelm the human. After
repeating the creeds of Nicaea I and Constantinople I, which they professed to
follow, the council fathers at Chalcedon reviewed, reiterated, and delineated
nearly four centuries of theology about Jesus.
But Chalcedon did not solve the controversy regarding Christ but it synthesized
the points of two schools in theology—Alexandria (union of divine and non-
divine) and the Anthiochean (humanity of Jesus.)
Chalcedon is also significant as it has shown us how to express theology in the

language and philosophy of the time. (Video)
C. SOTERIOLOGY: SIN AND SALVATION

(Material Reference: “Who is Jesus: An Introduction to Christology,” Thomas P.
Rausch. Claretian Pub., 2005 pp. 165-178)
3. SIN AND SALVATION IN SCRIPTURE

 The account of the Fall in Genesis 3 is humankind's loss of innocence through
Adam and Eve.
 It captures the perennial temptation of human beings, not just to temptations, but
to putting themselves first, no matter the consequences...Human beings want to be
the judge of evil and good rather than submit to the will of the Creator. In doing
so, they are guilty of apotheosis—or self-deification, the attempt to become their
own gods.
 Saint Augustine calls this the “aversio a Deo, turning away from God, a desire
that is rooted in the heart of human beings.

CHRISTOLOGY | 40
 In post-modern language, this means the denial of objective truth that resides in
God. Post-modern man claims to have his own objective, personal truth.
d. The Fall
 The results of the aversion from God proved costly to man: loss of intimacy with
God; alienation from creation itself and from each other; the woman will bring
forth children with difficulty; she will be subject to her husband instead of being
equal; man will have to work hard to earn a living; alienation from their bodies,
being shameful of their nakedness; earth became a place of exile.
 The chapters following the Fall, illustrates the presence of these evils: fratricide—
Cain murders Abel; the Great Flood; the confusion of language.
 Many consider these stories as mythical but they teach us a profound lesson on
the destructiveness of sin in our community.
 The effects of sin does not end here: rebellion against God, idolatry, slavery in
Egypt, oppression of the poor.
e. Sin in Paul
 The teachings of Paul on sin are found in Romans 5:12-21 and in Corinthians
15:22, 45. But Romans is considered as the greatest treatise on sin, and had
influenced St. Augustine's thinking.
 In Paul's teachings, he brings together the ideas of salvation, Adam, Sin, Death,
the Law, and Christ. Sin entered the world with Adam; with Sin comes Death, not
just physically but also spiritually, a separation from God. With Law comes the
consciousness of Sin. With Christ comes freedom from sin.
 The presence of sin explains why we do the evil we do despite our detestation of
it.
 St. Augustine invented the word, “original sin” but it is rooted in the ideas of Paul
on sin. In Romans 5:12-21, Paul teaches on the parallelism between Adam and
Christ. Adam's transgressions bring death, Christ's righteous acts and obedience
bring acquittal and life.

CHRISTOLOGY | 41
 The expression, “inasmuch as all have sinned (not “in all sinned—St. Jerome),
shows that human beings have duplicated the sin of Adam in their lives and have
alienated themselves from God.
 The Council of Trent used this argument to support the Catholic teaching on
infant baptism.
f. New Testament images of Salvation

 People who are saved belong to God's Kingdom, the realization of which is the
Paschal Event—Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Christ. It is the newness of
life of life resulting from the death and resurrection of Christ. How is this Christ-
act expressed in the Pauline writings?
 Fr. Joseph Fitzmyer has listed ten images Paul uses to express Christ's saving acts
coming from the Paschal event: justification, salvation, reconciliation, expiation,
redemption, freedom, sanctification, transformation, new creation, and
glorification.
 For Mark, salvation is the struggle between Jesus and evil, personified by Satan
and the evil spirits; death of Jesus is a ransom for many, part of his service to
man.
 Matthew sees the death of Jesus as the breaking of the new age.
 Luke is the only Synoptic evangelist who uses the words “salvation” and “savior,”
sees the death of Jesus as the “New Exodus” a deliverance from sin. This
deliverance is also seen in the ministry of Jesus struggles to remove the presence
of sin in people and in the prevailing unjust structures in society.
 For John, Jesus is the Word made flesh (Incarnation), the revelation of God that
brings judgment on the world (Exaltation).
4. SIN AND SALVATION IN CHRISTIAN HISTORY

c. The Eastern Fathers
 The Eastern Fathers are more incarnational, thus optimistic, emphasizing the point
that Incarnation elevated and transformed humanity.

CHRISTOLOGY | 42
 Sin did not destroy the image of God in man, interpreting Romans 5:12-21 in
terms of personal sins. (For details, see, Thomas Rausch, “Who Is Jesus?, pp.
172-174).
d. The Western Fathers

 Placed emphasis on redemption, the Cross and the idea of satisfaction
(Tertullian).
 Marked difference from Eastern Fathers took place during the 3 rd century in that
the idea of “redemption” began to emerge as the idea of “solidarity in Adam and
his sin”. (See, Rausch, pp. 174-178).
e. Sixteenth Century
 Enormously influenced by St. Augustine, interpreted salvation in the
Augustinian/Anselmian terms. In their thoughts, the themes of substitution and
vicarious punishment dominated their theology of sin (Anselm). Calvin's “total
depravity” is traceable to St. Augustine. (See, Rausch, pp.178-181)
f. Conclusion
 The sacrificial image of salvation has come to mean satisfaction in keeping with
the idea of St. Anselm of Canterbury: Christ by his death made satisfaction to
God's justice, restoring the order of creation. This has given shape to Western
Soteriology. (Transactional soteriology)
 Closely related to the idea of salvation (soteriology) is the question of sin and
iniquity. Though mythological, the story of Fall in Genesis sees the beginning of
evil as the refusal of man to acknowledge and reverence God. This is pride or the
temptation to worship oneself (aversion from God).
 Paul relates Adam to Christ, making salvation as Adam-Christ parallelism, paving
the way to the theology of original sin that was to be developed by the Fathers and
formulated by St. Augustine.
 The Eastern Fathers focused on Incarnation, transformation; The Western Fathers
on the Cross, on Redemption.

CHRISTOLOGY | 43
D. NEW APPROACH TO SOTERIOLOGY

(Material Reference: “Who is Jesus: An Introduction To Christology”. Thomas P.
Rausch Claretian Pub., 2005, Chapter 11)
Overview
 Original sin and salvation are fundamental doctrines of Christian religion. But the
traditional way of understanding them may no longer appeal to modern minds.
 Rausch asks: Does one have to believe in a primeval Garden of Innocence or a set
of first biological parents to make sense of original sin? Evolution rules out the
first, while paleontology has yet to establish the second.
 “Are we bound always to use the transactional language of the tradition---making

satisfaction, taking our place, bearing God's wrath, becoming guilt and sin,
offering himself as a sacrifice—to express the mystery of God's salvation offered
us in Jesus?
 What might the doctrine of original sin mean from a contemporary perspective?
For theology today, the doctrine speaks to the radically social nature of the human
person and to the way human freedom is limited prior even to the exercise by the
network of relationships that constitutes each person as an individual”
 In other words, “each of us has been touched by competition...survival, violence

that have marked the human species ever since its emergence.”
 Or what are we to say about the Anselmian theology of satisfaction which has
dominated Western soteriology for over a thousand years? Can we believe in a
God who would seem to require the crucifixion of his only beloved Son as price
for our salvation?
Insights from Thomas Rausch
 “A contemporary 'situationist' approach (phenomenological) to the mystery of

iniquity interprets the doctrine of original sin in light of the radically social nature
of the human person. Not just ourselves but our freedom to a considerable degree
bears the imprint of our social situations, each of which is touched by sin.”
 In the view of St. Augustine, there is in the human heart something profoundly
wrong...violence, injustice, thus the need for God's grace.
 “This approach takes the reality of sin seriously, without reducing it to an

ontological theory of corrupted nature. It also recognizes that nature and grace in
reality may not be separated for nature is always “graced nature”.

CHRISTOLOGY | 44
 The traditional soteriology comes from “above.” The new approach comes from
“below.”
 The soteriology from “below” considers man and his situation of sin and sees how
Christ’s salvation works within it. In other words, Christ “mediates” our salvation
in that God's love in Jesus—through the Cross—changes lives, it is stronger than
death—hopeful, it creates a new people, and gives us a share in divine life
through the Spirit of Jesus.
 This soteriology is “relational and revelatory rather than transactional. It

specifically seeks to avoid literalizing one of the NT's metaphors, and it does not
offer a mythological or metaphysical meta-narrative, explaining salvation in terms
of some kind of transaction or exchange. But a transformation in God effected by
Jesus.
“END OF DISCUSSION”
INDIVIDUAL REPORTING FOLLOWS
GOOD LUCK ! ! !

CHRISTOLOGY - Msgr. Correa

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHRISTOLOGY - Msgr. Correa

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHRISTOLOGY |1

A. The Objectives of the Course

PART I. JESUS BEFORE CHRISTIANITY

PART II. JESUS IN CHRISTIANITY

A. New Testament Christologies

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

2. Son of God Christologies

C. SOTERIOLOGY: SIN AND SALVATION

1. Sin and Salvation in Scripture

D. NEW APPROACH TO SOTERIOLOGY

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

PART III. JESUS IN OUR COMMUNITY: CHRISTOLOGY IN CONTEXT

A. Christ in the Philippines

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

B. The Sources of Christology

1. The Historical Jesus

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

A. Meier’s work represents the best, albeit controversial in Catholic biblical

B. Christian Tradition in its strict sense, understood theologically, is one of the

2. The Biblical Jesus

3. Jesus from Tradition

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

C. The Sources of Christology

Presentation. Generally speaking, it will consist in classroom presentations. You may

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

Computation of Grades. The computation of grades is as follows:

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

PART I JESUS BEFORE CHRISTIANITY

B. THE INTENTIONS OF JESUS

1. Jesus Elected to be Baptized By John

Historical Background: Jewish Leadership

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

Fr. Roland de Vaux, OP (1903-1971) was a French Dominican, former director

The Sadducees, another group of influential Jewish leaders, tended to be on the

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

JOHN - The Baptizer – The Prophet – The Martyr

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

An integral part of the compassion of Christ is forgiveness. Although John the

In Jewish mentality, sins are, “debts (owed) to God” as a result of some

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

Clearly, for Jesus, healing and forgiveness are expressions of is compassion.

C. THE KINGDOM OF GOD

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

1. The Kingdom of God and Money

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

2. The Kingdom and Prestige

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

Jesus presents a child as an exemplar of “littleness”, the opposite of greatness, status

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

3. The Kingdom and Solidarity

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

4. The Kingdom and Power

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

5. The Coming of the Kingdom

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017

1. Jesus and Politics

COPYRIGHT © 2017 Pauperes 2017