The Apostles - Pope Benedict XVI (2007) Reviewd by Martha L. Rogers

GoddeWords] Book Review: The Apostles - Pope Benedict XVI (2007)


Q Bee to Mirlo, GoddeWords



http://www.amazon.com/review/product/1592764053/
ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt_sr_1?%5Fencoding=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar

Reviewed by Martha L. Rogers, PhD.

This book is well-written but its title is deceptive. The early
chapters front-load what follows with the theological premises of the
Roman Catholic Church so it is less about the Apostles than we might
hope. BXVI is known as a scholar, and certainly his scholarly bent
shows in what he writes, leaving many people who haven't personally dug
into the current scholarship feeling impressed. If one believes in
apostolic succession and Christ's entrusting the apostles with
maintaining fidelity and truth (and this reviewer does accept this
concept), then there are those of us who feel that the mandate for
truth has failed. I have to assume that the Bishop of Rome believes
what he has written, but the world has changed in that the world of
scholarship is open to those of us in the pews. We don't have to accept
a distorted and incomplete scholarship. We're no longer illiterates who
are dependent upon the Church to tell us what to believe. We can dig it
out and weigh its efficacy for ourselves. It cannot be that the Bishop
of Rome is unaware of the extensive scholarship, as he has the
unfathomable riches of the Roman Catholic Church that would make it
easy.

I will only briefly address two overwhelmingly glaring areas. We note
that women disciples are discussed in the very back of the book. BXVI
lists many of the women, but he is only able to magnify the works of
those who are coupled, such as Priscilla and Aquila. He makes no note
of the importance that in scripture, Priscilla is listed first. And he
manages to get through chapters on St. Paul's co-workers and the
chapter on women without mentioning the Apostle Junia (Romans 16:7).
The scholarship here is clear: There was one named female Apostle. See
Eldon Jay Epp (2005). Junia: The First Woman Apostle. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press (available on Amazon).

Then, the gospel material on St. Peter is, as would be expected,
seriously selective, reinterpreted and reworked. What is lost is that
the meaning of "Apostle" was being fought in the first century, and we
know who won out in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Luke carves out a view
that the 12 are the only trustworthy witnesses of the Resurrection.

Luke's "twelve" is a select group and it is ONLY in Luke they are
specifically chosen FROM a larger group of followers, a group not
present in Mark and Matthew [see Luke 6:13]. Matthew uses the term,
"apostolic" only once [10:2-5]. Mark uses it only once [6:30]. Luke
uses the term 6 times in the Gospel, and 34 times in Luke-Acts. The
author of Luke and Acts writes several decades after Paul and adds new
requirements for apostleship, limiting it to the Twelve, excluding
Paul, James the brother of Jesus, who rose to head the Jerusalem
Church, and all female apostles. The restriction of "Apostle" seen in
Luke-Acts is not seen in Paul. Luke downplays the functionality of the
role or mission of Apostleship and makes it more symbolic.

The preeminence of Peter is not uniform across the Gospels so we can
see the struggle for authority that was going on. In 4G, Jesus never
specifically chooses Peter as a member of a subgroup of disciples. He
does not have any special resurrection appearance until Chapter 21,
which is a later add-on redaction.

Contrary to BXVI, Peter is not depicted as the first to see the Risen
Christ across the Gospels. Matthew, Mark and John give prominence to
Mary Magdalene. It is only in Luke that Peter is gifted with an
individual appearance of the Lord [Luke 24:33-34]. In the other three
Gospels, Jesus or angelic messengers send Mary Magdalene alone or with
other women to proclaim the Resurrection. This is such an inconvenience
to Rome that it must be obscured. So, at a minimum, the history as
recounted in the canonical Gospels shows that the conflict for
authority was going on in the 1st century.

If you want to see some of the available scholarship for yourself, read
Ann Graham Brock (2003). Mary Magdalene, The First Apostle: The
Struggle for Authority. Harvard University Press (available on Amazon).
Based on her PhD dissertation at Harvard, she has very effectively
demonstrated in the canonical Gospels, with supplementary non-canonical
sources including the Acts of Peter and Acts of Paul, that where Peter
is made prominent in the Gospels, Mary Magdalene and the other women
are diminished, and vice versa.

The Apostles reads easily if you accept the underlying premises, and if
you don't, the book well captures official Roman Catholic views. It is
not an unbiased account of the early history of the church. There is
good information in this book, but it should not be read in isolation
or as an accurate picture of the first century of Christianity.