Review by New York Times Review
GARRY WILLS is not only one of the country's most distinguished intellectuals, but also one of its most provocative, bringing his learning to bear on great questions of history and contemporary politics, often at the same time. Add to this his regular disquisitions on the church (he is Roman Catholic) and you have a combustible mix that can delight, infuriate or illuminate, usually all three. The irony of Wills's latest work, "What the Gospels Meant," is that it lacks polemics yet is full of observations sure to rile fearful souls who view ambiguity as the enemy of faith. This eminently readable volume is part of a series by Wills providing an overview of Christianity's roots. The series began with "What Jesus Meant" and continued with "What Paul Meant." There is less of Wills in this book than in the previous volumes - for good or ill, depending on what one is looking for. What readers will find here is an engaging look at the Gospels, informed by the best biblical scholarship, as well as by Wills's own faith, which he discusses openly. Wills relies almost exclusively on the writings of the late Raymond Brown, a Catholic priest whose works are the gold standard of New Testament exegesis. "What the Gospels Meant" starts straightforwardly with a helpful explanation of just what a Gospel is: "a meditation on the meaning of Jesus in the light of sacred history as recorded in the sacred writings." Wills then parses the Gospel of Mark, the earliest account, as a "report from the suffering body of Jesus," written to comfort early Christians facing persecution. Matthew's is the teaching Gospel, recounting many of Christianity's most familiar sermons. The erudite Luke presents "the reconciling body of Jesus," a Gospel of poignant stories like the Prodigal Son and the Good Samaritan that display the humanity of Jesus and the universality of his message. John is, as ever, the theologian, a prophetic voice from "the mystical body of Jesus." Yet the paradox of modern Christianity is that the growth of biblical scholarship, and the fervor of believers in sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), has done so little to affect the mass of biblical illiterates who proclaim their convictions about what Jesus would do while knowing precious little about what he actually did or, more important, what he meant Neoatheists aren't much better, sneering at Christians but displaying ignorance about Christianity. And neo-Gnostics - academics and acolytes who claim to channel the rebel spirit of various early Christian offshoots - routinely confer on "elite and snobbish" (Wills's phrase) second-century texts an authority they rarely grant to the canon. Such literalism sustains a fragile faith. In this sense, Wills is a dangerous man. He does not create a foolish consistency out of differing Gospels, but underscores the attributes of each narrative to highlight truths more crucial than whether there were four discrete Evangelists, or whether three wise men actually followed a star in the East. The credulous will be shocked by his rationality, while skeptics will be scandalized by his respect for the faith. To be sure, Wills includes asides that will win few points with Rome, like his claim that the virgin birth "is not a gynecological or obstetric teaching, but a theological one." And he throws in facts that can be mischievously tossed out at family gatherings or, worse, to the pastor after Sunday services - for example, that the crown of thorns was probably a wreath of acanthus leaves. (Wills also provides his own translations of the original "marketplace" Greek, though I'm not sure that killing the "pampered" calf or hearing that the Word became flesh and "bivouacked with us" will catch on.) Given how far the quest for the historical Jesus has strayed from both history and the meaning that people seek in the Gospels, we can only hope Wills's book is a sign of things to come. The pope himself last year published a well-received study, "Jesus of Nazareth," the first of a projected two-volume work that sought to put Christ back in Jesus. (Interestingly, Wills and Benedict XVI reflect a trend toward giving greater credence to the historical reliability of John, whose Gospel is the most abstract and the last to be written.) Like Benedict, Wills emphasizes the eschatological power of Jesus' message, and the revolutionary fire that his words, now banked to a dull glow by familiarity, kindled in his contemporaries. The adage that "Jesus began as biography and ended as creed" is an article of faith to those who believe that the truth of what really happened 2,000 years ago has been buried under layers of dogma and deception. Wills shows that the reverse is true: Jesus' disciples followed him to the cross because they believed he was the Messiah, and then spread his message as they - like generations after them -came to believe that he had been raised from the dead in fulfillment of the Scriptures. Creed came first, then the Gospel truth. Or truths. So are Garry Wills and Pope Benedict occupying the sensible center of New Testament scholarship? Whatever the case, the fact remains that if exegesis is considered merely archaeology or merely apologetics, then it strays far from both history and faith, and from what the Gospels really meant. David Gibson's latest book is "The Rule of Benedict: Pope Benedict XVI and His Battle With the Modern World."
Copyright (c) The New York Times Company [October 27, 2009]
Review by Booklist Review
Wills completes a trilogy begun in What Jesus Meant (2006) and continued in What Paul Meant (2006) with an examination of the four canonical lives of Jesus that aims not at harmonizing them but at accounting for their differences. As in the previous volumes, Wills probes the language of the documents, clarifying the meanings of key words, and marries that linguistic investigation to recently garnered historical knowledge. Mark wrote to validate an early Christianity enduring persecution; Matthew, for an established community (probably late-first-century Antioch) concerned with spreading the word and needing a book of essential teachings; Luke, for the sake of reconciling Gentile and Jewish Christians; and John, to theologize the burgeoning religion. When they are regarded as created for specific purposes, squabbles over supposed contradictions among them evanesce. Wills generously acknowledges his great indebtedness to the late Raymond Brown, arguably the greatest twentieth-century New Testament scholar writing in English, and he sublimely concludes by suggesting the best way to read the Gospels: with the intelligence God gave us to help us find him. --Olson, Ray Copyright 2007 Booklist
From Booklist, Copyright (c) American Library Association. Used with permission.
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
Wills's follow-up to his bestselling works, What Jesus Meant and What Paul Meant, sheds new light on the four books of the Bible best known to most Christians. In taking the gospels apart, Wills helps readers see the oft-read stories from the life of Christ in a new way. As a former teacher of ancient and New Testament Greek, he provides his own translations of the texts, accompanied by incisive analysis that incorporates the work of other scholars. Although some Christians remain uncomfortable with the use of biblical scholarship to expand upon Christianity's scriptures, Wills is obviously convinced of its value and holds that it need not weaken one's faith. In his epilogue, for instance, he notes how scholar Raymond Brown, whom he quotes extensively, remained a devout believer even as he plumbed the depths of biblical scholarship. Wills explains that the gospels "are not historically true as that term would be understood today," adding that they were composed several decades after Christ's resurrection and are the culmination of an oral preaching process. Rather than historical accounts, he considers them to be a form of prayer: a "meditation on the meaning of Jesus in the light of Sacred History as recorded in the Sacred Writings." Readers willing to have their impressions about these texts challenged by an erudite scholar will find this to be fascinating and worthwhile reading. (Feb. 18) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Library Journal Review
New York Times best-selling author and Pulitzer Prize winner Wills (history, emeritus, Northwestern Univ.; What Jesus Meant) provides another splendid book for the educated general public. Here, he analyzes the four Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John, insisting that the church deliberately "gives us four different takes on the central mystery" of Christ, which remains inexhaustible. He observes that Mark emphasizes Jesus's role as sufferer; Matthew systematically presents his teachings; Luke stresses the healing aspects of his mission; and John keeps always in mind his divinity. Wills also explains the parallelism between biblical Jewish and Christian Scripture and the use of symbolic language in the Gospels to reveal the meaning of biblical events, e.g., God's theophany to Moses in Exodus 33 and the Resurrected Christ's theophany to two disciples in Emmaus. Wills dedicates his book to the memory of the great 20th-century biblical scholar Raymond Brown, on whose work he relies extensively. Highly recommended for public, seminary, and undergraduate academic libraries. [See Prepub Alert, LJ 10/15/07.]--Carolyn M. Craft, formerly with Longwood Univ., Farmville, VA (c) Copyright 2010. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
