Religion: Myth & the Gospel (Contd.)

The idea that some Christian Scripture is mythological rather than historical, though held by many Protestant theologians, has kicked up a flurry of controversy around San Francisco's outspoken Episcopal Bishop James A. Pike (TIME, Feb. 24). The issue has its counterpart in Roman Catholicism. Cautious by comparison with Bishop Pike—who suggests that even the ancient doctrine of the virgin birth is a mythological way of presenting the paradox of Christ's simultaneous humanity and divinity—Catholic proponents of the idea avoid the word myth. But the new view of the Gospels is highly unsettling to Catholic conservatives, and so widespread among college students, laymen's discussion groups and seminarians that it has provoked a well-modulated blast by a leading theologian.

Subject of the blast is the theory that the first two chapters of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are not to be considered as historical, but as what the Jews call a midrash. A midrash is a passage of explanatory commentary on the Scripture —either in analytical, legal terms (Halacha) or dramatic, legendary terms (Haggada). Into the latter category the so-called Midrash Theory puts the Gospel narrative of the birth of Jesus—including such episodes as the angel Gabriel's announcement to the Virgin of her miraculous conception, and the beloved story about the journey of the Wise Men from the East to Jesus' birthplace in Bethlehem.

Shock & Surprise. The Midrash Theory is related to the technique of Biblical scholarship known as "form criticism," in which Scripture is analyzed in terms of the different forms in which Middle Easterners of 1,900 years ago communicated—far removed from the modern documentary attitude toward history. The form critic tries to determine the reality behind the written word by applying to the text what is known about the patterns of thought and talk current among the people who composed the Bible and the people they composed it for.

"Misgivings about this scriptural 'new look' are being voiced more and more among educated American Catholics," according to Jesuit Francis L. Filas, chairman of the department of theology at Chicago's Loyola University, writing in The Priest. "Shock and surprise have occurred" among "priests, nuns, college students, and even the general public," says Father Filas, from such statements as: "1) The angel Gabriel never made any annunciation to Mary. Luke's account is a pious meditation enlarging on the single fact of the Incarnation, which is the only fact of which we can be certain in Luke's story.

"2) The 'event' of Christmas was the birth of Jesus from Mary, with some witnesses present. Of no more than this can we be sure. Even this is a tentative opinion, subject to change, depending on subsequent opinions of exegetes.

"3) It is probable that there is very little history in the second chapter of Matthew. Except as a pious enlargement intended to show the manifestation of Christ to the gentile world, few historical details mentioned in Matthew 2 (including the existence of the Magi) are to be considered credible."