Le Christ Hier, Aujourd’hui et Demain ed. by Raymond Laflamme, Michel Gervais (review)

BOOK REVIEWS Le Christ Hier, Aujourd'hui et Demain. Ed. by RAYMOND LAFLAMME ET MICHEL GERVAIS. Les Presses de L'Universite Laval: Quebec, 1976. $15.00. At a time when German-speaking theologians seem to dominate the theological scene not only in Europe but in North America as well, it is good to see a collection of Christological essays appear from a rather quiet part of the theological world: French Canada. In March of 1975 Laval University in Quebec held a colloquium in Christology. This present volume is the collection of papers given at that conference. The volume contains twenty-two papers ranging over a wide variety of Christological topics. Bernard Sesboiie begins by giving a clear and insightful overview of contemporary Christological thought. Bernard Lonergan (he and Fredrick Crowe present the only articles in English) and Jacques Doyon treat the topic of Christological methodology. Fredrick Crowe and Jacques Gervais study the human mind and consciousness of Christ. The immutability of God and the Incarnation is the topic of Michel Gervais's very thoughtful paper. There are a number of articles on Biblical Christology . Paul-Emile Langevin gives a thorough discussion of Paul's statement in Romans 1:3-4 that Jesus "was made Son of God in power according to the spirit of holiness, by his resurrection from the dead." The Christological significance of the literary structure of John's Gospel is studied by Michel Roberge. Other biblical studies are Jean-Marie Archambault 's treatment of Jesus's filial obedience, Evode Beaucamp's analysis of Jesus as our Messianic Hope, and Andre Myre's discussion of Jesus as the Eschatological Prophet. Two essays are of soteriological significance. Jean-Guy Page looks at the relationship between Christ and the Church with regard to salvation of the world. Politics and the life of Jesus is the subject matter for Louis O'Neil's essay. The Christology of three theologians is also studied. The best is Jacques Doyon's treatment of Nicolas of Cusa. Gilles Langevin takes a quick but penetrating glance at Karl Rahner. Edmond Robillard gives a short but detailed presentation of Ignatius of Antioch's Christology in his letter to the Ephesians. The wide variety and range of the articles makes for interesting reading in itself. More importantly, and what is surprising for such a large compilation of essays, is that almost all of them are of good quality. Only two or three are disappointing. Because this writer is a systematic theologian, he will consider the main articles bearing upon systematic subjects. The springboard for Lonergan's article is Piet Schoonenberg's book, The 703 704 BOOK REVIEWS Christ. Lonergan is concerned with the fact that Schoonenberg not only maintains that Jesus is a man and person, but that Jesus is only a human person to the exclm1ion of his divinity. To maintain that Jesus is a divine person for Schoonenberg implies that Jesus is not fully human. To deny Jesus's human personhood, which is at the very heart of what it means to be human, is to deny the full humanness of Jesus which the Gospels and Councils make clear is so important. By making distinctions between consciousness , subjectivity, and identity Lonergan tries to show how Jesus can be fully human with a human subjectivity, and yet at the same time be the Son of God in a full ontological sense. " Though his identity was divine, still Jesus had a truly human subjectivity that grew in wisdom and age and grace before God and man and that was similar to our own in all things save sin" (p. 64). What is important to remember and what Lonergan is at great pains to maintain is that Jesus must be fully human because that is what the Son of God has become and is. Jesus's importance lies in his identity. If Jesus is not the Son of God existing as man, then the whole point and importance of Jesus being a man is lost. Beneath this explanation of Lonergan's is a deeper question. What sort of incarnational act is it that brings about a oneness of identity and a distinction of natures? This question is a real...