It is obviously popular to question the historicity of the Gospels’ portrait of Jesus. Scholars who practice the historical-critical method of biblical study devoid of faith – and thus rejecting the possibility that God entered our world in Christ – object to the historicity of a multitude of events recorded in the Gospels and propose a different Jesus than the one communicated by the four evangelists. Pope Benedict XVI, himself a master of the tools of historical-critical scholarship, wrote his three volume Jesus of Nazareth to answer such skepticism. By wedding the tools of historical-critical scholarship to the Church’s faith, he demonstrates to all who will listen that the Jesus of the Gospels is in fact “the real, ‘historical’ Jesus in the strict sense of the word. . .[T]his figure is much more logical and, historically speaking, much more intelligible than the reconstructions we have been presented with in the last decades” (Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration, xxii).
With the Church celebrating the great feast of Epiphany, it is the perfect time to see how Pope Benedict argues the star and magi in Matthew’s infancy narrative are historical. These “are not a meditation presented under the guise of stories [i.e., Jewish haggadah], but the converse: Matthew is recounting real history, theologically thought through and interpreted” (Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives, 119). Mind you, Benedict agrees with Jean Daniélou who, even though he held the star and magi are historical, stated that, if it were somehow proved that Matthew intended them only as theological symbols, it would not affect the Church’s faith since these elements do not pertain to any essential truth of Christian faith (Infancy Narratives, 118).
Benedict recounts a number of details showing that it was historically possible that magi, purveyors of religious, philosophical, and astronomical knowledge, traveled from Persia in search of the newly born king of the Jews. He points out that the Roman historians, Tacitus and Seutonius, both recorded the speculation that the ruler of the world would soon emerge from Judah (Infancy, 95). Such speculation was surely fueled by the spread of Judaism throughout the Mediterranean. The Holy Father points out how long such speculation had been spreading; he recalls the ancient prophecy of the pagan prophet Balaam, recorded in Numbers 24:17, “I see him, but not now; / I behold him, but not nigh: / a star shall come forth out of Jacob, / and a scepter shall rise out of Israel; / it shall crush the forehead of Moab, / and break down all the sons of Sheth.” Extrabiblical confirmation of Balaam’s existence and reputation as a middle eastern prophet were recently uncovered, pointing to the historicity of the prophecy recorded in Numbers as well as its being defused throughout the region hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus (Infancy, 91).
In regards to the Star of Bethlehem, Benedict reviews different theories explaining it as an astronomically identifiable occurrence. Benedict earlier expressed his conclusion that Jesus was born around 7-6 B.C., and notes how Johannes Kepler calculated that a conjunction of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars occurred at that same time. Kepler likewise postulated that this may well have been accentuated by a supernova – a point that appears confirmed in Chinese chronological tables (Infancy, 98-9). Closer to our own time, twentieth century astronomer Ferrari d’Occhieppo believed the star could be explained by a 7-6 B.C. conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation Pisces (Infancy, 99). Benedict sees the star implying that “the cosmos speaks of Christ, even though its language is not fully intelligible to man in his present state” (Infancy, 100).
Such a conjunction would surely have caught the attention of Persian wise men, devoted to astronomy and knowledgeable of religious matters such as the prophecy of a ruler coming forth from Judah. Even more than catching their attention, however, they felt moved to seek this ruler out. Pope Benedict sees the magi as representing “the inner dynamic of religion toward self-transcendence, which involves a search for truth, a search for the true God and hence ‘philosophy’ in the original sense of the word” (Infancy, 95). It was only natural that they would seek the newborn king in Jerusalem, in Herod’s palace. Benedict finds the turmoil experienced by Herod and Jerusalem by the magi’s appearance to coincide with the historical portrait of Herod as a paranoid ruler looking to kill anyone he perceived as a threat to his rule, even his own sons (Infancy, 103, 108).
The magi, through the chief priests and scribes summoned by Herod, are directed to God’s Revelation, to Micah’s prophecy (5:1) that the Messiah was, like David, to be born in Bethlehem (Infancy, 104). Their philosophy and natural religion brought them to a certain point, but Revelation was needed to reach their final destination. The star then reappears and they follow it directly to Jesus. Benedict sees in these events, “Creation interpreted by Scripture” (Infancy, 105-6). With so many historical indicators of the plausibility of Matthew’s narrative, Pope Benedict concludes that the wise exegete should accept Matthew’s account as historical, until unassailable proof is put forward that Matthew intended the narrative to be understood as haggadah (Infancy, 119).
For the past 30 years Shane Kapler has been involved in evangelism and catechesis within the Archdiocese of St. Louis. He is the author of works including The Biblical Roots of Marian Consecration, The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Seven Core Beliefs of Catholics, Through, With, and In Him and Marrying the Rosary to the Divine Mercy Chaplet. Shane is a board member of the Institute of Catholic Humanism. He is online at ExplainingChristianity.com