Mr John Guillaumier (The Sunday Times, May 18) seems to reject the keystone of the Christian faith, namely the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. He does not explicitly express his opinion, but limits himself to presenting us with quotations from various authors (Gerd Ludemann, Richard Tarnas, Timothy Freke, Peter Gandy and Joseph Campbell). To these he adds quotations from the writings of Gnosticism and the early Christian writer Tertullian.
Reading his letter one could easily conclude that the author does not believe in the Resurrection. In no way am I trying to persuade Mr Guillaumier to believe in this fundamental article of the Christian creed. He is free to believe in or reject this dogma of the Christian faith. If he chooses to reject this mystery, he surely cannot claim to be Christian at all.
Independently of his opinion, I ask Mr Guillaumier to respect the faith others hold so dearly and, when he deems necessary to give his opinion about some articles of the Christian faith, to do so with respect. I think it is unethical of him to describe faith in the Resurrection as the "faith of fools".
As a Christian I cannot agree with statements taken from other sources stating that "the Resurrection must be rejected by anyone holding a scientific world view", and that "the Gospel stories of the empty tomb and Jesus' post-resurrection appearances are fictions devised long after his death to justify claims to his divinity".
Mr Guillaumier tries to support his opinion by quoting Tertullian, who later in life rejected the Church to embrace Montanism. Mr Guillaumier should know that faith in the Resurrection was not the reason behind Tertullian's decision to leave the Church, as his letter seems to imply. Tertullian (c. 155/160-c. 240/250 CE), a lawyer, born of pagan parents, converted to Christianity in about 193 CE.
Some conclude he was a priest. However, there is no evidence to believe he was a cleric; it is more likely that he was a lay theologian. Tertullian's literary activities span nearly 25 years. Scholars divide these years into three periods: a) the Catholic period (197-206 CE); b) the Semi-Montanist period (206-212 CE); and c) the Montanist period (213-223 CE). Tertullian embraced Montanism because of his extreme rigorism.
Some authors give indications that later Tertullian rejected Montanism too so as to become a founder of a sect bearing his own name. Augustine mentions a sect called Tertullianists! To be fair, one must say that Tertullian is the first Christian author to write in Latin, earning the title of Father of Latin theology. He also had a major impact on the western Church through his writings, laying the foundations for the doctrine of the Trinity.
As regards faith in the Resurrection, Tertullian left us with a treatise, Against Praxeas, written in the Montanist period. In this treatise Tertullian writes: "We believe that He (the Son) was sent by the Father into a Virgin and was born of her, God and man, Son of Man and Son of God, and was called by the name Jesus Christ. We believe that he suffered and that, in accordance with the Scriptures, he died and was buried; and he was raised again by the Father to resume His place in heaven..."
Montanism originated from the second century writer Montanus, active in 135-175 CE. He "is an example of a theologian operating in the early period of the Church to focus on the activity of the Spirit". Montanus placed considerable emphasis on the activity of the Holy Spirit, particularly in dreams and visions. Scholars suspect that Montanus may have even arrived to identify himself with the Holy Spirit!
I wonder why in his article against the faith in the Resurrection, full of 'scientific' quotations from the so-called "liberal scholars" and authors, of all Christian writers Mr Guillaumier chose Tertullian. Doesn't he know that Tertullian was as much of a rigorist as a theologian, who strongly opposed the use of extra-scriptural sources in debates about the Christian faith? Tertullian "is among the most forceful early exponents of the sufficiency of scripture, denouncing those who appeal to secular philosophies".
As regards Gnosticism, scholars agree that it is a diverse, complex movement. Some equate it with the modern New Age phenomenon. Can we really consider Gnostic writers to be really Christian? This movement appeared to be very similar to Christianity in many points but it was not!
Against heretical movements, Tertullian himself puts forward the Tradition of the Church; in other words that which has been handed down to us from the times of the Apostles and had found expression in the Sacred Scriptures.
The apostolic Church handed down to us precisely faith in the Resurrection. Tertullian himself writes in the above-mentioned treatise Against Praxeas: "This rule of faith has been current since the beginning of the gospel, before even earlier heretics much more, then, before Praxeas, who is but of yesterday... In this we have a presumptive principle against all heresies: whatever is first is true; whatever is late is spurious."
The event of the Resurrection of Jesus itself is not narrated in the New Testament at all. No one saw the actual fact of the Resurrection. What the Gospels narrate is the empty tomb and the apparitions of the Risen Lord to his disciples.
The kerygma of the apostolic preaching was precisely the proclamation of the Paschal Mystery as the primary object of the Good News from the very beginning of the Church. This proclamation declares that Jesus crucified was raised up by God (Acts 2: 23-24). The Resurrection event is a supernatural metaphysical reality not belonging to this world; thus it cannot be the object of scientific investigation.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the Resurrection as a real transcendent event which happened in the bodily life of Jesus and had historical implications for his disciples. To be a witness to Christ implies necessarily to be a witness to his Resurrction. The Resurrection is an exclusively real fact and a mystery of faith. The scholar W. Groussouw concluded: "History can only demonstrate the faith of the disciples in the Resurrection."
History is in fact an eloquent witness to the faith of so many faithful, past and present, who had their lives transformed by the encounter with the Risen Lord through the action of the Holy Spirit. As Christians we do not merely recognise the Resurrection event as a fact, but we accept it as a saving deed believing in it as the principle of our own resurrection to the eternal life of glory after sharing in Christ's sufferings and death for the sake of God's Kingdom.
The Kingdom of God begins in this physical world, arriving to fulfilment in the Second Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The Resurrection of Jesus is not reanimation or a mere resuscitation of a corpse, but an act of salvation originating from God the Father completely realised by Jesus Christ in his Sacred Humanity. It is through his now glorified humanity that we as Christians hope to obtain life immortal.
St Paul confesses the Resurrection of Jesus in his first Letter to the Corinthians, a text which has its origins at least as early as 35 CE: "Now if Christ is preached as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain... if for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied."