My previous assignment as Spiritual Director and religion teacher at Kolbe Cathedral High School in Bridgeport offered me many opportunities to discuss the Catholic faith with my fellow faculty members and my students, Catholic and non-Catholic alike.
During one Lenten season one of my non-Catholic Christian students wanted to discuss a sermon she had heard at her place of worship the previous Sunday in which her minister concluded that Jesus must not have been a nice looking man because, had he been attractive, people might have “followed” him for the wrong reason. I must admit that I had never heard anything quite like this before, and that I had never really thought much about how Jesus must have looked beyond the fact that he was a Middle Eastern Jewish man who was probably fairly robust given that he did manual labor as a carpenter and walked everywhere he went. He also had the advantage of not being tempted by fast food restaurants and ice cream shops on his way back and forth to work each day. There is, of course, the matter of the Shroud of Turin. Proponents of the Shroud’s authenticity claim that is the burial cloth with which Jesus was wrapped when he was placed in the tomb. The cloth shows the mysterious image of a man who suffered and died in a manner consistent with that of the Lord’s Passion and death. The Shroud has been studied by scientists representing many disciplines who have proposed various theories of how the image was impressed on the cloth, how old it actually is, and whether or not it could be the cloth in which Jesus was buried. At present the results of these studies are hotly debated, often contradictory, and inevitably controversial. The Church has taken no official stance on the matter, but since the time of Pope Pius XII (1958) the image has been approved for devotional use by the faithful. Pope John Paul II urged scientists to continue the work of studying the image, arranged for its display in conjunction with the Great Jubilee in 2000, and visited it himself. Pope Benedict XVI publicly expressed his desire to visit the Shroud which was on display that spring. But what of the appearance of the man whose image is impressed upon the Shroud? He has long hair and a beard. His face is not particularly striking (in my opinion) partly from the fact that that it appears swollen and wounded. If this is the face of Jesus he seems to me to look like a regular guy, and I say that with all the respect due the Lord of the Universe. Since most of the class agreed with this interpretation we were able to move on to discuss the fact that Jesus, because he was perfectly human, i.e. without the stain of sin, regardless of whether he looked like a movie star or like a regular Middle Eastern Jewish fellow, must have been attractive. Who could fail to be attracted to a man completely free from sin and who loved everyone he encountered with the very love with which God loves us? It was only their own sin and consequent lack of love that made many of the people he met want him tortured and killed. It was only their sin and consequent lack of love that made him “unattractive” to them. We concluded that anyone who followed Jesus did so not because of how he looked, but because they recognized who and what he was. And that must have been attractive. I was thankful to have been able to propose a more reasonable suggestion about how Jesus may have looked without having to criticize a fellow “preacher”. At the same time I had been able to make the unspoken point that the Scriptures cannot be left open to individual “interpretation”. Even though the Bible does not tell us exactly how Jesus looked, reason suggests to us that he must have “looked” pretty good to any and all who were willing to see who and what he was. Two millennia later he still looks just as good as he did then. |
Mi asignación anterior como Director Espiritual y maestro de religión en la Escuela Secundaria Kolbe Cathedral, me brindó grandes oportunidades para discutir la fe católica con mis colegas de trabajo al igual que con mis alumnos católicos y no católicos.
En una ocasión durante la Cuaresma, uno de mis alumnos no católicos deseaba discutir un sermón que había escuchado en su iglesia el domingo anterior, en el cual la pastora concluyó diciendo que probablemente Jesús no debió haber sido un hombre muy atractivo físicamente, porque de lo contrario, la gente le hubiera seguido por razones equivocadas. Debo admitir que nunca había escuchado algo parecido, y que nunca me detuve a pensar en la apariencia física de Jesús, únicamente que era un judío de Oriente Medio, probablemente bastante robusto ya que se dedicaba a trabajos manuales como la carpintería, y que caminaba a todos lados que se dirigiera. Tenia la ventaja de no ser tentado con restaurants de comida rápida y tampoco existían heladerías. Sin embargo está la cuestión del Sudario de Turín. Los defensores de la autenticidad del Sudario, aseguran que éste es el sudario con el cual Jesús fue envuelto cuando fue colocado en la tumba. La tela muestra la misteriosa imagen de un hombre que sufrió y murió de la misma forma que Jesús a la hora de su Pasión y su Muerte. El Sudario has sido estudiado por científicos que representan varias disciplinas y los cuales manifiestan varias teorías de como esta imagen se estampó en la tela, los años de antigüedad, y si verdaderamente es el mismo sudario en el que Jesús fue envuelto antes de ser colocado en la tumba. En la actualidad estos resultados son bastante debatibles, algunas veces contradictorios, e inevitablemente controversiales. La Iglesia no ha tomada ninguna posición oficial en este asunto, pero desde tiempos del Papa Pio XII (1958), la imagen ha sido aprobada para uso devocional por los fieles. El Papa Juan Pablo II exhortó a los científicos para que continuaran el trabajo de estudiar la imagen, y dio orden de que se exhibiera en conjunto con el Año Jubilar 2000 y él mismo lo visitó. También el Papa Benedicto XVI públicamente expresó su deseo de visitar El Sudario que estaba en exhibición esa primavera. Pero, ¿Que de la imagen que aparecía impresa en el Sudario? Allí, la imagen tiene pelo largo y barba. Su apariencia particularmente no impresiona, en mi opinión, en parte por el hecho de que pareciera que está inflamado y golpeado. Si esta es la faz de Jesús, me parece que se ve como un hombre normal, lo digo con todo el respeto que merece El Señor del Universo. Ya que la mayoría de la clase estuvo de acuerdo con esta interpretación, pudimos continuar discutiendo el hecho de que Jesús, por el hecho de ser perfectamente humano, solo que sin la mancha del pecado, ya fuera que pareciera una estrella de cine o un simple judío del Medio Oriente, debió haber sido atractivo. ¿Quien no se sentiría atraído por un hombre libre de pecado, que amaba a cuantos encontraba con el mismo amor con el que Dios nos ama? Me sentí agradecido de sugerir algo más razonable sobre la apariencia física de Jesús sin tener que criticar a un colega “predicador.” Al mismo tiempo tuve la oportunidad de señalar el punto implícito que las Escrituras no pueden dejar a la interpretación de cada individuo. Aunque la Biblia no nos describe la apariencia física de Jesús, la razón nos sugiere que debió haber sido bastante atractivo a los ojos de todo aquel que deseaba verlo por quien era. Dos milenios después, lo seguimos viendo tan atractivo como entonces. |