THE BEATITUDES

The Beatitudes as viewed by both Abesamis and Ratzinger

I. ACCORDING TO ABESAMIS1
Carlos Abesamis considers the beatitudes as a goldmine by virtue of their
inspirational wealth. It is a compact concentration of data about the Kingdom of
God. In citing the beatitudes, the author conflates the Biblical data found in
both Gospels of Matthew and Luke. They speak of a proclamation of salvation
to the poor and oppressed. Succinctly in Abesamis’ views, the Beatitudes
actually present a picture of what is really the Kingdom of God. However, it is
important to note of some considerations.
The said author provides us with some parameters before we really
painstakingly interpret these precious sayings of Jesus as embedded with
beautiful messages of hope for our own salvation. The first one is that the
beatitudes are proclamations or announcements of salvation. The different
beatitudes proclaim different forms of salvation to various classes of people in
the society. Second, we take into consideration that ‘Salvation’ is synonymous
with ‘Kingdom of God’. In other words both terms can be interchanged and
practically have exactly the same meaning. As a result, we must understand
clearly that these beatitudes are proclamations of Salvation, or of the Kingdom
of God; Kingdom of God = Salvation. The third concern is that ‘salvation’ or
‘Kingdom of God’ can be found only in the second part of each of the
beatitudes. The propositions in the second part of each of the beatitudes are
various ways of expressing the idea about the Kingdom of God and of its
salvific blessings. Hence, much of Abesamis’ discussions will be concentrating
of this second part, which presents a picture of the Kingdom of God. And the
ensuing explanations will be dealing much about this Kingdom of God.
After earmarking these important parameters, the discussion on each of
the beatitudes now starts—albeit only the second part of each sentence.
Abesamis speaks of the Kingdom of God in these descriptions. First, as Divine
Filiation (Mat 5:9). In God’s kingdom, all who are in it shall have a special
relationship with God the father. Second, the Kingdom of God is the Vision of
God (Mat 5:8). Abesamis says that human life reaches its absolute fulfillment
when human beings with bare eyes gaze at the nakedness of the Divine; it is
an essence-to-Essence experience. Third, the Kingdom of God is the
Compassion of Social Justice (Mat 5:7). This particular beatitude can be
reworded as follows: “Blessed are those whose compassionate heart does the
works of social justice, for the Kingdom of God for them will likewise be the
experience of justice and compassion. Fourth, the Kingdom of God is something
which is a ‘real’ and new earth and not just symbolic. In the event, there will
indeed be a new earth in which the meek, the anawim, the afflicted, humbled,
subjugated, lowly, can truly live in.
1
Cf. Stopover 4 of Carlos H. Abesamis, A Third Look at Jesus, 3rd and completely revised ed. (Quezon City:
Claretian Publications, 1999), 38 – 56.
 Fifth, the Kingdom of God is Laughter and Comfort (Lk 6:21, Mat 5:4).
In the Kingdom of God, there is no place for sadness, only joy and laughter.
This means the full-throated bliss of flesh and blood people. There is no more
burden due to wealth and worries but only hope and happiness in struggle.
Sixth, the Kingdom of God is Food (Lk 6:21, Mat 5:6). Luke and Matthew differ
in their contexts. The former speaks of real physical hunger, of empty
stomachs whose hunger is for rice and bread. The latter refers to people who
hunger for moral uprightness and holiness. And according to Abesamis, it is the
account of Luke, ‘Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled”,
which is a more accurate report of what Jesus actually said. Hence, the
beatitudes speak of a blessing of more food, not for those already with filled
stomachs, but for those who are truly hungry. Being filled means being truly
nourished.
In the accounts of Lk 6:20 and Mat 5:3, there are two seemingly different
words here: the first has ‘Kingdom of God’ while the second, ‘Kingdom of
heaven’. Which is the correct one? Abesamis says there is no difference at all.
The word ‘heaven’ actually substitutes the word ‘God’. Hence, Kingdom of
Heaven and Kingdom of God are exactly the same. Neither speaks of another
entity that is according Westerners’ mind as heaven. Each of them refers to a
new earth, as mentioned above, which is the Kingdom of God. Eventually these
beatitudes speak of the Kingdom of God as Justice and Liberation for the Poor.
Abesamis now swerves a bit from his original premise of concentrating only on
the second part. Instead, he justifies this by saying that the second part
already explicitly speaks of the Kingdom of God.
While Abesamis tries to explain that the Beatitudes speak of
interpretations about the Kingdom of God, they do pose certain problems. We
interpret these beatitudes according to what Jesus practiced and did.
Interpreting his words through his deeds make it easier and more precise
rather than dwelling into deep theological analyses. Furthermore, Abesamis
tells his readers that the Beatitudes are not similar to the parables. The former
truly speaks of the Kingdom of God while the latter is only of some aspects of
the Kingdom of God. In other words, the Beatitudes are more explicit about the
substance of the Kingdom of God, unlike that of the parable which are only
talking about the characteristics of the Kingdom of God.

II. ACCORDING TO RATZINGER2

Ratzinger considers the accounts of Matthew and Luke in his topic on the
Beatitudes. However, he discusses with much depth and details that of
Matthew’s. These Beatitudes are in the greater context of Jesus’ Sermon on the
Mount. ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ poignantly describes the Beatitudes as the New
Testament’s counterpart to the Ten Commandments. In other words, they can
be considered the new Torah. While Moses was well known for giving the Ten
Commandments, Jesus is now the new Moses who gives to us the Beatitudes.
But the author also makes it clear that Jesus had no intention to abrogate the

2
Cf. Joseph Ratzinger, Jesus of Nazareth, translated from the German by Adrian J. Walker (New York:
Doubleday, 2007), 64 – 127.

2
Ten Commandments, or the fundamental corpus of the Torah, but rather to
reinforce them.
The Beatitudes are words of eschatological promise and are criteria for
discernment for those who like to seek direction in life. These very beatitudes
give hope to those who are poor economically and those lost ones because
they ought to rejoice amidst all their sufferings. Ratzinger speaks of the
Beatitudes as paradoxes that are according to the values of God and not of the
world. These paradoxes are similar to the life of St. Paul—one perfect practical
example of how one ought to live as Jesus’ Apostle. These speak of a life of
suffering but in the end there is much hope and blessing amidst all these
sufferings. This is also similar to what St. John the Evangelist tells us of the
exaltation of the Lord’s cross. How? Jesus Himself underwent torment and
death by crucifixion but was exalted later in His Resurrection. This is the great
paradox that Christ Himself underwent. The words of the non-synoptic Gospel,
that of John, that calls the Lord’s Cross an ‘exaltation’ or an elevation to God’s
throne on high tell of such an equivocal paradox. The two messages that St.
Paul and St. John give us are: (a) the beatitudes express the meaning of
discipleship, which is proclaimed not theoretically but in the life and suffering,
and the joy of the disciple who gives himself over completely to following the
Lord. The other (b) is that the Beatitudes definitely have a Christological
character because the disciple is ultimately bound to the mystery of Christ who
suffered and died on the Cross and eventually rose up and conquered death.
Meanwhile, the beatitudes presented in the Gospel of Luke consist of
consolation and promises. Those in Matthew present a sort of veiled interior
biographical figure of Jesus; they present a road map for the Church in which
the direction for discipleship are to be found.
The discussions in each of the beatitudes consider both parts, unlike that
of Abesamis3. The first beatitude, “Blessed are the poor in Spirit; theirs is the
kingdom of heaven” (Mat 5:3), speak of the ‘poor in spirit’ as those who are
both economically (=materially) and spiritually poor. This beatitude is
epitomized by St. Francis of Assisi, who understood clearly what is meant by
‘poor in spirit’. Ratzinger connects this beatitude with the third and seventh. In
the third, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” (Mat 5:5),
those who are meek are very close to the poor in spirit. The word ‘meek’ comes
from the Greek word ‘praus’ (=nonviolent), and Hebrew ‘anawim’ (God’s poor
ones). The latter is more exact word. The second part speaks of the ‘land’ to be
inherited as a space in which the people can truly exercise their obedience and
openness to God and where they can freely worship Him minus all the
contaminations of idolatry. Hence, there is a more universal claim to this ‘land’
since it speaks of the whole earth and not just any particular locality.
Succinctly, it says that the earth ultimately belongs to the meek or to the
peaceful because it is the land ruled by the king of peace. Obviously, the
seventh beatitude, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons
of God” (Mat 5:9), is an invitation to be peacemakers, like the son who is the
true bringer of peace. To be a peacemaker is to become close and be in
harmony with God the Father, just as the Lord Jesus Christ is. Enmity with God
3
See the above texts in the first part.

3
leads to confusion and problems. Hence, when we do what the Son—Jesus
Christ—does, we ourselves become sons of God.
The second beatitude, “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be
comforted” (Mat 5:4), talks about two kinds of mourning: (a) Positive, and (b)
Negative. The first is a loss of hope, and is mistrustful of love and truth. This
kind of mourning is destructive. An example of a person who mourned this way
is Judas Iscariot who hung himself instead of asking for forgiveness. The second
is one that is occasioned by a radical encounter with truth and leads to genuine
conversion and to resistance of evil. This is a mourning that is full of hope, and
exemplified by St. Peter, who was able to overcome a great moment of crisis
due to his betrayal of Jesus and later became the leader of the Christian
Church. This is very much connected with the eight, which is “Blessed are
those who are persecuted fro righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of
heaven” (Mat 5:10). Those who mourn or are being persecuted because of
following Jesus Christ are given the consolation which is in the Kingdom of
Heaven. The comfort spoken of in the second beatitude is the Kingdom of
Heaven in the eighth.
The fourth, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they shall be satisfied” (Mat 5:6), is concerned with those people who are in
search of things that are not purely mundane but that which is more noble,
great, genuinely good and can lead to true happiness in life. These people are
not contented with material things that can give only fleeting joy. They seek
what is beyond—i.e., the truth that can only be found when they follow the way
of the Lord Jesus Christ. This truth is indeed in Christ. The last beatitude being
tackled by Ratzinger is “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”
(Mat 5:8). It speaks of a person who has pure heart is someone whose bodily
pleasures and appetites are under the discipline of the spirit of piety, virtue,
and tempered appetites. Those with pure heart can truly humble themselves in
love and service, and thus purifying themselves from impure motives and from
pride especially. Hence, they can easily perceive God in a brilliant ascent to the
truth, which is God Himself. This is a compelling parallel to that of Christ’s self-
emptying that is summarized perfectly in Paul’s letter of the Philippians 2:6-9.
Jesus came down and became one of us, even to the point of death. But by
dying, he revealed to us his very divine nature by rising from death. This has
inspired great mystical minds throughout the centuries.
The Beatitudes found in Luke are followed shortly by a series of ‘woe to
you’ statements. These, according to Ratzinger, are not condemnations.
Instead they are supposed to serve as warnings or a caution so as we will not
go to this false path. Although the author doesn’t discuss this part in great
depth, nevertheless he points out the Luke’s account, as well as that of
Matthew, serve as signposts for us human persons not to be led astray. One
great critique of these Beatitudes is that of Neitzsche. He was indignant of
Jesus’ vision and sees it as the envy or, in my own words, sour-graping of the
cowardly and the weak. Instead of praising the strong and the successful, the
weak are being praised. This though has also influenced some modern minds,
leading to a form of relativism when it comes to values and virtues proclaimed
by Jesus. The Beatitudes stand in great disparity with the values of the world

4
because they demand conversion. When one is too attached to mundane
values, then one can never transcend to a more noble stature that can be
worthy to inherit the Kingdom of God.

III. REACTION and CONCLUSION

Initially, before reading the contents of the said books, I was more
attracted to the author’s name rather than the titles. And so, I wasn’t as
enthusiastic in reading that of Abesamis as that of Ratzinger. Obviously, as a
Christian I find the words of the Pope more popular and palpable, although not
necessarily easily comprehensible. But I found some aspects in Abesamis’ work
which are quite interesting and are worth mentioning and reflecting. In the
same way, the work of Ratzinger gives me a kind of deep lecture not only
about the scriptures but also on life.
Abesamis delved more on the second part of each beatitude statement,
i.e. that which speaks of the Kingdom of God. For Abesamis, what is being
described in this second part is the Kingdom of God itself. While he
concentrated more on the second part, I couldn’t avoid reading also the first
part. Of course, each of the succeeding statements of the beatitudes is mainly
a follow-up of the first. But then, Abesamis has a point in speaking more about
the second rather than the first because he was trying to say that the Kingdom
of God is being presented in a compact form in the beatitudes. And as I
mentioned above in his parameters, the beatitudes speak of salvation,
especially that of the poor ones. Salvation, or the Kingdom of God, is reflected
on the second part of every statement. He has very unique points in that I have
not actually read other works that speak in the same manner as Abesamis does
as regards Salvation or the Kingdom of God in the Beatitudes. In my opinion,
his views try to present a very simple and, as much as possible, word-for-word
rendering of the Beatitudes.
Ratzinger, on the other hand, gives a thorough rendition of the
Beatitides, except for one (on being merciful), using both parts of each
statement. In talking about the beatitudes, he considers each of the Gospels
accounts differently. First, he explains in great depth and length the account of
Matthew, which I thought was very profound and very theological. Second, he
explains Luke in short details. In Matthew’s account, which I think he gives
much preference as a true theologian would, Ratzinger explained the persons
being referred to in the first part, and then goes to explain too the second part.
He doesn’t immediately conclude the way Abesamis does in his work. Rather,
Ratzinger spots the right words to explain in depth the meaning of such
important words found in both parts of each beatitude (e.g. poor in spirit,
meek, consoled, inherit the earth, etc.).
Frankly, I find Ratzinger’s work laden with more profound words and
explanations that are worth chewing and masticating for a good number of
days, if not months or years rather than that of Abesamis. I see a very deep
understanding not only of the scriptures but the theology behind it, albeit in the
Westerner’s point of view. I felt a bit uncomfortable when Abesamis says the
2nd Look is quite far from the 1st and 3rd Looks. In fact, perhaps because of my

5
training in Western Philosophy and Theology, I find Ratzinger’s work more
worthy for reflective reading than that of Abesamis. However, the work of
Abesamis is not actually that bad for he presents some really unique views as
far as Scriptural interpretation is concerned. For example when he speaks of a
tangible new earth in a completely new era, I believe there is nothing
completely wrong with that. In fact, he favors the virtue of hope in this regard.
Hope for a better world, where no one feels hunger, desolation, sadness, and
evil, is but a very beautiful thing to do. And it is a perfect example of what
Christian Hope is all about. Neverthess, Ratzinger’s insights offer a wider
horizon for application in real life, whether in social or moral issues, even
theological or dogmatic ones. It is because nothing is more substantial and
satisfying to me than knowing more intimately my Lord Jesus and making him a
priority in life.

Submitted by : Bro. Gino Godinez, SDB

August 25, 2009