Theology Journal

Jesus and the Victory of God
Wright, N.T.
London. SPCK
1996

Jesus believed that to be the Messiah is to be the focal point (the fulfillment) of Israel. He would fight and defeat the real enemy: Satan, not the Roman occupiers. He would bring about the real end of the Exile that Israel had experienced for hundreds of years, the renewal of the covenant, the forgiveness of sins. He was to fulfill the destiny of Israel to be the light of the world.

Jesus believed that Satan had seduced Israel into compromising its vocation to be the light of the world. Israel was setting itself against the world, and hoped that its Messiah would lead it into victory against the world by defeating the Romans. Israel had been seduced into thinking that the kingdom of God would be brought about using the same means that its oppressors used: military power, violence, conquest. Jesus predicted that this would lead to Rome crushing Israel and Jerusalem once and for all, and this would constitute God's judgement on Israel for abandoning its true destiny.

Throughout his ministry Jesus fulfilled his Messianic role as the focus of Israel by identifying with Israel, even in all its weakness. In love he offered fellowship to the sinner, the unclean, the outcast. Finally he identified with the suffering of Israel and the coming judgement on Israel. Israel was bringing doom upon itself, and its Messiah would also undergo that doom. He would be condemned as a rebel and crucified. He would thus bear the sins of the world quite literally. In so doing he would also fulfil and uphold the true destiny of Israel; he would reject hate and violence in favour of love and peace, even to those who were enemies, and himself be the light to the gentiles. Evil would be defeated. Satan's seduction would fail as the Messiah of Israel fulfilled the way of God even as he underwent the judgement on Israel's failure. By his resurection he would be vindicated, and his followers would continue to be the light of the world. The kingdom of God would be established.

In doing this Jesus would be doing what only God could do - save his chosen people. Jesus believed that God had given him a vocation to enact and embody the prophesied return of YHWH to Zion, to judge and to save. In place of the Temple that had been corrupted and which was going to be destroyed by the Romans, there would be Jesus and those who followed him. God was working in, through and as Jesus.

Reflections
Jesus bears the sin of the world, but this doesn't mean he takes our punishment for us. The sense seems to be more that he has solidarity with us. Because Israel suffered and would suffer, so the Messiah would suffer. And because Israel was not chosen for its own sake but for the sake of the world, so the Messiah's sufferings were not just for Israel but for the world. We all suffer and die, and Jesus has also suffered and died. His resurection means that this is not the end; because he lives, we also may live.

There is a vital link between the people of God and their Messiah - he is the focus of their destiny, and they share in his destiny. Jesus took on himself the destiny of Israel, including Israel's suffering and its doom, and by his ressurection Israel shares in his destiny so that death is transformed into life. Speaking of salvation in Jesus refers to this sharing of life - Jesus shares in our life and we share in his.

Evil is not overcome by evil. Violence is not defeated with more violence. Hate is not destroyed through hate. The way of God, of Jesus, is love and forgiveness. Even if this way leads us to our deaths, we will be vindicated even as Jesus was vindicated. If we give into evil by fighting evil with its own weapons, then we do not defeat evil but perpetuate it. Jesus death looked like defeat but it was victory, because he fulfilled the true vocation of the people of God and so established the kingdom of God.

To be the church, the people of God, the body of Christ, is to be joined with Jesus as the Christ. If we are his body, we share his mission to be the light of the world. We share in his life and the Holy Spirit through his resurection, but this means we share in the life of love, service and compassion to the world. We should not focus upon our own salvation, our own religious experience, our own spiritual gifts. We are to deny ourselves and be light to the world.

Groundwork of Christian Worship
White, Susan J.
Peterborough: Epworth Press
1997

Worship as an aspect of theology (p2-16)
1. Worship as service to God. We offer to God what we have already received from God, namely our lives, though the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving.

2. Worship as a mirror of heaven. Our worship reflects and participates in the worship of the saints and angels in heaven.

3. Worship as affirmation. Our worship inspires us and supports us in this life.

4. Worship as communion. Our worship expresses our fellowship with God.

5. Worship as proclamation. Our worship proclaims the gospel in remembering and retelling what God has done.

6. Worship as the arena of transcendence. Our worship is where God may unleash his power in unexpected ways.

The Word of God
Where the Word of God is read, preached and received it calls a Christian community together to worship. That community is the people of God gathered around God's Word. (p17)

Baptism
The need for baptism was taken for granted from the beginning (p80) and is rooted in Jewish practices. It was likened to circumsision, which emphasises that salvation is a corporate affair and a matter of being included in the people who are already being saved. Because of the shedding of blood circumsision was also associated with the blood of the sacrifices. Baptism also has roots in the many ritual washings that removed impurity and uncleanness, and in proselyte baptism which was associated with ideas of rebirth through the Flood. John the Baptist baptized people in repentance as a preparation for the coming of the Mesiah. From this Jewish matrix baptism derives a number of meanings:
a. Inclusion in the covenant community.
b. New birth.
c. Forgiveness of sins (after Wright, the renewal of the covenant - my comment)
d. Entry into the Messianic era.
e. Association with the blood of sacrifice.
f. Repentance.

All these meanings were summed up by the church when it speaks of baptism as incorporation into Christ as a member of the Body of Christ.

In the West baptism and confirmation became separated because, while baptism was administered in rural areas by local presbyters, the bishops in the cities reserved the right to confirm by laying on of hands. (p98-99)

From the Reformation onwards a number of changes develop regarding the understanding of baptism. Martin Luther regarded it as God's promise of salvation to the baptized (p99). During the 18th century the sacraments generally became pushed to the margins; baptism became a duty performed in obedience to Christ, it was not an effective sign and the Lord's Supper was not a dynamic encounter with Christ (p101). Pentacostalism in the 19th and 20th centuries separated water baptism from baptism in the Spirit.

Vatican II put forth the following understanding of baptism:
1. Baptism and confirmation are signs of conversion.
2. Conversion begins with baptism and ends with death.
3. Normative canditate for baptism is an adult.
4. Infant baptism is a 'benign abnormality'.
5. Catechesis, water baptism, laying on of hands, anointing with oil and communion are a unity.

The Lord's Supper
The Lord's Supper (LS) needs to be considered in it's original Jewish context as a ritual meal presided over by a rabbi in the context of the Passover celebrations (wether or not it was actually a Passover meal (p108)).

Jewish meals had a sacred character, where God is present in the nourishing and sustaining of life, and this is reflected in the prescriptions and prohibitions surrounding meals. Food, and the sharing of food, cemented relationships between the faithful and with God, (p105) pointing to the deeper reality of that relationship. Jesus' sharing of meals with 'sinners' and outcasts is therefore religiously significant (p106). An established pattern of thanksgiving at meals developed in which God was blessed for the gift of food, blessed for the Exodus and God's saving acts, and asked to renew those saving acts and send the Messiah. A meal was a kind of enacted prayer. (p108)

The Passover meal especially brought out the character of meals. First, it is about salvation and release from bondage. It's celebration made the Exodus not merely an event of the past but a present reality that has a claim on Jews today (107). The specific foods used pointed to various aspects of the relationship of God with Israel. It again also expressed the hope of God's future redemption and the coming of Messiah.

The LS brings together these elements of Jewish practice. It seems that originally it was a full meal ('love feast') with a separate bread and cup ritual. By the early to mid 2nd century the meal and the ritual were split (Ignatius, c112), and by the 4th century the love feast had died out. (p109-110).

It is unknown how frequently the LS was originally celebrated, possibly on the evening of Sundays. Possibly it was presided over by whoever hosted the meeting at their house, though in c112 Ignatius says that a bishop should preside. Documents from 100-300 say that the form of words used should be according to the president's ability, but 'within conventions'. The conventions seem to be:
1. Thanksgiving for creation and redemption.
2. Institution narrative.
3. Invocation of the Holy Spirit.
4. Declaration that bread and wine are offered as a sign of self-offering in union with Christ's own self-offering.
5. Prayer is in the triune name. (p110-112)
Christ is believed to be present in the LS, though where or how is not important. (p112)

By the late 3rd century the form of words became more fixed, Rome gaining particular authority for the texts. The theology of the LS begins to emphasise the sacrificial aspect and the presence of Christ comes to be localised in the elements, the bread and wine being more closely identified with the body and blood of Christ. (p112-113)

By the mid 10th century the idea had developed that ordinary people were unworthy to handle the body and blood of Christ which caused the laity to become reluctant to take communion. The idea that the LS was a representation of the atoning sacrifice, present in the bread and wine, became strong and the elements needed protection from theft. In the 11th century such was the power believed to be inherent in the mass that it was thought the world's salvation was virtually dependent upon its celebration. (p113). Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) developed the idea of transsubstantiation using Aristotlian ideas of accidents and substances.

Up to the Reformation the LS had become a spectacle in which the laity infrequently participated (and from 1415 the wine was denied to them). At the same time, because of the power it was believed to possess, celebrations increased with people paying 'mass stipends' for various benefits. Despite lack of lay particpation an increase in biblical literacy among the laity heightened interest in the LS.

In The Babylonian Captivity of the Church (1520) Martin Luther pointed to 3 walls that had been wrongly erected around the LS:
1. The denial of wine to the laity.
2. The doctrine of transubstantiation.
3. The doctrine that the LS was an atoning sacrifice.

He argued that the presence of Christ in the elements was like the presence of fire in heated iron, in which every part is both fire and iron: the body and blood of Christ are wholly present in the bread and wine, which nevertheless remains bread and wine. Receiving wine was the right of all. The LS is an event where the whole community experiences the Risen Christ in and through consumption of the bread and wine. (p115-116)

The Swiss Reformers (Ulrich Zwingli, Martin Bucer, John Oecolampadius) moved away from the doctrine of the 'real presence' to a memorialist view. John Calvin held a view between Luther and the Swiss: Christ is truly received by those partaking of the LS, but he is received spiritually. Despite the differences all the reformers agreed on certain things:
a) reception in both kinds.
b) the reading of the Word at every celebration
c) that the LS was a 'sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving'
d) that the LS should be celebrated in the vernacular.

The reformation in the British Isles and Scandinavia adopted an ambiguous theology in their liturgy, as demonstrated in Cranmer's Book of Common Prayer of 1549 and 1552. They allowed for those who believed in the 'real presence' as well as those who did not.

In the 17th century the Puritans sought to further purge the LS. The communion table was not an altar (which implied a sacrifice), there was no kneeling or other possible adoration of the bread and wine, no liturgical vestments, no making of the sign of the cross, and the president was not to be called a priest. The Puritans carried these sentiments to America. (p118)

In the 18th century an Enlightenment rationalism promoted the dominance of scriptural study and preaching in protestant services, and the subordination of the LS. The LS was seen as a calling to mind of the virtues of Christ which was done in obedience to Christ's command. The idea that God would work through material elements was abandoned, a view still maintained in many churches today (e.g. Brethren churches). Against this movement Methodism reintroduced sacrificial language about the LS, frequent communion, and the belief that the power of God was present in the material elements. This tended to be abandoned in American methodism however. (p119)

In the 19th century the Protestant Romantic movement sought to revive the pattern of the Middle Ages, which set the stage for modern liturgical scholarship. However, it also tended towards the privatization of religious experience and excessive sentimentality. Working in the opposite direction the Evangelical Revival stressed personal commitment as vital for salvation over external practice, so that preaching dominated public worship and the LS was again pushed to the margins. In addition the Temperance movement expressed concern over the use of wine in worship. (p119-120)

In the 20th century the Liturgical Movement has had a major influence on the main denominations. Roman Catholicism has reaffirmed the centrality of the LS to worship as an event that proclaims and makes present the redeeming work of God. Vatican II revised the liturgy and allowed the use of the vernacular, which in turn influenced Protestant liturgy. Ecumenical discussions have also forged agreement on a number of issues. There has been a restoration of the recitation of God's whole work in creation and salvation, the invocation of the Holy Spirit, and the eschatological element of the LS as a foretaste of the heavenly banquet. (p121-122).

The World Council of Churches document Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry established agreement on several aspects of the LS.
1. It is a thanksgiving.
2. It is an anamnesis or memorial.
3. It is the arena for the Spirit's action.
4. It is communion.
5. It is the Kingdom meal.
(p124)