Sunday Scripture: Easter Sunday
Welcome to this, the thirty-sixth of my reflections on the theology of the Sunday readings at Mass.
Thank you for taking the time to read my blog. I sincerely hope that this reflection will inspire you. You might find that it answers a few questions you may have, but most of all I hope that it will show you how fantastic Sacred Scripture is and perhaps enable you to share some of my love and passion for the Bible as you begin to comprehend how layered and multi-faceted it is, and what a carefully considered part of the Mass the readings are.
If you want to know how these posts came about, please read my first post in this series here.
If you want to know how these posts came about, please read my first post in this series here.
I would like to think this regular blog would be a great help to anyone who reads at Mass, to enable them to foster a deeper understanding of the message they are trying to impart to the congregation.
There are several different ways to read this post. I would suggest the first thing to do is to look at the relevant readings. You might then want to look at the specific commentary for a particular reading. I post the same summary of the featured Biblical books each week, but at the end, under the subheading this week, you will usually find some commentary specific to each week. At the end I post a passage which attempts to draw all the readings together and understand the message.
My reflections are not definitive, but based on my study and perhaps authenticated by careful reference to the Biblical Commentaries and books I list at the bottom each week.
This Sunday the theme for the readings might be summed up as:
This Sunday the theme for the readings might be summed up as:
Christ is Risen, He Saw and He Believed.
 |
| Women at the empty tomb, by Fra Angelico, 1437-1446. |
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν,
θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας,
καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι
ζωὴν χαρισάμενος.
Christ is risen from the dead,
Trampling down death by death,
And upon those in the tombs
Bestowing life!
This week's readings are:
- First Reading: Acts of the Apostle 10:34a, 37—43.
- Psalm 117:1—2, 16—17, 22—23; Response: v. 24.
- Second Reading: Colossians 3:1—4.
- Gospel: John 20:1—9.
First, a short preliminary survey of each of the books.
I will post the same, or similar prelims week on week, for each book as we encounter them, although I may add a little detail specific to each week's readings.
The Acts of the Apostles is the second book in a two-volume work comprising of the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles. Acts begins with the words “In my earlier work Theophilus, I dealt with everything Jesus had done and taught from the beginning, until the day he gave his instructions to the apostles he had chosen through the Holy Spirit, and was taken up to heaven” (Acts 1:1) which implies that it is a continuation of the Gospel. Brown notes in An Introduction to the New Testament that the unity of the two volumes is “maintained by the overwhelming majority of scholars, based on the continuity of style, thought and plan.” (p.225).
The title in Greek is Acts of Apostles and it falls into a genre of Hellenistic writing called Praxeis, that is “deeds”, which often recounted histories of great men like Hannibal or Alexander. It is broadly agreed that both works come from the same author, although (like the Gospels) Acts is anonymous.
As far as external evidence for the author, no one ascribes any other author than the beloved physician and companion of Paul called Luke (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:11; Philemon 24). Internal evidence is not particularly clear on the matter either. It has been suggested that medical language used in the text confirms that it was written by a physician, but the author uses some words that are found in Greek doctor’s books and has this in common with other, non-medical books. There are also several passages which contain the narrative written in the first person plural (commonly referred to as the “we” passages, These are: 16:10—(14)—17; 20:5-8, 13-15; 21:1-8, 11, 12, 14-18; 27:1-8, 15, 16, 18, 20, 27, 29, 37; 28:1,2,3,7,10-16.). The evidence of ancient literary practice in general would lead to a conclusion that the author was thus an eyewitness to the events he is writing about. However, Barrett suggests that it is unlikely that Luke wrote the entire work himself, as there are various discrepancies, most notably Luke’s account of the Council in Acts 15:
Would one who was on intimate terms with Paul have believed that he approved of the Decree promulgated in 15:29 and delivered it to the Gentile churches for them to observe (16:4)? In his extant epistles Paul never mentions the Decree and gives advice which seems to contradict it. —Barret, C. K., Acts a Shorter Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2002), p. xxiv.
This makes it difficult to ascribe the whole work to a single author who was on close terms with Paul. An alternative hypothesis could be that such a person—who could well have been the physician Luke—provided the material turned into Acts by the author.
There are other possibilities however; Richard Bauckham, in his work Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, looks at the narrative of the Scriptures and asks what relevance some elements of detail have in achieving any purported theological goals. Extrapolating this theory and applying it to Acts, it seems particularly pertinent when one considers the physicians language and details such as we see in Acts 21. Even Barrett comments on the extraordinary level of detail used by the author here, who notes a departure from the leeward side of the island and a straight course to Cos which `’…implies a north-east wind”. (Barrett, q.v. p.323)
Objectively, it would not seem unreasonable to ask what the point of including such details are if the point of Acts is as contrived and manufactured as some suggest? It seems much more reasonable to assert that these details are the observations of one who was present and experiencing these events first hand. We can also glean from the narrative’s abrupt end, some sense of completion—the story brought up to date. Luke was writing at the time to which the verses refer; he wrote no more, because nothing more had happened.
This evidence takes on further weight when considered in the context of certain historical omissions. The fact that Luke does not mention the Great Fire of Rome and the savage persecution of Christians that followed in 64 A.D. There is no mention of Peter & Paul’s martyrdom in the mid 60’s and no reference to the military conquest of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D. The fact that Luke is silent on these matters speaks volumes, especially considering the stress in Luke’s work of the relationship between Christianity and Imperial Rome.
The text itself comes to us from a large number of Greek MSS of various ages, written at different times in Christian history; from various ancient versions; as well as from quotations made by ancient writers. Brown dates the work around 85 A.D., give or take five to ten years. According to Barrett, external evidence would dictate a date not much earlier than 150 A.D. given that Acts is the second volume of a work that included details taken from Mark’s Gospel, commonly dated at around 70 A.D.
Barrett does concede however, internal evidence yields a much earlier date. Whatever the answers to these questions, Acts is written in a bright and interesting style, in the manner of a popular historian, descriptively and with a well-formed narrative. The work denotes education and the author commands a thorough knowledge of Greek and utilises various styles; a business-like style, an ‘OT’ style, and a finer style used for special occasions and important characters.
Investigating the Purpose of Acts
For Raymond Brown, Lucan writing is unique in that more than any other book of the New Testament, the story is intrinsic to the theology. As we have already noted, the author of Luke-Acts was a skilled writer and has been considered a theologian, but also a consummate literary artist with a mind that is tuned to the aesthetic. His intentions are declared unambiguously in Luke 1:1-4:In as much as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theoph’ilus, that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed. (Luke 1:1-4)
Acts contains a similar, if shorter dedication (Acts 1:1-5) that links his efforts in the first volume with those in this volume. In other words, he has gone to the same painstaking lengths to separate fact from fiction in preserving the historical memory of the early Christians. This is a historical work, prefaced in the manner of contemporary historical works. Luke offers an evangelistic presentation of Jesus’ life and mission (in the Gospel of Luke), and here in Acts, this work continues. Luke tells us how Jesus the LORD is still with us; His Holy Spirit has communicated His commandment to the Apostles “whom He had chosen” (Acts 1:2). This is important. Acts is the story of the expansion of the Church under the impulse of the Holy Spirit and has been described as the Gospel of the Spirit. Luke expresses this in 1:8, which sums up the plan of the book: the story of the choice of the disciples by the divine authority of the Holy Spirit, and their inspiration and animation to spread the Gospel message to the ends of the earth.
There has been some speculation that Luke wrote from secular motivation. His evident skill perhaps belies his enjoyment in telling a good story and perhaps Luke wrote for pleasure, with some measure of fraternity with his Christian contemporaries. This theory blatantly ignores a plethora of theological considerations, not least the exhortative and inspirational speeches of the Apostles, which demonstrate a deep understanding of the Old Testament, linking them to Luke 24 and the account of Jesus explaining Scripture to His Apostles on the road to Emmaus. Further, the book repeatedly asserts that the crucified Jesus has been raised by God from the dead; a statement of fact that cannot be accepted without immense spiritual ramifications. Considering the consummate skill of the author in imitating a wide range of postclassical literary conventions, there has been a plethora of theories which generalise recurrent partial comparisons to define the genre of Acts as a whole. The historical-critical method of biblical exegesis provides us with an essential starting point when considering these theories. The interplay of theology and history was unfolded in the Vatican II document Dei Verbum, and then further by two documents of the Pontifical Biblical Commission: The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (Vatican City, 1993) and The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible (Vatican City, 2001). The methodology which matured in the course of debates among exegetes in the production of these documents has led to key understandings regarding the essentially historical nature of Sacred Scripture; “For it is the very essence of biblical faith to be about real events.” ( Ratzinger, J., Jesus of Nazareth (London: Bloomsbury, 2007), p. xv.).
There has been some speculation that Luke wrote from secular motivation. His evident skill perhaps belies his enjoyment in telling a good story and perhaps Luke wrote for pleasure, with some measure of fraternity with his Christian contemporaries. This theory blatantly ignores a plethora of theological considerations, not least the exhortative and inspirational speeches of the Apostles, which demonstrate a deep understanding of the Old Testament, linking them to Luke 24 and the account of Jesus explaining Scripture to His Apostles on the road to Emmaus. Further, the book repeatedly asserts that the crucified Jesus has been raised by God from the dead; a statement of fact that cannot be accepted without immense spiritual ramifications. Considering the consummate skill of the author in imitating a wide range of postclassical literary conventions, there has been a plethora of theories which generalise recurrent partial comparisons to define the genre of Acts as a whole. The historical-critical method of biblical exegesis provides us with an essential starting point when considering these theories. The interplay of theology and history was unfolded in the Vatican II document Dei Verbum, and then further by two documents of the Pontifical Biblical Commission: The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (Vatican City, 1993) and The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible (Vatican City, 2001). The methodology which matured in the course of debates among exegetes in the production of these documents has led to key understandings regarding the essentially historical nature of Sacred Scripture; “For it is the very essence of biblical faith to be about real events.” ( Ratzinger, J., Jesus of Nazareth (London: Bloomsbury, 2007), p. xv.).
This is an important historical assertion made by Pope Benedict XVI because it addresses, and dismisses the Bultmanian dichotomy that has haunted exegesis over recent decades; that idea of the historical fact as “an interchangeable symbolic cipher for biblical faith.” (Ibid). Acts then, as asserted by Dillon in the NJBC, constitutes a history. Luke and Acts together constitute a historical and literary unity.
History, Apologia, Theology?
As we have seen, scholars attempting to fit Luke-Acts into specific modern literary genres find themselves in some difficulties. Certainly, from a modern perspective, Acts’ lack of historical reliability has been questioned. It is asserted that Luke’s historical accuracy is comprised by his theological agenda, which led him to shape and even create material. However, is the expectation that the author of Acts should have accurately remembered every word, every deed, as if he had recorded it all on video a realistic one? When one compares Luke-Acts to contemporary works, one can see how it is demonstrably within the limits of what was considered reliable by comparative standards; in short, the author of Luke-Acts is every bit as trustworthy as other historians of his time.J. B. Chance makes a compelling argument for this by comparing the author of Luke-Acts to Lucian’s How to Write History. (cf. Chance, J.B., Acts (Georgia: Smyth & Helwyn Publishing, 2007), p. 16.). Here Chance demonstrates how the evangelist compares favourably with other authors of the Hellenistic tradition as exemplified by Herodotus and Thucydides. Luke's well-written prose also adds an air of seriousness of intent to his writing and lends a scholarly polish, which adds to its air of authenticity. In studying such authors, it is well known and accepted that the speeches recorded were not verbatim representations of what was said, but shaped by the author, retaining as closely as possible the overall message of the speech. The evangelist’s writing, therefore, would seem to be typical of ancient Hellenistic historiography which used the genre of general history, adapting it as appropriate in order that it might provide a suitable literary vehicle for depicting the origins and development of Christianity. It seems obvious then, that Luke wrote in history, in order that Theophilus might “know the truth” (Luke 1:4). Still, the construction of his work fails to fit into the merely historical, if it was an attempt at a history, it would be a poor one that would contradict the author’s evident acumen.
Perhaps, if the focus of Acts is not history, it has been suggested that it is a Christian apologia which was aimed at vindicating Paul’s memory against attacks by Jewish detractors. Alternatively he could have been attempting to soften the stance of Roman officialdom to Christianity, or even evangelise the Roman intelligentsia. The evidence for Acts as an apologia is substantiated by tracing a vein of political and religious arguing through the whole text. These strands of polemic are seen by Bruce as being prototypical of second century apologia.
Defenses against Judaism are conveyed in the reports of Paul’s stance. His belief in Christ does not nullify his loyal and devout Judaism but rather accentuates the deepest hopeful aspirations of all Israel (Acts 23:6; 24:15; 26:7 f; 28:20). In Paul’s speech at the Areopagus (Acts 17:22-31) we find an affirmation of Christian truth over Pagan ignorance. The third apologetic strand can be witnessed in the proclamations of Christian innocence voiced by Roman officials throughout his work. Jesus’ triple acquittal by Pilate (Luke 23:4, 14, 22), episodes at Corinth, Thessalonica, Ephesus and Philippi, where Roman authorities attest to Christianity’s innocence of any offense against Roman law, also Paul’s acquittal by Felix, Festus and Agrippa (Acts 24:22-23; 25:25; 26:30-32). All these things are self evident in the text, but considering Brown’s comment regarding readership (q.v.) and adding to Bruce’s opinion that of Maddox who asserts that, rather than an apologia, Acts is “a book dedicated to Christian self-understanding” (NJBC 44:5) and the opinion of Johnson that Acts is in fact a theodicy, we can begin to see that Luke’s purpose is broader than any one definition and rather sets out to “defend God’s activity in the world”. (Johnson, L. T., The Acts of the Apostles (Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1992), p. 8). For Johnson, the historical verisimilitude in Acts is not as impressive as the very way it is utilised by the author in order to shape his theological vision. The text demonstrates the way in which God’s plan of salvation was actualised in the person of Jesus Christ. This had become necessary because of the diaspora of Christian beliefs away from just Jews and toward the Gentiles. The question Luke addresses is how Gentiles can legitimately claim the promises made by God to Israel as their own inheritance. How could Gentiles accept this story of Judaism which flowed from Jewish belief, and yet was rejected by many Jews?
This led to the formulation of an essential question, can God be trusted to keep His promises? Luke then sets out to demonstrate God’s fidelity, poignantly alluding to Israel’s rejection of God’s offer of salvation through parables like that of the good father in Luke 15:28-31. In Acts, he uses the principle argument of the intersection which the Incarnation constitutes to demonstrate how salvation history continues through this event and the birth of the Church in order to vindicate the expansion of Christianity to the Gentiles as the legitimate fulfillment of the mission of Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit.
Luke-Acts, demonstrates that the life, and especially the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and His sending of the Holy Spirit impacted so powerfully on the world that it brought forth a powerful response;
...the Spirit-guided expression of the early Christian community’s experience of the in- breaking of absolute love into the world in the event of Jesus Christ (Lk 24: 13-35; Jn 20:31). —Norris, T. J., A Fractured Relationship (Dublin: Veritas, 2007), p. 136.It is this continuity of salvation history which is understood with increasing consensus as the principle argument of Luke-Acts.
Psalms is the Bible's manual of inspired song and prayer. The collection of 150 Psalms represents the culmination of a long tradition that extends across almost the full span of the history of ancient Israel, from the Exodus (c. 1280 B.C.) until the last centuries of the Old Testament era (c. 200 B.C.). In Hebrew the canon of the Bible is called the TNK or Tanakh, which consists of Torah (teaching), Nevi'im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (writings)—thus TaNaKh. Psalms makes up the first of the writings in the Hebrew text. One of the most powerful things we know about the Psalms is that this is how Jesus Himself prayed.
This week: The psalm is an individual song of thanksgiving and calls on all Israel to praise God. Verse 22. "The stone which the builders rejected has become the corner stone" is likely a proverb which has been worked into the psalm. It has great significance for the early Church and helped us to understand the role Jesus' rejection and execution by His own people played in soteriology. Jesus quotes this in Mt 21:42 where Jesus states that He (stone) is commissioned by God (the Lord's doing), despite His rejection by Jerusalem (the builders). Scripture thus foresees that the Messiah will paradoxically meet opposition from the leaders of His own people; conversely, the faithful see in the work of Jesus God's marvellous deeds.
This week: The psalm is an individual song of thanksgiving and calls on all Israel to praise God. Verse 22. "The stone which the builders rejected has become the corner stone" is likely a proverb which has been worked into the psalm. It has great significance for the early Church and helped us to understand the role Jesus' rejection and execution by His own people played in soteriology. Jesus quotes this in Mt 21:42 where Jesus states that He (stone) is commissioned by God (the Lord's doing), despite His rejection by Jerusalem (the builders). Scripture thus foresees that the Messiah will paradoxically meet opposition from the leaders of His own people; conversely, the faithful see in the work of Jesus God's marvellous deeds.
"Often, too, the Church is called the building of God. The Lord compared himself to the stone which the builders rejected, but which was made into the corner-stone. On this foundation the Church is built by the apostles and from it the Church receives solidity and unity. This edifice has many names to describe it: the house of God in which his family dwells; the household of God in the Spirit; the dwelling-place of God among men; and, especially, the holy temple. This temple, symbolized in places of worship built out of stone, is praised by the Fathers and, not without reason, is compared in the liturgy to the Holy City, the New Jerusalem. As living stones we here on earth are built into it. It is this holy city that is seen by John as it comes down out of heaven from God when the world is made anew, prepared like a bride adorned for her husband. (CCC 756)
The Letter to The Colossians, addresses a unique situation in the early Church and its theology is equally unique, concerned with stressing two main themes against errors reported about the Church in Colossae (2:4, 8, 16, 18-22). Paul stresses the supremacy of Christ and the completeness of Christians in Christ. One of the main areas of study with regard to this epistle has been the attempt to identify the opponents who were misleading the community in Colossae. According to the epistle itself, the false teaching is a philosophy and an empty receipt (2:8), a human tradition (2:8); it concerns the elemental spirits of the universe (2:8) and angels (2:18); it demands the observance of food regulations and festivals, new moons, and sabbath (2:14, 16, 20, 21); and it encourages ascetic practices. Since the opponents are charged with "not holding fast to the head," the error must have arisen within the believing community. Jewish and Hellenic influences seem to be interwoven in what can be inferred of the error. A complex syncretism that incorporates features of Judaism, Paganism, Christianity, magic, astrology, and mystery religions forms the cultural background of the letter and consequently it may be impossible to identify the opponents in Colossae with any particular group.
This week: We are reminded that the focus of our thoughts must be lifted above the concerns of the world and towards Christ enthroned in heaven, where believers are seated with Him through the grace of Baptism. At the Second Coming Jesus return will initiate the general resurrection of the dead, when the bodies of the righteous will radiate the glory of the Lord.
The Gospel According to St. John: I have written a detailed exposition on the Gospel of St. John which you can read here.
This week: On the first day of the Jewish week, that is, Sunday, Mary Mag'dalene, who was delivered of demonic possession (Luke 8:2) and whose love of Jesus carried her all the way to the Cross (19:25; CCC 641) finds the stone has been rolled away from the tomb. The empty tomb is the "critical minimum"—the "rock bottom" foundation for a theological history of Jesus and the indisputable fact of Easter morning. Even the Roman soldiers who guarded the site attest to it (Mt 28:11-15). The disappearance of Jesus is the first indication that He has risen as He said (Mt 20:17-19). This is confirmed by several appearances throughout the next forty days.
John and Peter race to the tomb, John defers to Peter, who has received the honour of preeminence from Jesus (Mt 16:16-19). When John enters he "saw and believed" (20:8) which demonstrates that the discovery of the empty tomb doe not, does not lead to faith by itself, except in the beloved disciple, whose deep love for Jesus makes him perceptive. For the women the empty tomb becomes part of the good news only when it is explained by the angelic message of the resurrection, for the rest of the disciples, only the appearances of the risen One dissipates the doubt. Allegorically, the tomb represents the Sacred Scriptures, Peter is faith, which is the first thing we bring to its pages, and John is understanding which afterwards enters and penetrates their meaning more deeply (See John Scotus Erigena, Hom. in Prol. John). Morally, Peter and John represent the active and contemplative missions of the Church, so that even when contemplatives are the first to arrive at a deeper understanding of the faith, deference is given to the hierarchical leadership, who later defines and promulgates their authentic insights.
The detail of the linen cloths provides corroborating evidence of the Resurrection. No thief would have taken the time to unwrap Jesus' corpse and fold his burial cloths neatly in the tomb.
John and Peter race to the tomb, John defers to Peter, who has received the honour of preeminence from Jesus (Mt 16:16-19). When John enters he "saw and believed" (20:8) which demonstrates that the discovery of the empty tomb doe not, does not lead to faith by itself, except in the beloved disciple, whose deep love for Jesus makes him perceptive. For the women the empty tomb becomes part of the good news only when it is explained by the angelic message of the resurrection, for the rest of the disciples, only the appearances of the risen One dissipates the doubt. Allegorically, the tomb represents the Sacred Scriptures, Peter is faith, which is the first thing we bring to its pages, and John is understanding which afterwards enters and penetrates their meaning more deeply (See John Scotus Erigena, Hom. in Prol. John). Morally, Peter and John represent the active and contemplative missions of the Church, so that even when contemplatives are the first to arrive at a deeper understanding of the faith, deference is given to the hierarchical leadership, who later defines and promulgates their authentic insights.
The detail of the linen cloths provides corroborating evidence of the Resurrection. No thief would have taken the time to unwrap Jesus' corpse and fold his burial cloths neatly in the tomb.
Drawing them all together...
Today's readings are replete with witness: "He saw and he believed" (Jn 20:8). Peter and John go to the tomb on the testimony of Mary Mag'dalene and do not simply see, but also believe—not just because of the empty tomb, but because of a powerful sense that something has decisively changed; the world is different, the future is charged with an overwhelming sense of rapture and mysterious expectation based on this apostolic experience. Later, St. Peter addressed the household of Cornelius and testified at length: there are four allusions to witness, and his conviction establishes an apostolic tradition of which we are a part: "Now I, and those with me, can witness..."; "it is to Him that all the prophets bear witness..." They witness to Jesus who went about doing good and curing all who had fallen into the power of the devil. This is a living continuity of memory which exists within the Church and all its members are a part of. The importance and essence of this continuity is wonderfully illustrated by such examples as a letter from Ireneaus, Bishop of Lyon in France to Florinus with whom he was a student at Smyrna in Asia Minor. In this letter, Irenaeus reminisces how he and Florinus attended lectures by Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who died in approximately 155 AD. Polycarp used to tell them stories about 'John, the disciple of the Lord', whom he had known personally many years before. Ireneaus, then, in France shortly before 200 AD was able to recall at only one remove, a man who had known Jesus intimately. When the Bishop of Lyon gathered his congregation, he was not thinking of something he had discovered (where Kipling's Tomlinson found his God) 'in a printed book', but rather of what he had been told by his old teacher, whose friend had been there and knew.
This letter gives an example of the corporate memory of faith, of Apostolic Tradition handed down from generation to generation. Our knowledge about the origins of the church and about its Founder, rest on this living tradition, which had its beginnings in the actual memories of those who had witnessed the events and had personal dealings with the principle Actor in them and are deposited for safe keeping with the Church that he founded. This witness matters because we will have our sins forgiven through His name. No matter what the mess of the horror, He has opened a way of transformation and pardon.
Today's readings are replete with witness: "He saw and he believed" (Jn 20:8). Peter and John go to the tomb on the testimony of Mary Mag'dalene and do not simply see, but also believe—not just because of the empty tomb, but because of a powerful sense that something has decisively changed; the world is different, the future is charged with an overwhelming sense of rapture and mysterious expectation based on this apostolic experience. Later, St. Peter addressed the household of Cornelius and testified at length: there are four allusions to witness, and his conviction establishes an apostolic tradition of which we are a part: "Now I, and those with me, can witness..."; "it is to Him that all the prophets bear witness..." They witness to Jesus who went about doing good and curing all who had fallen into the power of the devil. This is a living continuity of memory which exists within the Church and all its members are a part of. The importance and essence of this continuity is wonderfully illustrated by such examples as a letter from Ireneaus, Bishop of Lyon in France to Florinus with whom he was a student at Smyrna in Asia Minor. In this letter, Irenaeus reminisces how he and Florinus attended lectures by Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who died in approximately 155 AD. Polycarp used to tell them stories about 'John, the disciple of the Lord', whom he had known personally many years before. Ireneaus, then, in France shortly before 200 AD was able to recall at only one remove, a man who had known Jesus intimately. When the Bishop of Lyon gathered his congregation, he was not thinking of something he had discovered (where Kipling's Tomlinson found his God) 'in a printed book', but rather of what he had been told by his old teacher, whose friend had been there and knew.
This letter gives an example of the corporate memory of faith, of Apostolic Tradition handed down from generation to generation. Our knowledge about the origins of the church and about its Founder, rest on this living tradition, which had its beginnings in the actual memories of those who had witnessed the events and had personal dealings with the principle Actor in them and are deposited for safe keeping with the Church that he founded. This witness matters because we will have our sins forgiven through His name. No matter what the mess of the horror, He has opened a way of transformation and pardon.
St. Paul, after his Damscus Road experience, carried the same message in his actions, his preaching and his writing. Not only are we forgiven, but we "have been brought back to true life with Christ," he tells the Colossians. Christ not only gives us the promise of new life, He is our new life! The perspective of the future can only be onwards and upwards, open to rapture and eternity. That is why he tells us to be transformed in the hope of heaven. This radically alters our place in, and perception of, the present, because even our understanding of the past has been changed forever. We have reason for joy and thanksgiving, as the ancient Psalmist revealed prophetically: "Give thanks to the Lord for He is good, for His love has no end." All past sorrow and human folly is redeemed: "The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone," through God's miraculous power and love: "This is the work of the Lord, a marvel in our eyes." This gives us a path into the future, the path of resurrection—"I shall not die; I shall live and recount His deeds"—new power in His name.
 |
| Face of Jesus from the Shroud of Turin |
Bibliography:
Baker, K., SJ, Inside the Bible, San Francisco: Ignatius, 1998.
Barret, C. K., Acts a Shorter Commentary, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2002.
Boadt, L., Reading the Old Testament, New York: Paulist Press, 1984.
Brown, R. E., An Introduction to the New Testament, New York, Doubleday, 1997.
Brown, R. et al (Ed) The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, (London: Chapman, 2000).
Catechism of the Catholic Church, New York: Doubleday, 1995.
Dodd, C.H., The Founder of Christianity, (London: Collins, 1978).
Duggan, M., The Consuming Fire, (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1991).
Fuller, R.C., Johnstone, L., Kearns, C., A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, (London: Nelson, 1969).
Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament, Second Edition RSV, (San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 2001).
Kereszty, R., O. Cist., Jesus Christ—Fundamentals of Christology (New York: Alba, 2010).
Kreeft, P., You Can Understand The Bible, (San Francisco, Ignatius, 2005).
Letellier, R., Sunday & Feastday Sermons Cycles A, B, and C, (New York: St. Pauls, 2011).
Magnificat Monthly Vol. 3, No. 5/ March 2013.
McKenzie, J.L., Dictionary of the Bible, (New York, Touchstone, 1995).
Ratzinger, J., Introduction to Christianity, (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2004).
Ratzinger, J., Jesus of Nazareth, (Bloomsbury, London, 2007).
Comments
Post a Comment