Third Place Thoughts

Keys are important.  I received a new key today.  The back door at the church was upgraded and that means that I get another key on my already packed keyring.  Make that my "work-keyring".  A couple of days ago, I also picked up a new key at home.  There, it was just a matter of replacing a worn out doorknob--but it has yet to make it onto a key ring.  Regardless of why I have these new additions, their presence has made me ponder what I carry around with me on a daily basis.

On one key-ring I have car keys for two cars, a bike-lock key that has gone unused for the past three years, electronic key fobs for Emme's preschool and for the neighborhood pool, a key to the "Preschool Board Suggestion Box", those little scannable fobs for everything from the athletic club to the library to the grocery store, a Texas EX life-member keyring, and a key for the lockable desk drawer that I keep unlocked.  I do not have a house key on the ring.  We have had some work going on at the house for the past couple of weeks, so my key has remained under the welcome mat while our handyman hangs out at our home.

On the other set, it is all work related keys... fourteen of them to be precise.  They make their home on a labyrinth keyring that I bought for Leigh, about 10 years ago.  She never used it, so I commandeered it.  There are keys for outer church doors, inner church doors, sound systems, AC systems, etc.  In any given week, I will only use about three of these... but It is always nice to know that the other are there if I need them.  A few weeks ago, I left home without this keyring, for the Thanksgiving Eve service.  I felt naked and dependent on others.


 
Usually, because these make up such a heavy load to carry around, one ring or the other will hang out in a desk drawer until needed.  At the athletic club, I leave my keys on a board at the front desk.  There is nothing worse than running on a treadmill to the sound of Jingle-Keys. 

Perhaps what really got me thinking about keys was the AA group that meets at the church.  They do not have keys, and have to be let into the building.  We have the system worked out pretty well, but still I worry that they will be locked-out at some point because everyone has finished their work and gone home early.  They have recently transitioned to our place, from another hosting church that trusted them with keys.  We have not established that type of relationship yet, even though we leave and allow them to lock up--pulling the door closed behind them.

I remember the first time that I was given a key to the church.  I was probably twelve.  My mom had a part time cleaning job at the church we attended and I would often go help.  I remember that there was one week that she was sick, and I volunteered to go do the vacuuming-- and there were comments on that Sunday about the dirty sanctuary.  I had not done a quality job, and it showed.  Even so, I got to keep the key.  It shared a ring with my house key and the key to the Scout hut.

That was a simpler time.  Home life was not ideal, but the house in which we lived was definitely a home.  School and Scouts were my work.  I could ride my bike to either of those locations and lock it up with a coiled cable and a combination lock.  Church was my third place...maybe church, the video arcade, and the pizza place. And then there were the streets and the backyards of my neighborhood-- that is were we could usually be found, most likely with friends.

I miss those "Third Places".  Today at lunch, I was greeted by name at my favorite lunch spot, The Red Orchid.  It has become one of my regular haunts.  I go there so often that I feel like I should send a Christmas card to the staff that always takes such good care of me.  The athletic club has become another one of my regular brick-and-mortar sites.  I am there with regularity.

So, just as I was just thinking about healthy boundaries between work, home, and these other public spots when I ran across this blog by Ed Stetzer.  Then there was this National Geographic article on cities. These have made me think of how we use public space (both effectively and ineffectively) .  And then there is Twitter!  It is certainly a cyber-space that has great potential in building community.  I think it should be considered a "third place" that rivals even the Roman Forum.  It is that place that I go with regularity.  I am part of that community... even though I am not one who does a lot of talking.  I do a lot of listening.  I keep an eye open for more effective fulcrums.  It is truly a new medium, largely because of its creative users. 

All that being said, I believe that I haven't been using the right keys recently, to access the proverbial backyard.  I am still riding around in the street.  I need to do some internal organization... and reengage my creative connective.  I'm not sure how to do it.  It is an adaptive problem, not a technical one.  So this is the beginning! (I hope it gets better.)

Me:
https://twitter.com/schaefers
https://twitter.com/presbyink
https://twitter.com/scotchpresbyter

In my short term memory:
https://twitter.com/#!/schaefers/apts
http://beingrkp.com/
http://timblodgett.tumblr.com/
http://christiancentury.org/blogs/archive/2011-12/perspectives-young-clergy-crisis#comment-15480
http://lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu/texts.php?id=55#gospel_reading

Praying the Psalms

Psalm 25:1-10
25:1 To you, O LORD, I lift up my soul.

25:2 O my God, in you I trust; do not let me be put to shame; do not let my enemies exult over me.

25:3 Do not let those who wait for you be put to shame; let them be ashamed who are wantonly treacherous.

25:4 Make me to know your ways, O LORD; teach me your paths.

25:5 Lead me in your truth, and teach me, for you are the God of my salvation; for you I wait all day long.

25:6 Be mindful of your mercy, O LORD, and of your steadfast love, for they have been from of old.

25:7 Do not remember the sins of my youth or my transgressions; according to your steadfast love remember me, for your goodness' sake, O LORD!

25:8 Good and upright is the LORD; therefore he instructs sinners in the way.

25:9 He leads the humble in what is right, and teaches the humble his way.

25:10 All the paths of the LORD are steadfast love and faithfulness, for those who keep his covenant and his decrees.

Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday

8:30 service
Sunday School
11:00 service
hospital visit
Staff meeting
set up office
set up computer, printer, etc
Wedding run-through (for this Sat.)
Paperwork
called Board of Pensions
Moved furniture
Tried to sell former AP's desk on Craigslist (the staff and congregation actually hold bad feelings towards it)
Hospital visit
Paperwork
Run through directory, updating, back-stories
To hospital for ID badge (took hours)
Hospital visit
paperwork
Installation planning
Nursing Home visit
Set up tables for Wednesday night supper
Wednesday night supper
-home
Tomorrow... day off

Update

I am a pastor in Charleston, SC!

Forgive me for not posting for a while... been busy.

There, and back again...

Well... it's all official. Over the past month and a half I have accepted a position as Associate Pastor of Westminster Presbyterian Church in Charleston, South Carolina... met with the Charleston Atlantic Presbytery's committee on ministry, been voted on by the congregation, been examined and approved on the floor of presbytery, put a contract down on a house, and set an ordination date (Pentecost). I'm tired... and excited. This weekend's trip to Charleston was a little crazy... I left Stan's funeral and went straight to the airport. I arrived in Charleston at 11:00 pm and was in bed by 11:45. Then, up at 5:00... at the church by 6:00 for a two hour car ride to Hilton Head. I was supposed to be examined before lunch but things went long. Back in the car by 3:00... to Charleston by 5:30, dinner with my head of staff at 7:00, in bed by 10:00. Up at 4:00 (that is 3:00 Texas time) and at the airport by 5:00. Finally home by noon. Nap time.

You know... the quick (dance, dance, dance) & the dead

It being transfiguration Sunday, I wonder if Stan's black guayabera is now a dazzling white.

The following is offered in memory of Stanley Robertson Hall:

The Eucharist as Sacrifice

The language of sacrifice has been used through the centuries in an attempt to express a truth at the heart of Eucharistic practice. Even today, language used in the rite brings forth images of offering, sacrifice, atonement, and giving—but surely, these words mean something markedly different to individuals in the twenty-first century than they would have to early Christians. Not only have there been changes in language, over the years, but there have also been tremendous changes in social order as well as liturgical practice. Even through ages of change, there remains a sense of sacrificial language at the core of this liturgical event. Sacrifice, however, is a term that can be misused as often as it is used correctly. In the Eucharistic rite, “sacrifice” means something different than what “sacrifice” means in pagan or Jewish ritual. The argument can be made that the Eucharist is not ”sacrifice” at all—but something so close that there has not been any better way of describing it. To understand how we view the Eucharist today, and what type of “sacrifice” is being made, we need to recall some of the ways it has been understood in the past. By identifying it as “Christian sacrifice”, we may come to terms with a range of ideas that span from the early faith to the present church, therefore engaging the metaphorical language on its own ground.

To speak of Christian sacrifice, we must first acknowledge the rich tradition of Jewish heritage found throughout Old Testament texts. The Hebrew Scriptures give in-depth instruction about sacrifice. Here, priestly instruction was collected as law. Sacrifice literally means the slaughter of an animal (an actual victim), the offering of incense or grain along with the blood and smoke that “giving” these offerings would entail. Leviticus outlines procedures for a number of ritual sacrifices—burnt offerings, offerings of well being, cereal offerings, sin offerings, guilt offerings. These “sacrifices” and sacrifices throughout the history of the world have been performed in times of celebration and thanksgiving as well as in times of hardship and ruin. In this type, the individual making the sacrifice brings a perfect and healthy animal to the priest from the herd or flock. The animal is killed, blood is sprinkled on and around the altar and then selected portions of the animal are burned. Smoke and odor go “up” to where God is. When an animal was sacrificed, the life of the animal—and more importantly, the life of the worshiper who brought the sacrifice—were ritually “given” to God. [1]

In these Jewish sacrificial ceremonies, the killing of the animal was not understood to affect the specific situation in some sort of cosmic parallel. The offering was ingrained into the daily life, so much that it was much more an acknowledgment of one’s place than it would have been a direct petition for change through divine intervention. Here, sacrifice “points to the fear of the holy” and at the same time “coexists with the desire to commune with it.”[2] In this type of sacrifice, there is a sense of the close relationship between what is impure and what is holy, between death and life, and between weakness and power.

Likewise, in the Hellenistic world, sacrifice played a major role in the social structures and in the politics of the day. Those who did not sacrifice to the gods were accused of atheism. To be a good citizen meant that one would participate in the sacrifices of the community—to take some responsibility in the organization of the social structure as well as to carry on the economics of the temple and the state. Engaging in a “sacrifice” meant offering in a ritualistic way, parts of one’s possessions. Hellenistic sacrifice looked like the Jewish practice in this regard. Clearly identifiable characteristics—material, agent and recipients for these sacrifices—were as easy to label as in other pagan rituals. There was killing, burning, offering and blood—only these were given to an assortment of gods, rather than to the One God of the Hebrews. Regardless of the differences, both Jewish and Hellenistic sacrifices appear to be very similar. Christian Sacrifice—the Eucharist, is a different story (although many of the elements appear to be somewhat familiar.)

The early Christian community was not exempt from the overarching social structures of its time. For one, the Christian communities inherited many of the deeper meanings that the Jewish communities had associated with sacrifice. There was a certain aspect of ritual, atonement, and purification that was involved in the Jewish practice that spills over into the Christian tradition. Sacrifice said something about who the worshiping people were as well as saying something about God. Sacrifice is something that can not be undone, once the blood is poured out, there is no putting it back in. In that regard, sacrifice was a serious business—not something to be taken lightly. This was understood to be a holy thing, not just a ritual or legality. Here the people were coming into contact with God. It was not something that could be reversed. Sacrifice was “both ritual action and theological metaphor.”[3] Sacrifice was a sign of confession that the community embraced with language—which literally urged both the inner ethical change as well as an offering of some mass.[4]

Furthermore, bloody sacrifices were a reality that no one in the ancient world would be unfamiliar with. These events became the ritual practices of communities, only for those who were Christian—something had changed. The metaphor of sacrifice was taken by the early church—and then cracked open on the cross. For early Christians, the syntax of “sacrifice” was still present in the community, only it looked vastly different than the killing ceremony. There was still the ritual of gathering—and of celebration, but there was no longer any need to offer up “things” to God. “Sacrifice” was taking on a new shape—the relationship between people and God had been drastically altered through the Christ event. The new practices reflected the change. All of the language about sacrifice or offering was retained, but in this new setting it was used to mean new things and to point to new priorities. Christians metaphorically fought the fire of old ideas with the new fire of Holy Spirit.

Today’s life is far removed from many of the practices and concerns of the early Christian communities. These early communities held drastically different views of sacrifice than we do today—at least in the fact that sacrifices were to them a common occurrence. When we speak of sacrifice today (at least in a secular way), we often think about “sacrificing” money or something we desire for a greater good. If we think this as Christians, we lose out on some of the implications sacrifice has on the life of faith. Christian sacrifice is something different than secular sacrifice—this is most distinguishable in the Eucharist.

Early Christian communities picked up where their Jewish forbearers had left off, and used this idea of sacrifice to explain the events of the cross. Metaphorically, we call the crucifixion a sacrifice but it is really an execution. “We use the strange word to say the new thing: God views this execution as if it were the archetypal sacrifice…it is in no way a literal sacrifice, yet it is used to depict our sacrifice of the Eucharist…it is an offering but not an offering; our sacrifice is praise, a sacrifice but not a sacrifice.”[5]

The language becomes important as this metaphor is played out. The sacrificial vocabulary is retained. In the effort to hold onto a way of expression, choices are made—in some ways this language is more effective than it is in others. “The attribution to the assembly of names drawn from sacrificial ritual sometimes occurs in central texts of the liturgy. Thus the table of the meal, which is widely and informally called an “altar,” can also be so designated in hymns and prayers of the rite itself. In some traditions, the house of the assembly is similarly termed “temple”; in others the participants in the assembly are designated as a “priesthood” and the presider in the assembly is a “priest” or a “high priest.”[6] Bear in mind that these words have now undergone a change—they resemble the old ways but there is a different focus for the assembly. “Christian worship is not a sacrifice”…”at least not in a literal sense of the word.” [7]

There is no victim, no animals are slain in the assembly, no holy violence occurs, there is no bloody knife or stone with horns. God is not given something to eat and is not rebuilt through the action of the assembly. “Christian worship is rather a communal gathering that enacts or remembers the baptismal bath, reads and interprets scriptures, and holds the meal of bread and wine.”[8] We use sacrificial language where there is no sacrifice! We look at giving as sacrifice but that is not what is being related in the Eucharist. “Our giving of worship and gifts is conjoined to the “sacrifice of Christ.”[9] We see Christ as the sacrifice offered to God—for whatever purposes it is that a sacrifice would be made: to guarantee the future, to bring satisfaction out of anger, to substitute one thing for another, or perhaps the establishment of a holy bond. [10]

What we have, more than a sacrifice, is the syntax of a sacrifice. Self giving acts are seen as a reflection and celebration of those gathered—of the all-sufficient gift of Christ. These acts are not seen as a contribution made in addition to the gift of Christ. Only when this “reflection” is made, can the language of sacrifice be used to speak of the gospel. It is through this language that many aspects of the Christian life are drawn together. Sacrifice has been viewed as an important way to talk about the connection between the death of Christ, Christian worship and Christian ethics.[11]

To speak of Christian sacrifice, there is a necessity to look at the language of metaphor and interpretation. To truly understand what is going on, one must be able to make the leap that the metaphor provokes. “Words, to risk a paradox, mean more than they mean. Translation is not only a matter of interpretation from one language to another. It involves, almost as much, a transfer of meaning, in the selfsame language, from speaker to hearer. To converse is to translate—to recreate meanings, moods and metaphors.”[12] Words do not possess absolute character-and it is here that we may begin to see that “sacrifice” may have many meanings. “Words acquire their virtues or their defects, from their context. Their character and their values are relative…words are the weapons, not the warriors. We are the warriors.”[13] All of this is to say that there can be appropriate use of the “sacrifice” metaphor—as well as inappropriate. Some have argued that the imagery of “Christ’s sacrifice” amounts to some sort of divine child abuse. This argument fails to use the metaphor for the purpose it was intended—Christian sacrifice must uphold that which is at the heart of the Christian message if it is to be used at all.

Christians use the long held tradition of Jewish thought that had spiritualized the meaning of the temple cult and made “sacrifice” available to describe the interior state of the one who praised God and kept the law.”[14] It may be better to say that “sacrifice” is the wrong word in these cases. “The wrongness of the words needs to be heightened, not tamed, in order for the figure of speech to work. We need to inquire what truth about God is proposed by calling our assembly action sacrifice when it is not.”[15] Sacrifice was once the central ritual act—bearing and sustaining a conception of the world, drawing the people and their gods into the heart of daily experience. In some ways we adopt pieces of those ideas in Christian Sacrifice—there is certainly some word drift to any two meanings or understandings that are so alike.

To attempt to define what sacrifice means requires a sense if its evolution. To go from the sacrificial structure of the Old Testament to the belief that an ultimate sacrifice has been made for all time meant that there would be a need for some explanation. In Justin Martyr’s writing we see just this sort of account: “That God has no need of blood-outpourings and drink-offerings and incense-burnings, and whom we praise, as much as we can, by the word of prayer and thanksgiving over all that we eat.”[16] Justin admits that Christians do not sacrifice in the former sense (grounds on which early Christians were accused of atheism) and rejects ritual killing. He talks of religious practice as being a new action—giving to the poor and needy that which had been formerly devoted to the gods. In an empire of sacrificial parades, Justin describes the procession of the gathered community in a metaphor—a new kind of parade that is not what at first it seems. He explains that “the traditions of the Christians is to offer food, not to the gods, but to the poor—and with thanksgiving, to themselves. This is our ritual sacrifice.”[17]

Metaphor is the key to the interpretation of Christian sacrificial language. It means rather that “praise and thanksgiving, or the Eucharistic memorial, are called in the interpretive way by the (alien) name of sacrifice or offering. The force of the metaphor, the revelation which it brings, is to convey that the praise and thanksgiving of Christians, rendered in memorial of Jesus Christ, far surpasses any offering of gift found in Pagan or Jewish practice.”[18]

The metaphor is meant to hold our attention to the association between the bread-word and the messianic table fellowship in the kingdom—which is realized in the life and death of Christ. “This is to say that the primary reference of the bread-word is eschatological or messianic and that Jesus here promises a share in the messianic blessings to those who eat of his body, or, in other words to those who receive the gift of himself which is communicated through the symbol of the bread… The appeal to sacrificial imagery occurs in the wine-word.”[19] Through the language that describes what is taking place with the cup—images of blood being poured out for the sins of many—those kernels of what is at stake within a sacrifice make the leap into Christian Sacrifice. “To set the two metaphors alongside one another, that of our praise and thanksgiving and that of God’s offering to us in Christ, is to evoke the reality of the Holy Spirit.”[20]

Perhaps today, one of our greatest obstacles is in the way we attempt to draw lines of recognition between concrete examples of sacrifice and what we call sacrifice in the Eucharist. Robert Daly suggests that we often go about the task completely backwards. We should not begin with the non-Christian example of what sacrifice is and then try to back it into our understanding—but rather we should begin with what the early Christians were pointing toward. In what way did they begin to use sacrificial terms to speak of the Christ event, the Christian life and the Eucharist? Daly states that answers to this question must necessarily begin with our central beliefs in a triune God and in the Eucharist.[21]

Daly describes three defining moments in the Christian Sacrifice. The first is that it begins with the self-offering of the Father in the gift of the Son (and not with any attempt on our part.) The second is that of the “totally loving response of the Son to his humanity.” And the third is that which takes place when “the rest of humanity, in the Spirit, begins to be taken up into that self-offering, self giving relationship of the Father and the Son.” He goes on to state that it is only in the third action that Christian sacrifice becomes real.[22]

Christian sacrifice is therefore not something that the faithful do; it is rather what happens to the faithful. What God was doing in Christ—was doing away with the “material, agent, recipient” way of looking at sacrifice. What is being done in the Christ event is as much an invitation into the metaphor as it is a description of what is being described. The words both veil the meaning and unveil it.

To understand the Eucharist, Daly suggests, we should look at it like a wedding ceremony.[23] He explains that the ceremony helps us to make a connection between the gathered event and the rest of our lives. Marriage does not stop at the conclusion of the wedding ceremony and likewise, “Eucharist that stops at the end of the celebration in church never becomes a real Eucharist.” What is taking place in the ceremony is the beginning place—and will only be completely realized in the fullness of time. The assembly receives what it already is—the body of Christ. It is about transformation—Christian sacrifice means that there is a change within us. We die to the “us” we might have been and accept the new body—the “us” of the Eucharist.

I began this project thinking that the questions I had about the language of sacrifice, as we encounter it in the Eucharist, would lead me to some fairly concrete examples of sacrificial language through the centuries. I expected to find a slower conversion of thought—not the jump from “Jewish” sacrifice to what has been described as Christian sacrifice. What I have found is that the “change” seems to have been much more complete in its early stages than I would have imagined. (I guess that I am guilty of falling into the trap of thinking modern society vastly superior to our early counterparts.) The use of metaphor to describe these things of the sacramental realm was, surprisingly, a constant aspect of the authors’ arguments. It quickly became clear that our modern thought processes may lack what the early Christian communities took for granted (that the metaphorical leap could be made.)

It seems that those communities that were closer to the “sacrifice of Christ” held a better understanding of Christian sacrifice than the majority of today’s populations. The metaphor still works, but it needs to be delivered cautiously and carefully in today’s world. There are many words that have developed connotations detrimental to the Christian message. “Sacrifice” is just such a difficult word—in that we modern types have a limited perspective on what it means. Woe be to the person who uses it haphazardly.

In the parish today, there is no reason not to use the language of sacrifice when describing the Eucharist—as long as the metaphor that was intended by the early church is retained. One must be aware of the pitfalls: that this is not a sacrifice in the pagan sense, and that the Eucharist is not just what happens in the midst of the assembly—but that it is carried on in the lives of those that gather. Special care must be given that the language is not saying something that goes against the Christian understanding or teachings (that it is not justifying the victimization of anyone, nor spreading fear.) With these things in mind, the Eucharist may be blessed by being described as a sacrifice—not on someone else’s terms, but on its own.

In this project I have tried to identify what Christian sacrifice “looks” like, as compared to other forms of sacrifice. I believe that the answer to this query lies in the context that event takes form. In the gathered assembly there is a sacrifice—and it looks like prayer, concern for one’s community, and the offering of one’s self (in whatever forms this may take) to others who do not appear to be included in any number of self defined groups. I have gathered a sense that those saints that went before us may have been infinitely more successful in realizing the metaphor. Perhaps we are too often caught up in being individuals brought together into a body to realize that we are a body first—and that we have our individuality which flows from that place. Likewise, some of my first questions addressed to this topic centered on the idea of sacrifice that connects us within the community—and now I realize that the question is flawed. A better question would be how to preserve the sense of Christian sacrifice in the face of secular definitions and ideals.

In conclusion, I have come to realize that this project is just a starting point. I have found that the language used to describe the Eucharist—something I feel fairly knowledgeable about, takes on a life of its own when it slips into images of Christian sacrifice. There is something in the language that is perhaps too deep to dig out (into words on a page, at least.) Sacrificial language seems to have a way of meaning something different—depending on the perspective the observer approaches it from. I am sure that our concepts of offering, sacrifice, atonement, and the like are in a perpetual state of flux. By engaging the Christian sacrifice—in the Eucharist, we are drawn further into the mystery. This is a growth industry; here we may spend a lifetime knowing the answer to the riddle, only failing to be able to verbalize the question. In affect, this should be considered a success (only the success is not ours.) Christian sacrifice looks like the church, the body of Christ—in this regard it should be at the heart of our being.

Works Consulted

Applebaum, David Ed. Parabola Vol. 25, Number 2 “Riddle and Mystery” Denville, New Jersey: Society for the Study of Myth and Tradition. 2000.

Bradshaw, Paul F. Ed. Essays on Early Eastern Eucharistic Prayers Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press. 1997.

Brock, Rita; Claudia Camp; Serene Jones Eds. Setting the Table: Women in Theological Conversation St. Louis, Missouri: Chalice Press. 1995.

Crockett, William R. Eucharist: Symbol of Transformation. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press. 1990.

Daly, Robert J. Christian Sacrifice Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press 1978.

Daly, Robert J. The Origins of the Christian Doctrine of Sacrifice Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1978.

Daly, Robert J. “Sacrifice: the Way to Enter the Pascal Mystery” in America: The National Catholic Weekly Vol. 188, No. 16. 2003.

Goldberg, Isaac. The Wonder of Words New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co. 1957.

Lathrop, Gordon W. Holy Things Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 1993.

Pittenger, W. Norman. The Christian Sacrifice New York: Oxford University Press. 1951.

Power, David N. The Sacrifice We Offer New York: Crossroad. 1987.

Power, David N. The Eucharistic Mystery Dublin: Gill and Macmillan Ltd. 1992.

Power, David. “Words That Crack: The Uses of ‘Sacrifice’ in Eucharistic Discourse.” in Seasoltz, R. Kevin. Ed. Living Bread, Saving Cup: Readings on the Eucharist Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press. 1982.

Stevenson, Kenneth. Eucharist and Offering New York: Pueblo Publishing Company. 1986.

Ramshaw, Gail. Reviving Sacred Speech Akron, Ohio: OSL Publications. 2004.

Stookey, Laurence Hull. Eucharist: Christ’s Feast With the Church. Nashville: Abingdon Press. 1993.

Weaver, J. Denny. The Nonviolent Atonement Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2001.

White, James F. Introduction to Christian Worship. Nashville: Abingdon Press. 2000.

---

[1] Weaver 58-59

[2] David Power (Living Bread, Saving Cup 172)

[3] Ramshaw 90

[4] Ramshaw 90-91

[5] Ramshaw 90-91

[6] Lathrop 139

[7] Lanthrop 140

[8] Lanthrop 140

[9] Lanthrop 140

[10] Lanthrop 140

[11] Lanthrop 141

[12] Goldberg 308

[13] Goldberg 317-318

[14] Lanthrop 141

[15] Lanthrop 143

[16] Justin (1 Apology 13)

[17] Lanthrop 147

[18] Power, David (Living Bread, Saving Cup 160)

[19] Power 161-162

[20] Power 174

[21] Daly, Robert J. “Sacrifice: the Way to Enter the Pascal Mystery

[22] Daly “Sacrifice: the Way to Enter the Pascal Mystery”

[23] Daly attributes the example to Edward Kilmartin

College News

From The University of Texas...

Liberal Arts To Reopen Garrison Hall, Home to Nationally Noted History Program

Two-day event includes tours, lectures, exhibitions

AUSTIN, Texas -Jan. 29, 2008- The College of Liberal Arts at The University of Texas at Austin this week will mark the reopening of Garrison Hall, the recently renovated home of the university's nationally recognized history program. The "Come Back to Garrison" celebrations include the opening of the Institute of Historical Studies and two days of tours, lectures, films and exhibitions, Jan. 31-Feb. 1.

Garrison Hall, built in 1926, is named for George P. Garrison, who joined the university as a history and English instructor in 1884 and was later head of the History Department. Garrison died in 1910.

During his 2006 installation address, President William Powers Jr. identified the Department of History as a strategic priority for the university, committing $1.3 million in new, recurring funds that will support research, teaching and the new Institute for Historical Studies whose inaugural programs will focus on "Global Borders."

"In the great universities throughout civilization, the teaching of history has always been fundamental," Powers said. "Historians and history teachers not only preserve the past, they enrich the long narrative of events and human interaction, so that we better understand who we are now and what the future holds.

"Every UT student, no matter his or her major, should study history in order to enjoy the full range of the intellectual experience."

THURSDAY, JAN. 31

Randy Diehl, dean of the College of Liberal Arts, and Alan Tully, chair of the Department of History, will host a reception, which is free and open to the public, Thursday, Jan. 31, from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Main Building, Room 212.

During the reception, Diehl and Tully will provide an overview of the history program and the opening of the Institute for Historical Studies, which builds on the Department of History's impressive publication record and competitive research funding from national agencies and research institutions each year.

As part of its 2008 rankings of America's Best Graduate Schools, U.S. News and World Report ranked the university's Latin American history program No. 1 in the nation and the department No. 19.

The historians have built strong research enterprises in the areas of empires and globalization, diaspora and migration, the borderlands, cultures, gender, religion and transnational history.

In addition to the faculty members' impressive number of national book awards and fellowships, the department includes a Pulitzer Prize-winner and seven current and former Guggenheim Fellows.

For more information about the Institute for Historical Studies, please visit http://www.utexas.edu/cola/insts/historicalstudies/ .

FRIDAY, FEB. 1

As part of the "Come Back to Garrison" activities, the university's historians will present lectures, which are free and open to the public, Friday, Feb. 1 from 10 a.m. to noon at classrooms throughout Garrison Hall. The discussions include:

10 a.m.
• "Torture, Past and Present" with Brian Levack;
• "The Secret Lives of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt," with H.W. Brands;
• "Spices and Global History" with Toyin Falola;
• "The Evil Eye: What Muslims, Christians, and Jews All Feared and Why" with Denise Spellberg; and
• "Buying Freedom from Slavery: An African-American Family Saga, 1777-1857" with Juliet Walker.

11 a.m.
• "Bubble and Bust: Lessons from Japan" with Mark Metzler;
• "The Salvation Army Archive of American Music, or How to Listen Like a Historian" with Karl Miller;
• "The Global Cigarette: Tobacco and Politics during the Cold War" with Mary Neuburger;
• "Finding Politics in Unexpected Places: Women in the Civil Rights Movement" with Tiffany Gill and Laurie Green;
• "AIDS in Africa" with James Wilson; and
• "The Wizard of Oz: A Parable of Populism" with Michael Stoff.

Throughout the afternoon, historians will lead visitors through the university's library and museum resources, including:

1:30 p.m.
• "Rewriting the Vietnam War: New Evidence from the Johnson Library" with Mark Lawrence;
• "UT's Extraordinary Sixteenth-Century 'Aztec' Maps" with Jorge Cañizares-Esguerra;
• "Maquilapolis" (film and discussion) with John McKiernan-Gonzales; and
• "The Second World War in Global Perspective: The Normandy Scholar Program Looks at a Turning Point in World History" David Crew, Michael Stoff and Charters Wynn.

3:30 p.m.
• "Jesus at the Movies, The Silent Era" with Howard Miller;
• "Virgins, Saints, and Angels: the Art of Conquest and Conversion in Colonial South America" with Susan Deans-Smith;
• "Asian Americans on Stage: Forbidden City, USA" (film and discussion) with Madeline Hsu;
• "Cuban Roots-Bronx Stories" (film and discussion) with Frank Guridy; and
• "Arthur Miller, Norman Mailer, Woodward and Bernstein" with Pulitzer Prize winner David Oshinsky.

Download the complete list of events and activities...

New development...

In an interesting turn of events... I have been given the green light to circulate my personal information form and actively seek a call to parish ministry. I am so relieved.

Final assessment... check!

Thursday I went to Ft. Worth to meet with my presbytery committee for my final assessment. I passed but I won't be able to circulate my "Personal Information Form" until I am "certified" on December 13. Now I am going over "Church Information Forms" and waiting.

Last night... I got a little help

In Memory of Austin, Bob, and Bill.

The Day of the Dead (or the Día de los Muertos, in Spanish) is a holiday celebrated mainly in Mexico with variations observed in other Latin American countries and in other parts of the world. The Mexican celebration occurs on November 1 (All Saints' Day) and November 2 (All Souls' Day).

Though the subject matter may be considered morbid from the perspective of many western cultures, celebrants typically approach the Day of the Dead joyfully. Traditionally, the mood is bright and cheerful, with an emphasis on celebrating and honoring the lives of the deceased and celebrating the continuation of life. Death is not the end, but rather the beginning of a new stage in life.

Happy Reformation Day! Happy Halloween!

I will have my final assessment next Thursday in Dallas. Today I told a church that I have had an "informal conversation" with, that I did not feel a call to their congregation. It was a little surreal... after all, I have not been given the go ahead to have "call" discussions. They took the whole thing very well and I feel much better, having gotten that off my chest. I just never felt the connection with them that has been present in other conversations.

So here is something that popped into my head last year on this day... Let's throw a Reformation Party! We have 10 years before we celebrate the 500th anniversary. Let's plan on a reunion (of sorts) to take place October 31, 2017... Wittenburg, Germany. Call it continuing education. Who is with me?

Here are the 95 Theses Martin Luther nailed on the church door at Wittenburg.

1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, "Repent" (Matthew 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.

11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Matthew 13:25).

12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.

14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.

15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.

17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.

18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.

19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.

20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words "plenary remission of all penalties," does not actually mean "all penalties," but only those imposed by himself.

21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.

22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.

23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few.

24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.

25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.

26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.

27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.

28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.

30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.

31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.

32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.

34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.

35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.

36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.

37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.

38. Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the divine remission.

39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need of true contrition.

40. A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes men to hate them -- at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.

41. Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously think that they are preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.

44. Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.

45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God's wrath.

46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.

47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.

49. Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear of God because of them.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.

52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.

53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.

55. It is certainly the pope's sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of Christ.

57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.

61. For it is clear that the pope's power is of itself sufficient for the remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.

62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Matthew 20:16).

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly fished for men of wealth.

66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.

67. The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.

68. They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.

70. But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.

71. Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.

72. But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence preachers be blessed.

73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.

74. Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.

75. To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.

76. We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.

77. To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

78. We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel,spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written, 1 Corinthians 12:28).

79. To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread among the people will have to answer for this.

81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or from the shrewd questions of the laity.

82. Such as: "Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church? The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.

83. Again, "Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

84. Again, "What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, because of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love's sake?"

85. Again, "Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences as though they were still alive and in force?"

86. Again, "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?"

87. Again, "What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?"

88. Again, "What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred times a day, as he now does but once?"

89. "Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously granted when they have equal efficacy?"

90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace! (Jeremiah 6:14)

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross, cross," and there is no cross!

94. Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, death and hell.

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).

I passed my PC(USA) Ordination Exam

I passed! I don't know my scores... and I don't really care. I passed the (final) exam and now I can get back to work on figuring out this whole call process, where we will go, and what I will be called to do. Even in my joy and relief, I mourn the fact that many of my friends did not pass one or more of these exams. Some are contemplating the possibility of switching denominations, some are just preparing for the next go-round. My thoughts and prayers are with them all.

Lessons from an Interim Youth Director

1. Taking Sabbath time is probably the hardest part of the job.
2. You will quickly become attached.
3. You will know things... things that can only be spoken over PB&J.
4. Politics is just as operative in Jr. High as in international negotiations.
5. Youth need pastors just as much as grown ups do.
6. Everyone needs a buddy.
7. Email really can eat up a work day.
8. Recruiting help is dependent on calendars that you do not have access to.
9. There will be "history" that you will not be aware of.
10. Birthdays are big deals.
11. Today's youth are busy, busy, busy... but also starving for real relationships.
12. Pictures are important.
13. Maybe 20% of youth actually read their emails.
14. Everything is a matter of hurry up and wait.
15. Planning requires presence.
16. It is wonderful to see youth participate in all aspects of worship.
17. Budgets are only as good as your latest printout.
18. Never sit down.
19. Karaoke machines have too many instructions.
20. Guest speakers need a firm time limit... an exact stopping time.
21. Eating is often the main activity, no matter the program.
22. If there is not enough activity, clumping will occur.
23. The Holy Spirit really is involved... thank God!
24. Someone will always need to show up late or leave early.
25. It is always easy to get a volunteer when you ask face to face.
26. Making a list helps.
27. The mailing list is your friend.
28. You will never figure out where all the supplies are hidden.
29. The parents will have your cell phone number programed into their phones.
30. Your phone will therefore be viewed as community property.
--maybe more tomorrow

Sold...