Posted by Helen on: 03.24.2007 /
This was the second of two lectures by NT Wright that I heard yesterday at Mundelein Seminary. My notes on the first one are here:
NT Wright: Biblical Foundations for Sacramental Theology
I didn’t feel like I followed this as well as the first lecture, plus I took these notes by hand (my laptop battery had run out) - so they may be more disjointed than my first lecture notes.
There was a form given out for buying CDs of the two lectures I heard, plus one NT Wright gave the night before to faculty only. I expect if you contact Mundelein you can buy them. They were charging $7 per lecture or $18 for the set. Update: here’s the order form for CDs of the lectures: NT Wright 2007 recording order form
Through inaugurated eschatology we share in and implement the newness of resurrection.
This approach won’t eliminate all problems but hopefully will create windows to let in fresh light, not least in ecumenical discussions.
Various authors have said the eschatological dimension remains vital. However they don’t develop the point. For example if they talk about “feasting in heaven” they don’t say which heaven. That’s not much help in thinking through what the sacraments are.
Jesus’ life death and resurrenction was the climax of God’s plan and of history, the hinge on which the great door of history swung open.
It’s popular today to talk as if Jesus’ approach was “Let’s do kingdom stuff and see what they do now”. No, Jesus was more intentional than that. He was aware of the resonances of what he was doing. His temple and supper action go together. Jesus maximized previous saving acts and anticipated the future.
This is a “work in progress’ and unfortunately there isn’t time to develop it much today.
Because of the resurrection, the whole cosmos has “sacramental possibilities’. The sacraments are not odd excrescences, strange heavenly objects in fields that seem strange to people. No, they are rather the outcrop that shows what the substrata beneath is made of. Just as, when we see grass growing through concrete it’s a sign the whole garden is going to be redone.
Space — the overlap of heaven and earth
In Jewish thought, if 2 or 3 study Torah together the Shekinah rests on them. Jesus upstaged that. John’s offer of free forgiveness at the River Jordan made the temple redundant and sets up overtones. Jerusalem was not big enough for Jesus and the Temple; there could be only one unique place where heaven and earth overlap and sins are forgiven.
Baptism announced the return from exile and the arrival of the Kingdom.
The massive implicit claim of Jesus was that in him, not Temple or Torah, was new life and forgiveness.
The last supper was very symbolic and was the climax of all other meals Jesus had with people. The overlap of heaven and earth is available to all through this strange meal.
In the sacraments, heaven and earth overlap. This complicates life if you want a fully realized “heavenly moment’. People who don’t like magic want everything earthly until they “get to heaven’.
We need to understand through faith, hope and love. We also need to understand Jesus through faith and history — which tends to bring howls of protest. But we need both Jesus the historic Galilean and Jesus the divine Lord.
Where does feeding on Christ take place? Calvin insisted that the real feeding is in heaven, although later people have tended to miss his meaning. Protestants say Catholics bring Christ’s body to earth — reformers argued that it’s in heaven so how can it be on the communion table? Calvin said, Christ’s body is not brought to the table but rather the worshipper is taken to heaven. Cranmer argued that the bread is real bread and also that there is a real feeding but he didn’t appropriate what Calvin said.
The interlocking of heaven and earth helps us understand the eucharist.
Time
How do the sacraments relate to the one time events of Jesus’ death and resurrection?
Time is linear and also converging. The sacraments are more than just a memory or anticipation. Through them we really partake. You could think of a railway line. Your train stops at stations; sometimes an express from behind you catches you up. Sometimes a train coming from ahead of you meets you. The past and future intersect with the present in a somewhat similar way. The redemptive past is with us and the future also.
Like signposts pointing into a fog, the future is virtually indescribable, but the signposts are still real and we must follow them.
Paul’s view of baptism was that it’s a true sharing in Jesus’ death and resurrection. It’s an encoded narrative of the story of Israel, the narrative in which the story of the person being baptized is embedded.
As a theologian I do struggle with the fact that many who have been baptized have lapsed from faith or never had faith to lapse from in the first place. Some oppose infant baptism for that reason; however I think the answer is appropriate follow-up after baptism.
The symbol is not enough without faith; yet the symbols do have real power and are highly dangerous if misused: we see in 1 Corinthians 11 that misuse of the eucharist invokes judgment.
I don’t like the new wording “do this in memory of me” because that sounds too much like a memorial to a dead friend. The Eucharist is more than that; the reality we feed on is Jesus’ death. In sharing the cup and bread the past events of Jesus’ death and resurrection become contemporary once more. The eucharist is not just a good time to talk about Jesus’ death. Rather, doing it says it — it’s a setting forth of the past and anticipation of the future.
This approach can help us move forward from sterile debates such as, “Is this the same sacrifice at Calvary or a new one?” The eucharist is not an introduction to the faith but rather for those who have already declared their faith. Jesus’ sacrifice is unique and in redeemed time the eucharist really is the same sacrifice, not an attempt to repeat it. Catholics thought Protestants had added another sacrifice.
In the new heavens and new earth there’s no sea, temple, sun or moon; also we see that the sun and moon were actually metaphors for God and the Lamb. There are no sacraments in the new world because everything is a sacrament. We’re poised between Isaiah 6 and 11.
Baptism tells a story of the creation and exodus. It launches the life of the people of God. It’s not just a mere physical event. Baptism anticipates the Romans 8 rebirth of the creation. The anticipation is mentioned in verses such as those about tasting the heavenly gift.
The quest for holiness becomes a present reality because we’re baptized. By one Spirit we’re baptized into one body.
Transformed Matter
The eucharist comes into its own here. One theory has dominated and polarized people into accepting or rejecting it.
The new creation overflows with God’s presence.
Athens lets us down but Jerusalem comes to our rescue. Jesus is present and transforms matter. This is food for me to set forward my salvation.
It’s not good enough just to look forward to the the whole creation transformed — we are called to work for the new creation.
It’s a false antithesis that the eucharist is either magic or just a memory. Personal salvation and world justice is also a false antithesis.
God’s work involves the overthrow of idols. Each [sacrament?] offers present realty of victory won. Perhaps it gives us weapons too, which we may need in the postmodern world we’re facing.
There are types of knowing you need to use, to understand. It’s neither extreme of a leap in the dark or merely by sight and touch.
Sacrifice is essential to worship — for example, see Romans 12. Sacrifice means transformation.
Conclusion
The Jewish framework will help us all understand and re-appropriate the sacraments — and each other, and what we’ve said about them in the past.
Questions
One person (another Bishop) asked, do “ordinary people’ need to know these things? What difference would it make if they did? NT Wright said we can’t collude with a split level system where only theologians have knowledge about these things. Peter and Paul said we should teach everyone so they are mature in Christ. We have the Holy Spirit’s help — he can catch people up quickly.
Another person asked if the intersection of heaven and earth is different from each believer being indwelt by the Holy Spirit? NT Wright pointed out first that that’s actually temple theology. He said he likes language which doesn’t encourage people into the false individualization that the only intersect of heaven and earth is in me. Instead we need to see we’re part of God’s kingdom project. This over-individualisation has been a problem sometimes with Charismatics and Pentecostals: the Holy Spirit is in me and now I have a day at the funfair. Rather, the point is that it’s for God’s kingdom project. The language we use can help us get it.
Another person asked about eschatology with words I didn’t know. NT Wright said that some have tried to argue Jesus wasn’t apocalyptic but that doesn’t really work because you can’t separate out what’s apocalyptic from what Jesus said. Anyway, it’s important to understand that apocalyptic doesn’t mean “Let’s blow things to smithereens” but rather, let’s fix the evil in the new heavens and earth.
NT Wright gave an example of people who believed Messiah had come in the year 192 so they minted coins saying “Year 1″. Even so, they couldn’t sit back; they had to work hard. Inaugurated eschatology is hard-nosed.
Comment by: Ann
1 03/24/07 7:49 PM | Comment Link |Beautiful summary — I can’t believe you wrote that by hand! Thanks for your work– I will have to explore more with the link you gave for the seminar CDs.
Comment by: Helen
2 03/25/07 7:34 AM | Comment Link |Thanks Ann!
All those years of practice taking notes in conservative Bible study lectures came in handy ;-).
If I get any more specific information about how to get CDs I’ll post it.
Comment by: Paul
3 03/26/07 5:25 AM | Comment Link |thanks again Helen!