In this Year of St. Paul let us go on a spiritual journey with him. Let us improve the quality of our Christian life by looking into the life and ministry of Paul.
Paul is indeed one of the most fascinating characters of the New Testament. Despite the name Acts of the “Apostles,” more than half of the narration of Acts deals with Paul and his activities. Of the 27 documents of the New Testament 13 carry the name of Paul as author. Paul is therefore the greatest missionary and theologian of the New Testament. In our study we will gather information about Paul both from the Acts and from his Letters.
This series is designed so as to have two study materials each month (to be used once in two weeks in our groups)
By getting to know Paul and by evaluating our life through his life we shall imitate Paul to imitate Christ. As we go through this series throughout this Pauline Year, may our lives be transformed, let us know the depth, width and height of God's love for us and be filled with the fullness of knowledge of Christ and the missionary zeal of St.Paul.
October-1
Eucharist (1) We know from our previous discussions that St. Paul did his theology mostly as he talked with others, as he wrote to his first converts, even as he argued with others. It is as part of such an engagement with the Corinthians that Paul brings out some inkling of his teachings on the Eucharist: 1 Cor 10,14-22; 11,17-34. Here, in the first instance it is as part of his advice to avoid idolatry that he teaches on the Eucharist and in the second as part of solving divisions existing in the assemblies gathered to celebrate the Lord's Supper , Paul's name for the Eucharist. We shall at first treat with the second passage (1 Cor 11,17-34) and then go to the other (1 Cor 10,14-22).
In 1 Cor 11,2-14,40 Paul is dealing with problems in the liturgical assemblies. In this, the first issue is about dress at liturgical assemblies (11,2-16) and the second about problems at the celebration of the Lord's Supper (11,17-34).
1 Cor 11,17-34 can further be divided into three parts: (i) 11,17-22; (ii) 11,23-26; (iii) 11,27-34. Paul seeks to remedy a situation in which it is said that there were factions in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. In the first subsection the unacceptable situation is explained; in the second Paul refers back to the origin of the Lord's Supper; in the third he gives directives to redress the situation. The essence of Paul's teaching is that there can be no Eucharist in a community whose members do not love one another.
The problem as presented in Paul's own words is: “When you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord's Supper. For when the time comes to eat, each of you goes ahead with your own supper, and one goes hungry and another becomes drunk. What! Do you not have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you show contempt for the Church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What should I say to you? Should I commend you? In this matter I do not commend you!” (20-22).
The problem, therefore, is that of social cohesiveness than theological dispute. Since the house churches are in view we may have to assume that the common meals were hosted by wealthier believers in their homes. In accordance with the practice of the time, those of higher status may have kept the best food for the social peers and poor quality food for the social inferiors and clients. The celebration of the Lord's Supper, i.e., the remembrance through the liturgical act, would take place at the end of such suppers. Having known such a situation, Paul tells of the tradition relating to the institution of the Eucharist (23-26). He says, “ For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, ‘This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.' For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.”
It is the comment that Paul adds in verse 26, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes,” that connects the narration of the tradition to the problem described. By it Paul wants to show what he means by the Lord's Supper and why the Corinthians' individual meals were not in consonance with the Lord's Supper. Paul is presenting the existential meaning of the celebration of the Lord's Supper. He says that the celebration of the Eucharist means the proclamation of the death of Jesus, i.e., the proclamation of the love that prompted such a great act of sacrifice (see Gal 2,20). Therefore, if their coming together and the shared eating and drinking did not proclaim that love then their ritual would not make the Lord's Supper.
From 11,27 onwards Paul draws conclusions and proposes remedies. In v. 27 when Paul says, “whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner” he has in mind the Corinthian situation in which they ate without having loving consideration for one another; and such a behaviour made them unworthy. By such behaviour they “will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” It implies that if the participants in the Eucharistic meal are not united in love they class themselves among those who murdered Jesus. Therefore Paul exhorts, “Examine yourselves, and only then eat of the bread and drink of the cup” (v. 28). The self-scrutiny does not mean that the Corinthians should probe the inner recesses of their consciences for bad orientations ant thoughts but that they should consider how their actions at the supper are affecting the brothers and sisters in the church. Paul stresses the importance of the self-examination leading to reconciliation (Matt 5,23-24) prior to participation in the Eucharist.
The general consequence of eating and drinking without self-scrutiny is enunciated immediately in 11,29, “For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves.” “Discerning the body,” then means that they must evaluate the authenticity of their relationship among themselves as members of the body of Christ. Here the “body” means the community of believers. The people who do not recognize the community as the body of the Lord but dare eat the bread and drink the cup bring judgment upon themselves.
Exercise: Read the texts indicated in the write-up.
Questions: Do we recognize the social implications of the celebration of the Eucharist?
October-2
Eucharist II
In our presentation of the Eucharist in Paul, in the last reflection, we pointed to the existential meaning of the Eucharist as seen in 1 Cor 11,17-34. As we already hinted at, the other text that deals with Eucharist is 1 Cor 10,16-17: “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”
The context is that of Paul advising the Corinthians to free flee from idol worship (1 Cor 10,14-22). Paul's argument is that although the food offered to idols is not anything as idols do not exist, still the very act of eating such food can indicate an aspiration for union with the gods whom they signify and so such an act has to be avoided. But at the same time the eating of the Body and Blood of the Lord really effects the union of the believer with the Lord. Eucharist is the meal at which the new people of God eats its “spiritual food” and consumes its “spiritual drink” (1 Cor 10,3-4). It is the ritual act whereby Christ's presence with his people is concretised. Since the Lord is identified with such food, those who partake of it should not violate its sacred character by idol worship.
Through his presence the Eucharistic Christ alone brings about the unity of believers. We said in the previous reflection that “discerning the body” in 1 Cor 11,29 means evaluating the authenticity of the relationship among the believers as members of the body of Christ. Indeed the theme of the body of Christ is already known to the Corinthian readers in 6,15 and 10,17. Relating 11,29 mainly to 1 Cor 10,16-17, the second text on Eucharist in Paul, we see that the most striking and challenging feature of Paul's theology of the Lord's Supper is undoubtedly his understanding of the church also as the body of Christ.
It should be noted here that the emphasis is not just on the one bread and one cup, but on the sharing of the one bread and the one cup. The question is, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ?” (16). Further the fact is that they partook of the one bread and the one cup which made the many “one body,” which marked and constituted their oneness as Christ's body. The reason therefore is twofold: “ Because there is one bread , we though many are one body , for we all partake of the one bread ” (17). The thought connection therefore is not just one bread → one body, but one bread → shared → one body. That means that it is the sharing in the one bread and in the one cup which constitutes, embodies, expresses, builds up the one body.
Therefore in the Eucharistic body of Christ Paul finds a source not only of the union of Christians with Christ, but also of Christians among themselves. In 1 Cor 11,17-34 and 10, 16-17 we have the earliest account of the institution of the Eucharist and the reflection on it in the New Testament, as 1 Corinthians pre-dates all the Gospels. Paul by indicating Eucharist as the memorial and proclamation of Christ's sacrificial death, and therefore as the bond of the union of the believer with Christ, and union among the believers themselves, makes it a rallying point. Therefore as the dictum in Theology goes, “The Eucharist makes the Church and the Church makes the Eucharist.” The two realities are inseparably related.
Exercise: Familiarise yourselves with the texts indicated in the write-up.
Q: Have you reflected on the effects of the Eucharistic union?
September 1
Freedom from “Sin and Death”
According to St. Paul , in the period before Christ human beings were all sinners. In spite of their strivings to live uprightly they never achieved that goal or destiny of glory intended by the creator for them; they failed “to hit the mark,” as the basic meaning of “to sin” implies (see Rom 3,23). This idea of the pervasive influence of sin on humanity Paul draws from the OT (e.g., Gen 6,5; 1 Kgs 8,46; Isa 64,5-7). The tendency to sin is with everyone right from birth (Ps 51,5). Human sin is also contagious (Jer 9,4). Sin creates a solidarity of contemporaries (Gen 11,1-9) and of successive generations (Ps 79,8).
The narrative of Gen 2-3 tries to explain how this sinful condition began. Its symbolism portrays Adam “man” and Hawwah (explained as “mother of all living [beings]”) as having brought sin into the world. The story teaches that sin did not originate with God, but began with human beings, and that it has been around as long as they have been.
Paul, basing on the tradition of Gen 2-3, ascribes to Adam the cause of everyone's death (1Cor 15,21-22). Here, of course, death does not mean physical death but spiritual (eternal) death. In Rom 5,12 Paul clearly ascribes to Adam a causal connection that brings not only death, but also sin into human life. At the same time one should not be under the impression that what Paul wants to present in Rom 5,12-21 is the problem of the entry of sin and death into human life; he primarily wants to show the contrast between Adam and Christ. It means that the sinful condition of all human beings is attributable to Adam, just as their condition of uprightness (righteousness) is attributable to Christ alone.
Both Gentiles and Jews share in the sinful condition. Indeed, Paul's indictment of the ungodliness and wickedness of Gentiles, who have suppressed the truth in their lives, is severe in Rom 1,18-23. He finds that they have no excuse for not honouring God as a result of what they have known about him from his creation. As for Jews, who gloried in the possession of the Mosaic Law as manifestation of God's will proving to be a guide for their conduct (Rom 2,17-20; 3,2), Paul's indictment of them is equally telling. They may have the Law, but they do not keep it (Rom 2,21-24). Therefore, apart from the Gospel the whole human race, “all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin” (Rom 3,9). Paul refers to sin frequently in such a way that sin is a force or power that has invaded human beings and is promoted by their natural and fleshly inclinations. Therefore Paul often personifies Sin and Death as actors on the stage of human history. Sin is thus an active evil force that pervades human existence. It “dwells” in humanity (Rom 7,17.23), deceives it, and kills it.
Being so, in Rom 15-18 Paul speaks of the superiority of the work of Christ from that of Adam. In v. 15 he says, “The free gift is not like the trespass.” It means that there is no comparison between what Christ did for humanity and what Adam did. In verse 17 Paul contrasts death as the effect of the offense of one man (Adam) with the gift of righteous life obtained through one man (Jesus Christ).
In verses 18 and 19 the Adam and Christ comparison is all the more clear: “Therefore just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. For just as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.” Therefore in Christ a person is set free from the bondage of sin and death. A person can then positively aspire for life, i.e., sanctity, and have the sure hope of achieving it. Paul, therefore, says conclusively in Rom 8,1-2: “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.”
Exercise: Read the texts cited in the matter.
Questions: Have we recognized the fact that everyone in Christ is set free from the clutches of sin and death? Are not the recent beatifications and canonisations in the Church speaking in the same line? Are not the Blessed and the Saints ones who have shown in their lives that the shackles of sin and death have been broken and the flowering of the life in the Spirit has taken place?
September-2
Freedom from “Self”
In the previous two reflections we spoke of Paul's understanding of the Christian's freedom from “the Law,” and “Sin and Death.” Paul also tells of the freedom from self through union with Christ in Rom 6,1-23. The question treated is as to how the believers cannot remain in sin or commit sin if they are already freed from the Law, and Sin and Death. Paul answers that it is possible since through baptism the believers are identified with Christ's death and resurrection, and their very being or “self” is transformed. Rom 6,1-23 may be divided into two: (a) 6,1-14 and (b) 6,15-23.
(a) 6,1-14: Freedom from sin and self through baptism
(We have hinted at this when we dealt with baptism; yet a few more things are in order). An opening objection in v. 1 helps to launch the theme: “What then are we to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound?” Paul responds telling that we have “died to sin” and therefore can longer “live” in it (v. 2, “How can we who died to sin go on living in it?”). In vv. 3-4 Paul grounds the statement that believers have died to Sin by pointing to baptism as involving a participation in the death of Christ (“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life”). What is implied is that baptism is a similitude for the death of Christ to the extent that it separates the believer from Sin; by being united to Christ through baptism, the believer participates in his state of separation from Sin, a total and definitive separation from the forces of evil. Vv. 5-8 affirm of the baptized what Paul will say of Christ himself in 9-11. In v. 6 “old self” and “body of sin”, placed in parallelism ( a . our old self; b . was crucified with him; b 1 . so that might be destroyed; a 1 . the body of sin, i.e., a, b = a 1 , b 2 ), are reciprocally explanatory and describe the human person under the dominion of Sin. With v. 8 Paul passes from the aspect of “death to sin” (as a separation from) to that of “life for God.” The assurance that the baptized have been separated from Sin also comes from the fact that they are united with the Risen One who has died to Sin once and for all. It is the resurrection of Christ that makes the separation between the baptized and Sin secure and solid. Further in v. 14 when Paul declares that Sin will not have dominion over the baptized he does not intend to say that the baptized will no longer experience weakness or imperfection, or that they will not sin any more, but they will not be “in sin,” as prisoners of Sin. For the baptized “are not under the Law but under grace.”
(b) 6,15-23: Freedom for commitment
Here the argument revolves around the sense of what happens when slaves change masters. In v. 16 it is said that all slavery involves obedience. As applied, one is either a slave to Sin, which leads to death, or in the service of (true) obedience, which leads to righteousness. In vv. 17-18 Paul, beginning with an exclamation of thanks to God, explains further with respect to the past and present of the believers. In v. 19 the parenthesis (“I am speaking in human terms…”) indicates the paradoxical way of describing freedom as slavery; it also shows the inadequacy of human language to express the status of believers. Vv. 20-22 draw attention to the outcome emanating from the past and present situations. The past was one of slavery to Sin with the immediate effects of “uncleanness” or “lawlessness” and the end result of “(eternal) death,” while the present is slavery to “righteousness (of God)” with the immediate effect of “holiness” and the end result of “eternal life.”
Exercise: Read Rom 6,1-23.
Questions: Do we feel in our lives the break with the old self? How far have we reached in our commitment to God?
