a lawless blog

When Moses came to the people
and related all the words and ordinances of the LORD,
they all answered with one voice,
"We will do everything that the LORD has told us."
Moses then wrote down all the words of the LORD and,
rising early the next day,
he erected at the foot of the mountain an altar
and twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel.
Then, having sent certain young men of the Israelites
to offer holocausts and sacrifice young bulls
as peace offerings to the LORD,
Moses took half of the blood and put it in large bowls;
the other half he splashed on the altar.
Taking the book of the covenant, he read it aloud to the people,
who answered, "All that the LORD has said, we will heed and do."
Then he took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, saying,
"This is the blood of the covenant
that the LORD has made with you
in accordance with all these words of his."

Moses went and told the people all Yahweh's words and all the laws, and all the people answered with one voice, 'All the words Yahweh has spoken we will carry out!'  

Moses put all Yahweh's words into writing, and early next morning he built an altar at the foot of the mountain, with twelve standing-stones for the twelve tribes of Israel.

Then he sent certain young Israelites to offer burnt offerings and sacrifice bullocks to Yahweh as communion sacrifices.

Moses then took half the blood and put it into basins, and the other half he sprinkled on the altar.

Then, taking the Book of the Covenant, he read it to the listening people, who then said, 'We shall do everything that Yahweh has said; we shall obey.'

Moses then took the blood and sprinkled it over the people, saying, 'This is the blood of the covenant which Yahweh Yahweh has made with you, entailing all these stipulations.'

More and more on this forum we see contributors declaring where they stand. When all's said and done, what matters is the personal attitude each one has to the Mystery of Life that we call 'god'. The same goes for the Eucharist: what matters is that we each respond to this mystery at a personal level with conviction and commitment, whatever form it may take.

In the readings for this Sunday the focus is on the New Covenant. I wonder what that means to the average 'catholic'. I don't know why there is so little teaching and discussion about this central feature which hinges on the text in the prophet Jeremiah:


Compared with the covenant formalised by Moses (first reading), the new covenant is not a set of laws setting out rights and duties. Such laws, put in writing, are the permanent standard that members of a community or a state must measure up to, the standard against which conduct is judged.

The new covenant is different. It is internal, written in the heart. It seems to me that this means that it is applied to each one individually. Hence it is not like a treaty that a nation makes with another nation, by which every citizen is bound by the simple fact of being a member of that nation. This is more like the covenant that we find in our domestic community. In families the ties that bind are not written, yet they are firmly fixed for they are embedded in the conscience and expressed in the intimate relationships within the home. Our response is utterly personal and must be totally sincere, while the written law formulated in society for the common good only requires outward compliance.

+++

It is depressing to think of so much discussion, disagreement and dispute indulged in by christians about how the eucharist works. Like a youngster pulling a computer to bits to find out how it works, over-analysing of the eucharist will destroy it. Regardless of technical explanations, the main point of the celebration highlighted in today's readings is that we take and drink of the pledging cup of the new covenant.


What are we thinking of as we take that cup and raise it to our lips?

In that gesture I am saying Yes to the covenant described by the prophet. I am saying Yes to the law written by the spirit in my conscience. I am saying Yes to the knowledge of truth and justice that I find  there, undeniable, unavoidable, inescapable, that compelling truth that is light, and enlightening, unless I cloud it for selfish or evil purposes.

Jesus made his life-blood the seal of this covenant. At the risk of his life he affirmed the truth publicly before the High Priest and the Civil Governor. He stood his ground when they threatened to destroy him. He remained true to the end. That is how you witness to the truth; that is what is written in our hearts; that is what we drink to in taking the eucharistic cup. That is the stuff of the new covenant.

+++

Now for a question: Is the new covenant made directly with the individual, or is it made made with the church institution and the community as such? 

If you feel this is merely technical, the wise reader will stop here. There is no need to go any further. But perhaps it is not just a technicality. In any case, I am intrigued by the fact that this new covenant is written in the heart, in the conscience of the individual. It does not seem to be a contract with the community, the 'ecclesia' acting as a formal society. So bear with me.

This covenant which is sealed by the gift of the spirit in the conscience of the individual seems to be prior to the forming of community. While it would be natural for people of the new covenant to form up in communities for mutual support, the idea that the community itself should take priority over the individual may be a foreign concept.

While you become a citizen of the state by being born in the country, you cannot become a member of the christian community by being born into it. Entry is an individual thing, by invitation, via baptism that seals you with the spirit after you say: Yes I do believe; and in Eucharist when you drink to the New Covenant from the cup offered by Jesus.

+++

Currently in the liturgy the expression 'for many' has replaced the 'for all' which, the experts tell us, accurately expressed the idea. The expression 'for many' was a Semitic way of encompassing a big mob, virtually everybody. (I have a faint idea that  a something similar is found among the aboriginal peoples of Australia.) However, thinking about this Semitic expression has led me to wonder if perhaps the 'many' indicates an awareness of the individuals in the crowd, which our abstract universal, 'all', may tend to lose sight of. If instead of saying 'the whole crowd', for example, I say 'lots and lots of people' I am pointing out that 'the whole crowd' contains all these individuals. Can we say 'for many' to emphasise that in the 'all' there are only individuals like me and you, and we are invited individually to say Yes to the cup of the covenant?

+++

The covenant of marriage is the only covenant most of us will ever have experience of, and it too is planted in the heart, a most personal commitment. Is marriage the most authentic model of the New Covenant? Everyone knows that their covenant is re-affirmed every day and a thousand times a day in a myriad of ways. So too the New Covenant that Jesus calls his followers to embrace.

The next time I go to mass it will be for many purposes: to gather with the local community of believers, to hear the Word of God and learn something fresh - or re-learn, to remember the passing over of Jesus by a symbolic re-enactment of his last passover meal.

But above all it will be to commit myself afresh to the new covenant in drinking from the pledging cup. If I don't make this totally personal commitment, then all the rest is merely play and all the men and women merely players.


[img]http://www.catholica.com.au/sunday/images/Y-not_an_640x166.gif[/img]