becoming

In chapter 1, Jesus and Israel, Lohfink attempts to bridge the connection between the first 2 petitions of the Lord’s prayer, with the re-gathering Israel:

What is really meant by the prayer, now so strange to us, that God sanctify his name? Once again the answer is given in the Old Testament, in Ezekiel 36. There it is said that the name of God has been desecrated by the dispersal of Israel among the nations. As a result of this, all the nations say: “So this is the people of God! This Yahweh must be a miserable God, if he is unable to preserve his own people from the loss of their land!” (cf. Ezek. 36:20).

Quoting from Ezek. 36:22-24, he continues:

The text clearly shows that God himself will sanctify his name. He will sanctify it by gathering Israel in the last days from all over the world, renewing it, and making it again into a holy people.

… “Sanctify your name” — this means, in other words, nothing other than “Gather and renew your people! Let it become anew the true people of God!” Jesus was obviously convinced that this eschatological gathering of the people by God had already begun now, just as the coming of the kindgom was now taking place. And Jesus was convinced that the gathering of the people and the coming of the kindgom were occurring through him. For when Jesus acted, God acted. Precisely this was Jesus’ mystery.

Lohfink further concludes (with reference to Matt 10:6) that Jesus did not envision a mission to the Gentiles. How then do the Gentiles achieve salvation? Not “become believers as a result of missionary activity; rather, the fascination emitted by the people of God draws them close.” To Lohfink, this explains why Jesus “turned so automatically to Israel alone” because “Jesus had to work in Israel, for only if the light of the reign of God shone in God’s people would it be possible for the nations to undertake the eschatological pilgrimage.” (19)

Knowing that Matt 11.8:11-12 was originally functioned as a threat directed again Israel, Lohfink draws the parable of the great banquet in Luke 14:16-24 to further describe the crisis of Israel and her failure. The Twelve functions “not only a sign promising salvation, but also a sign of judgement. At the last judgement they will testify against Israel if Israel does not repent.” (22)

—–

At this point, it is not clear as to what Israel should repent from? Lohfink seems to hint that Israel rejection of Jesus re-gathering of God’s people was indeed the issue. In light of this, are we to assume the death of Jesus simply as “God’s plan (to regather) went wrong”? Was Jesus’ mission a re-gathering of the Twelve to be light of the world through His death and resurrection, or were they just tragic consequences with which the Son of God perceived as one possible outcome? If the Jewish people had more or less rejected His call, how much of what He had called could still be considered as a regathering of Israel? Was it re-gathering, or re-constituting?

And to ask a hypothetical question — if Israel were to accept Jesus’ call, would the cross still be necessary?

Lohfink continues in the preface:

Not long ago there was a report in the newspapers that church agencies in Berlin had established a mobile unit, an automobile equipped with short-wave radio, in which a priest, a physician and a psychologist could be summoned immediately at any hour of the day or night. That sounds very up to date: the church, in a sense, at the front, modern technology in service of the reign of God. But in reality this ecclesiastical mobile unit is a highly questionable symnol of what the church has largely become in our society: a church which takes care of the individual, an institution which offers its wares to a group of individuals.

This conception corresponds exactly to the situation of our consumer society, which Gisbert Greshake recently compared to a large supermarket. Everyone moves around with a cart and picks out what he likes and needs. In the giant “Supermarket West Germany” there is among many other things a section which offers religious products to individuals. Responsibility for this section lies with the churches. Society is very anxious that this corner remain occupied; the stock should be complete  It seems to me that the mobile religious unit in Berlin is a perfect symbol of this supermarket-church, which takes care of individuals, provides for them, and leaves them in their anonymity.

Of course Lohfink was describing the German Catholic church in the early 80’s. It is rather interesting to recall how the late 19th century liberal theology had reduced church and salvation into individualistic and profoundly spiritualized/internalized forms. In such sense, a striking resemblance can be found easily among many Chinese churches today (yet their theologies are anything but liberal!). The supermarket analogy is simply dead on in today’s church. Hence it begs the question — if contradicting theologies can produce similar phenomenon, what’s the real driving force behind it?

I decided to re-read Lohfink’s book Jesus and Community. Here are some of the quotes from his book and at times, I will write down some questions and/or comments.

Preface:

It is not much of an exaggeration to say that Jesus could not have founded a church since there had long been one — God’s people, Israel. Jesus directed his efforts to Israel. He sought to gather it in view of the coming reign of God and to make it into the true people of God. What we now call church is nothing other than the community of those ready to live in the people of God, gathered by Jesus and sanctified by his death. From this perspective, it is foolish to look to the historical Jesus for a formal act of founding the church. But it is very meaningful to ask how Jesus gathered Israel and how he envisioned the community of the true Israel, because right here we reach the ultimately decisive question of what the church should look like today. (p. xi)

A question I have always been asking: if Jesus’ work is “merely” about the gathering of (the true) Israel, what makes his death and resurrection unique then? Any prophets (like John the baptist) can call God’s people to repent and return, why Jesus? How can we stress the continuation of Israel-Church, without undermining the work of the Messiah?

What am I reading these days for leisure?

• In my backpack – Brian McLaren, The Secret Message of Jesus
• In my washroom – Margaret Feinberg, Sacred Echo
• Beside my bed – Julian Rushton, Coffee with Mozart; Tony Campolo, Let Me Tell You a Story

What are you reading for leisure?

Kelly Abbottis from lifehacker, wrote about how to read well. I am glad that it echoes some of the points I made earlier in here, namely, the “toilet read”.

As I was browsing through Chapters/Indigo and Amazon.com and making price comparison, I notice the former pricing is MUCH MORE competitive than before.

In fact, with iRewards, my shopping cart subtotal is LOWER than the same one I have in Amazon.com. Don’t forget the difference (though minor) due to the exchange rate, and FREE SHIPPING ordering from Chapters/Indigo (within Canada)!!

(and no, amazon.ca pricing is still hopeless)

Read any good book lately? What are you planning to read this summer?

What will you do if you read a good book and you want more people to read it? You buy box of it and start giving them away…

And you stop giving out the plot by refraining yourself from writing a review or reflection post…

Let me tell you — it is not easy to keep one’s mouth shut on something that good!

借書

碰巧教會有一姊妹問我借本書，令我想起在我office的bulletin board上，貼著我的借書「十不」：

• 缺乏誠信的人不借
• 習慣不良的人不借
• 轉借於人的人不借
• 不能交流的人不借
• 附庸風雅的人不借
• 喜歡應酬的人不借
• 有書不借的人不借
• 打發日子的人不借
• 尋找刺激的人不借
• 喊苦叫累的人不借

當然這姊妹不屬這任何一項！

在「十不」之下，都記著借書人的名字並書的借出日期。我不像我的另一位同工，隨意任人取書。結果藏書肢離破碎，不是見上不見下（集）；就是再買回來，人才送回借出那本，攪到幾本幾本咁，似賣書多過看書…

我自己的原則是：預計會睇多過一次的書，買。一次玩完的，去神學院借（順帶一提：Tyndale圖書館人人入得。要借書，申請張external member library card，一年$75，任你借），還有猶疑的，索性上網看看有沒有review或summary之類。很多時，看過之後，感覺只係一般，結果買到慳番。

[link: 我的十不借書觀]

睇書

至於睇書，我通常會同時開幾本。但切忌本本一樣類型（Anson，你要上堂，無法！），否則自己混淆亂砌，揾自己笨。要留意你自己的精神狀況在一日的高低節奏：對我來說，朝早食過早餐，我精神最好，在沒有甚麼事情發生之前，可以看一些比較複雜、學術性重一點的書（Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes 就是我現時的餐後閱讀）。

出外午飯或晚飯，時間短，但勝在一個人夠清靜，我的習慣是帶同一篇article送飯。例如上星期四，我看的是Paul Stevens o既 The other six days的 Epilogue。再之前一日，我則將NET版的《歌羅西書》印在letter-size紙上，一邊食飯一邊記下observations。在這裡，絕不可以帶那大部頭的，不然食到天光也未睇完；而且就算睇了，下次繼續定必又會忘記前文，浪費時間。短文的好處是一餐飯搞掂，完全獨立，又有成功感，明無？

當然，在我家廁所，定必有另一款的讀物。散文是最好的選擇。這時，《中信》、《海外校園》、《舉目》，都是不錯的選擇。粱文道的《味覺現象學》就是這樣完成（這是好書，絕無不敬之意！）

睡床邊，又是另類閱讀，故事性比較強的例如小說、傳記等都是好的選擇。另一可能是每章頁數比較短的書。因為每晚都讀，就算要有一點貫串的了解要求，都應該沒大問題。唯一是，書的內容必需簡單清楚。我在這時是不可再動腦筋！若然作者有點幽默感，等你有個sweet dream 就更好啦（Steve Chalke 的Change Agent就是這一類）！

讓我再說，這是我的讀書方式；是基於對自己一日的精神狀態的了解。絕非人人一樣。我只希望鼓勵你，若你看書覺得舉步艱難，可能是你忽略了自己的生理時鐘，在不合適的時間做不合適的事而已！

[link: 你在讀甚麼書？]