Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Sanders and the "New" Perspective

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: John Lupia <JLupia2 AT excite.com>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Sanders and the "New" Perspective
  • Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:21:29 -0700 (PDT)


A Response to Rick Carr:

You wrote:

>I wonder, does Peter really take away from his vision experience the
message that he is to abandon Jewish dietary laws?  It seems to me that
Peter himself, upon reflection, concluded that the message was, "God has
shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean."  Acts 10:28.

Rick, the simple and pellucid logic of the text of Acts 10,11-16; 11,5-11 is
the revelation of the annulment of Jewish dietary law. If anyone can eat
anything and not be made unclean then it logically follows that St. Peter
could rightly say, "God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy
or unclean."  Acts 10:28 (in regards to dietary law, of course!).


Then you said:

>Similarly can not Paul simply be saying that "hearty obedience" is what
God requires and not simply formalism? That David or Isaiah or others
decried the vanity of offerings without a "broken and contrite heart" does
not mean that they believed the system to be obsolete, does it?

St. Paul is definitively and pellucidly stating in unequivocal terms that it
is not the circumcision of the olah (foreskin) that establishes a covenant
with an individual to God but their interior disposition and attitude having
an appropriate response to Jesus Christ believing that he is the Saviour of
the World and being faithful to his Gospel. St. Paul uses the expression
that "circumcision of heart" supersedes the former. The comparison of the
witnesses in the Old Law pointing to the prerequisite of having a "contrite
and humble heart" as a necessary preparation to fulfill the required duties
of the law not only demonstrates that interior dispositions were
quintessential in proper Jewish ritual practices but that they also
foreshadow what was fulfilled through the Gospel teaching by Christ and
through his Church as it is recorded in the Gospels and expounded on in Acts
and the epistles, discussed above and in my earlier posting. Prior to Jesus
Christ and the establishment of his Gospel and Church it would have been
absurd to think that circumcision and dietary law were a thing that could be
waived because you had a good interior disposition and attitude, they were
then morally bound requirements by God for his chosen people. So, the
Church rather early on as recorded in Acts 10,11-16; 11,5-11 taught that
Gentile converts did not need to be first converted to Judaism following
dietary laws and then to Christianity. In the same way Romans 2, 28-29
teaches that it is the circumcision of the heart that now takes precedence
over the former excision of the  foreskin (orlah). The Church made it
clear that circumcision and dietary laws were no longer required in the "New
Covenant" established by Jesus Christ. For that matter the Sabbath was
moved from Saturday to Sunday as recorded in Acts 20,7; 1 Cor. 16,2 (cf.
Joseph Andreas Jungmann, SJ, The Eucharistic Prayer and the Meaning of
Sunday, (Notre Dame: IN, 2nd prntg 1965) 105ff).


Cordially in Christ,
John
<><

John N. Lupia
501 North Avenue B-1
Elizabeth, New Jersey 07208-1731 USA
JLupia2 AT excite.com
<>< ~~~ <>< ~~~ <>< ~~~ ><> ~~~ ><> ~~~ ><>
"during this important time, as the eve of the new millennium approaches . .
. unity among all Christians of the various confessions will increase until
they reach full communion." John Paul II, Tertio Millennio Adveniente, 16





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page