ASH WEDNESDAY
Worship
Scripture Notes
For use with Common, Lutheran and Roman Catholic Lectionaries
Each year as we consider the meaning of Lent and the significance we would like it to have for us and for the people with whom we live, we turn to the Ash Wednesday texts selected for our use.
We see that in Joel 2 and in Matthew 6 the emphasis is on appropriate behavior. In Joel 2 it is on fasting, weeping, mourning, repentance, and returning to Yahweh. In Matthew 6 it is on giving alms, praying, fasting, and laying up treasures in heaven. Obviously, appropriate behavior such as demonstrated in these two texts was important for those who chose these pericopes for Ash Wednesday each year. Portions of one of the best-known penitential psalms in the Psalter (Psalm 51) were then selected in order to demonstrate appropriate prayer to accompany appropriate behavior during the season of Lent. Finally, the grace of God was brought into this series of texts by using the Apostle Paul's 2 Aorist passive imperative verb katallagete ("be reconciled to God") in 2 Corinthians 5:20 and Paul's entreaty in 2 Corinthians 6:1 not to receive the grace of God in vain. The 2 Corinthians reading provides for us, therefore, an important alternative to the appropriate behavior emphasis of the Joel and Matthew texts, and it would be advisable to emphasize this alternative at least once during each three-year cycle.
Common:
2 Corinthians 5:20b--6:2 (3-10)
Lutheran: 2 Corinthians 5:20b--6:2
Roman Catholic: 2 Corinthians 5:20--6:2
Let us consider the significance of Paul's 2 Aorist passive imperative katallagete in 2 Corinthians 5:20. Theologically, the passive imperative is perhaps the most interesting grammatical construction in Indo-European language. We are exhorted to be reconciled to God by the grace of God. We believe that God made this possible by means of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus as the Christ, through the atonement proclaimed by Paul and by other writers of documents that would eventually be included within the New Testament canon and developed further by later Christian theologians. What is our role today in this reconciling action? According to the grammatical construction used by Paul, we are passive. We are to have this done to us. More precisely, we are to permit this to be done to us. "Be reconciled to God!" we are told. We can choose to reject this reconciliation, but Paul urges us to permit it to be done to us. We are exhorted to be forgiven, to let ourselves become a new creation in Christ, as described in the 2 Corinthians 5:16-20a portion that precedes this text. We are strongly urged to accept from God this grace and to live in this relationship of grace. Beyond this text, in 2 Corinthians 6:3-13 (a section of which is used in the Common reading as an option) and in its continuation in 7:2-4, Paul claims that he and his co-proclaimers put no obstacles in the path of anyone, and he wants no obstacles by anyone to hinder the sharing of this message of God's amazing grace.
According to Paul our task, therefore, on Ash Wednesday and during Lent is to prevent obstacles from hindering in any way God's action of reconciling us and others to God through Jesus as the Christ.
In the light of Paul's admonition to permit the grace of God in our lives, let us turn to the other texts appointed for Ash Wednesday. In this way we shall let the gospel that is in Paul's letter illumine the other texts selected.
Common:
Psalm 51:1-12
Lutheran: Psalm 51:1-13
Roman Catholic: Psalm 51:3-6, 12-14, 17
The portions of the psalm selected put emphasis on penitential prayer. The obstacles to be removed are personal sins. These sins are great in number, but the appeal is that God's mercy is greater than the sins of the psalmist. From our Christian standpoint, the forgiveness of our sins is accomplished by God through Jesus' death and resurrection. We recognize, however, that the People of God during the pre-Christian era called upon the mercy of God without specific reference to Jesus, as the writer of Psalm 51 did, and we can assume that God was able to forgive them. The writer of Psalm 51:16-17 was aware that God does not need burnt offerings and sacrifices in order to be able to forgive. God is interested in our broken and contrite heart, the psalmist wrote. When our hearts are contrite, then the offerings and sacrifices will have value.
Has this changed since the time that the psalmist wrote or sang this psalm? What relationship do we see between atonement and forgiveness? Which is the more inclusive concept - atonement or forgiveness? Do we even today always require atonement of each other (of our children, for example) before we will forgive them? Within our cultural milieu is it possible that an overemphasis on atonement theology places an unwarranted limitation on God and on our perception of God?
Atonement theology is useful and valuable within our understanding of God's grace. However, perhaps it should be seen as only one of the ways in which we may perceive God's action in Christ and in history. Atonement theology was a way in which followers of Jesus after Jesus had been tortured and crucified by the oppressive Roman occupation forces saw some very important good that God accomplished through the tragic event of Jesus' death. Atonement theology is one of the ways in which we continue to see the crucifixion of Jesus, but today it is only one of several ways in which we view Jesus' death. For a more extended discussion of this, see Hans Kung, On Being a Christian (Doubleday, 1976), pp. 419-436.
Common:
Joel 2:1-2, 12-17a
Lutheran: Joel 2:12-19
Roman Catholic: Joel 2:12-18
This text elaborates on the ideas of Psalm 51 beautifully and even more vividly. Again in relation to this text, let us consider the issues and questions raised in the preceding paragraph. What are some of the implications for our perceptions of the relationships between Christians and people in other religions from our understanding of the relationship between atonement and forgiveness? What implications are there from this for Jewish-Christian-Islamic dialogue?
Common, Lutheran: Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21
Roman Catholic: Matthew 6:1-6, 16-18
A glance at the synoptic parallels shows that except for verses 19-21 the components of this pericope are peculiar to Matthew. Verses 1-6, 16-18 may most accurately be seen as teachings of the Matthean community in Jesus' name. The positive aspects of these teachings are certainly applicable today and at any period in time. The negative anti-Jewish aspects are not applicable.
We see that in Joel 2 and in Matthew 6 the emphasis is on appropriate behavior. In Joel 2 it is on fasting, weeping, mourning, repentance, and returning to Yahweh. In Matthew 6 it is on giving alms, praying, fasting, and laying up treasures in heaven. Obviously, appropriate behavior such as demonstrated in these two texts was important for those who chose these pericopes for Ash Wednesday each year. Portions of one of the best-known penitential psalms in the Psalter (Psalm 51) were then selected in order to demonstrate appropriate prayer to accompany appropriate behavior during the season of Lent. Finally, the grace of God was brought into this series of texts by using the Apostle Paul's 2 Aorist passive imperative verb katallagete ("be reconciled to God") in 2 Corinthians 5:20 and Paul's entreaty in 2 Corinthians 6:1 not to receive the grace of God in vain. The 2 Corinthians reading provides for us, therefore, an important alternative to the appropriate behavior emphasis of the Joel and Matthew texts, and it would be advisable to emphasize this alternative at least once during each three-year cycle.
Common:
2 Corinthians 5:20b--6:2 (3-10)
Lutheran: 2 Corinthians 5:20b--6:2
Roman Catholic: 2 Corinthians 5:20--6:2
Let us consider the significance of Paul's 2 Aorist passive imperative katallagete in 2 Corinthians 5:20. Theologically, the passive imperative is perhaps the most interesting grammatical construction in Indo-European language. We are exhorted to be reconciled to God by the grace of God. We believe that God made this possible by means of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus as the Christ, through the atonement proclaimed by Paul and by other writers of documents that would eventually be included within the New Testament canon and developed further by later Christian theologians. What is our role today in this reconciling action? According to the grammatical construction used by Paul, we are passive. We are to have this done to us. More precisely, we are to permit this to be done to us. "Be reconciled to God!" we are told. We can choose to reject this reconciliation, but Paul urges us to permit it to be done to us. We are exhorted to be forgiven, to let ourselves become a new creation in Christ, as described in the 2 Corinthians 5:16-20a portion that precedes this text. We are strongly urged to accept from God this grace and to live in this relationship of grace. Beyond this text, in 2 Corinthians 6:3-13 (a section of which is used in the Common reading as an option) and in its continuation in 7:2-4, Paul claims that he and his co-proclaimers put no obstacles in the path of anyone, and he wants no obstacles by anyone to hinder the sharing of this message of God's amazing grace.
According to Paul our task, therefore, on Ash Wednesday and during Lent is to prevent obstacles from hindering in any way God's action of reconciling us and others to God through Jesus as the Christ.
In the light of Paul's admonition to permit the grace of God in our lives, let us turn to the other texts appointed for Ash Wednesday. In this way we shall let the gospel that is in Paul's letter illumine the other texts selected.
Common:
Psalm 51:1-12
Lutheran: Psalm 51:1-13
Roman Catholic: Psalm 51:3-6, 12-14, 17
The portions of the psalm selected put emphasis on penitential prayer. The obstacles to be removed are personal sins. These sins are great in number, but the appeal is that God's mercy is greater than the sins of the psalmist. From our Christian standpoint, the forgiveness of our sins is accomplished by God through Jesus' death and resurrection. We recognize, however, that the People of God during the pre-Christian era called upon the mercy of God without specific reference to Jesus, as the writer of Psalm 51 did, and we can assume that God was able to forgive them. The writer of Psalm 51:16-17 was aware that God does not need burnt offerings and sacrifices in order to be able to forgive. God is interested in our broken and contrite heart, the psalmist wrote. When our hearts are contrite, then the offerings and sacrifices will have value.
Has this changed since the time that the psalmist wrote or sang this psalm? What relationship do we see between atonement and forgiveness? Which is the more inclusive concept - atonement or forgiveness? Do we even today always require atonement of each other (of our children, for example) before we will forgive them? Within our cultural milieu is it possible that an overemphasis on atonement theology places an unwarranted limitation on God and on our perception of God?
Atonement theology is useful and valuable within our understanding of God's grace. However, perhaps it should be seen as only one of the ways in which we may perceive God's action in Christ and in history. Atonement theology was a way in which followers of Jesus after Jesus had been tortured and crucified by the oppressive Roman occupation forces saw some very important good that God accomplished through the tragic event of Jesus' death. Atonement theology is one of the ways in which we continue to see the crucifixion of Jesus, but today it is only one of several ways in which we view Jesus' death. For a more extended discussion of this, see Hans Kung, On Being a Christian (Doubleday, 1976), pp. 419-436.
Common:
Joel 2:1-2, 12-17a
Lutheran: Joel 2:12-19
Roman Catholic: Joel 2:12-18
This text elaborates on the ideas of Psalm 51 beautifully and even more vividly. Again in relation to this text, let us consider the issues and questions raised in the preceding paragraph. What are some of the implications for our perceptions of the relationships between Christians and people in other religions from our understanding of the relationship between atonement and forgiveness? What implications are there from this for Jewish-Christian-Islamic dialogue?
Common, Lutheran: Matthew 6:1-6, 16-21
Roman Catholic: Matthew 6:1-6, 16-18
A glance at the synoptic parallels shows that except for verses 19-21 the components of this pericope are peculiar to Matthew. Verses 1-6, 16-18 may most accurately be seen as teachings of the Matthean community in Jesus' name. The positive aspects of these teachings are certainly applicable today and at any period in time. The negative anti-Jewish aspects are not applicable.
