SCRIPTURE AND LITURGY AND THE MASS

The Eucharist Explained

Set out here are some notes about the Eucharist I made just after a visit on 22/11/2001. Reading them now, in January 2024, I realise that Fr Gresham tried to teach me during our conversations. I had no sense of him wearying me with information at the time. On the contrary, he was always interesting and good company. Any errors in the explanation are, I am 100% sure, due to my memory at the time, rather than Fr Gresham's explanation.

Fr Gresham said, "At the mass the sacrifice of Christ is going on. Sacrifice means something given over completely to God. It includes not only the death of Christ but also his resurrection and ascension. The mass represents movement.

What happened at the crucifixion was judicial murder. It was Christ who made it into a sacrifice by what he did at the Last Supper. He said, 'This is my body which is sacrificed for you. This is my blood which is sacrificed for you and for many.'

What Jesus was doing at the Last Supper was not unusual. Jews would bless the name of God as they broke bread and drank wine. At the start of the meal Jesus broke the bread. Then there was the meal. Jesus said, 'This is my body ..... This is my blood .....' The disciples soon came to see it was a sacrifice. They realised they could miss out the meal and simply have the bread and the wine.

When Jesus said, 'This is a new covenant ...', it must have been surprising to the Jews because the old covenant was sacred to them, the covenant between God and Moses.

The extreme Protestant view is that the Eucharist is something that happens in our minds as we devoutly remember the Last Supper. But the mass isn't something that simply happens in our minds. It is actually happening during the mass. The death, resurrection and ascension of Christ is brought about during the mass in our presence. We share in it as we take the bread and the wine."

Jesus' Vocation - lived in faith

(undated notes)

"Jesus' genius was to combine three elements from the Scriptures. People had previously thought to link the 'Son of Man' figure in the book of Daniel (chapter 7) with the Davidic king of the Psalms. But no-one before Christ had thought to combine these two with the 'suffering servant' of Isaiah 53. It was Christ who brought these three figures together for the first time.

In Daniel the text speaks of the Son of Man coming to the Ancient of Days (Almighty God) on the clouds of heaven. This needs careful reading. The 'clouds of heaven' is to distinguish it from the sea. The Jews didn't like the sea. If something came from the sea it was bad.

Jesus believed he was the Messiah but he never really knew. He told Peter he was right - in fact he said it came from God - when he said Jesus was the Messiah. Only when Caiaphas asked him bluntly at the end, Jesus answered, "I am". which is the Jewish word for God.

For Jesus there was always a temptation for proof. Even at the end they said come down from the Cross and we will believe. The temptation. But that would have been swapping certainty for living in faith, and Jesus wouldn't do it. Only when he had lived through everything that he had set out to do, did he know; that was when certainty that he was God came to him, when he said, "It is finished". The Synoptic Gospels say he breathed his last, or something like that. Only John says, "He gave up his Spirit".

Considering a service sheet prayer

28-01-2004

Fr Gresham showed me a church service sheet in which they had written their own prayers. The first line was, 'O God with your boldness transform us'. 

He commented, "Can't make out what that is getting at." 

The next line was, 'With your gentleness lead us'. 

Fr Gresham, considering the matter in a reasonable way, said, "'Boldness', perhaps, would have been better there."

Further on the prayer said the Lord was leading his people by a pillar of cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night. 

Fr Gresham commented, "Of course this is a reference to the Exodus, but I don't think people will make much of it" 

In a later line the light of the Lord was driving the darkness out of the minds or hearts of men. Fr G explained that this is in an Easter prayer, but complained that they were "mixing everything together".

Regarding when the Last Supper was 

(from 01/06/06 notes)

I asked Fr Gresham about J Cosins who was mentioned in the All Saints Margaret Street parish magazine that I had brought with me. He said Cosins had insisted that the action of the breaking of the bread be included in the Prayer Book. It may have been done, but it was not written down in the 1552 Prayer Book.

Fr Gresham read out something from the Church Times that stated the Eucharist was derived from the Passover meal. Then he commented that this was stating as fact what was at the least open to question. 

He continued, "The synoptic Gospels were vague on this point, but if John's Gospel is to be believed then the Last Supper was celebrated on the Thursday evening, and the Passover that year fell on the Sabbath, so the Passover meal would have been on the Friday night, the evening before being counted as the beginning of the day of Passover. So in this case the Last Supper would have been a meal between a teacher and his followers, certainly a solemn occasion, but not the Passover meal.

The tradition then was that if twelve were present there would be a cup of blessing of wine shared amongst the company. So Jesus did nothing out of the ordinary, but he gave the ordinary a new meaning, with his instructions to do this in memory of me, and that this is my body and this is my blood.

When the crucifixion happened Jesus' followers would have been at a loss and dispersed. However, the following year they would have celebrated Passover and remembered what they had done and what had happened the previous year. It would have reminded them of what had happened the previous year.

The year of the crucifixion, with Passover falling on the Sabbath, Jesus, on the Cross, would have died just at the time the lambs were being killed for the Passover meal, at 3pm, ready for the meal that evening.

The early Christians would not have begun to have regular Sunday Eucharists immediately after Pentecost. But it came on them gradually that this was the thing to do. Just as they realised you didn't need to have the meal, you could just have the Eucharist. In St Luke this may have already been the practice, to drop the meal and just have the Eucharist.

St Paul wrote more clearly about the Lord's Supper than the accounts  contained in the Gospels. He does this in 1 Corinthians, which was written about 52AD, only 22 years after the events, when there would have been plenty of people around to contradict him and say something was not true if he had written anything wrong. He was attacked, but only for leading the people to forsake the Jewish laws of Moses and Abraham."

About Miracles

As recorded elsewhere Fr Gresham was orthodox in his beliefs: he believed in the Creed and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. He believed in the Virgin birth and the physical resurrection of the crucified Christ, in his glorified body that could be touched by doubting Thomas, as well as eat in the presence of the apostles, but could also appear within a locked room to be amongst his disciples.

But Fr Gresham also said he "wishes to have to believe as little as possible". In conversation he did speak about the miracles. For instance Jesus walking on the water. He said that where the land was flat, a person who was walking along the shore at the water's edge, when seen from a boat upon the water, might appear to be walking on the water. The levels of the water and the shoreline may appear to merge in the distance.

About the feeding of the five thousand. He said some of the crowd, perhaps some of the women, might have brought some food with them. It might have been hidden in their loose clothing. Perhaps they were naturally keeping it out of sight, wanting to keep it for themselves and their family, and not wanting to have to share it with surrounding strangers. But when Christ brought to the fore the boy and took his few loaves and fish and began to share these out, they were shamed into bringing out their own stores of food. So there turned out to be enough for everyone, with some left over. Fr Gresham added, "This proves that socialism works."

The Mass & Low and High Church

Reading now, in January 2024, the notes set out below (22/11/2001), and taken immediately after a visit to Fr Gresham, I realise how soundly he tried to teach me during our conversations. Any errors in the explanation are, I am 100% sure, due to my memory at the time, rather than Fr Gresham's explanation.

(22/11/2001)

"At the mass the sacrifice of Christ is going on. Sacrifice means something given over completely to God. It includes not only the death of Christ but also his resurrection and ascension. The mass represents movement.

What happened at the crucifixion was judicial murder. It was Christ who made it into a sacrifice by what he did at the Last Supper. He said, 'This is my body which is sacrificed for you. This is my blood which is sacrificed for you and for many.'

What Jesus was doing at the Last Supper was not unusual. Jews would bless the name of God as they broke bread and drank wine. At the start of the meal Jesus broke the bread. Then there was the meal. Jesus said, 'This is my body ..... This is my blood .....' The disciples soon came to see it was a sacrifice. They realised they could miss out the meal and simply have the bread and the wine.

When Jesus said, 'This is a new covenant ...', it must have been surprising to the Jews because the old covenant was sacred to them, the covenant between God and Moses.

The extreme Protestant view is that the Eucharist is something that happens in our minds as we devoutly remember the Last Supper. But the mass isn't something that simply happens in our minds. It is actually happening during the mass. The death, resurrection and ascension of Christ is brought about during the mass in our presence. We share in it as we take the bread and the wine."

03/03/2005

Fr Gresham said, "At the mass, at the institution, we remember Christ's death, resurrection and ascension, all three. But remember is a word with insufficient meaning for this. By 'remember' we mean a mental process that recalls a past event.  The Latin 'anamnesis' has the meaning of 'to make present': in the mass we make present Christ's death, resurrection and ascension."

"There was (? is) an argument between the low and high Church about sacrifice. The low Church accused the high Church of repeating Christ's sacrifice, whereas Christ's sacrifice was once for all time. There is a sentence following the institution which explains what is being done at the mass."

"On 'Question Time' Anne Atkins kept interrupting others. She was very reactionary. The extremes of liberals and reactionaries, if we could get down to the roots, have much in common. The far right and the far left have much in common. Dom Gregory Dix said that. He also perceived that the Roman Catholic Church would end up low. Things at one extreme tend to swing all the way to the other."

Daily readings

25/11/2004

"I think, instead of four snippets of readings a day, people should have only one. (It could then be longer.) And the scriptures should be covered over two years. The Book of Job every year would be a bore. But re-read after two years, I enjoyed it.

That lovely chapter 35 in Isaiah, that is so obviously not by 1st Isaiah."

They let the Devil in

17-03-2004

"The catechism from the 1662 prayer book (not the original Cranmer prayer book) included mention of the Devil, as well as that Christ was the Saviour of the world." 

"In the 1960's they rewrote the catechism and left out the Devil. Well that was alright. But they also left out the statement that Christ was the Saviour of the world."

"Now a priest who I (Fr Gresham speaking) was friends with, Stanley Evans, and who was killed in a car crash, was asked to review this catechism, and he said it was alright leaving out the Devil, but when they left out that Christ was the Saviour of the world, they let the Devil in. That was the trouble, they let the Devil in."

Stanley Evans' concern for local people

24/02/2005

An Anglo-Catholic church I attended was organising a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. I was not sure if I wanted to go. 

Fr Gresham said, "Stanley Evans wrote a booklet about a pilgrimage he went on. It was called, "To Jerusalem in Evening Dress". It was humourous, but his point was that pilgrimage parties have no thought for the society into which they go; they don't care about the local people. But he was more concerned about that, than about holy places."

Fr Gresham added that "perhaps now is not the time to visit there". 

Rising from the people

23/03/2006

Fr Gresham said, "Gregory Dix's idea for liturgy was to get, say, seven bishops to agree on a liturgy, and mark certain sections not to be altered, then give it to the parishes with the instructions that if they find a better phrase, or a better way of doing the other parts of the liturgy, then try it and let the bishops know."

"Because liturgy always was developed from the people and parishes. It arose there. It wasn't set by a committee and handed down. For example. there used to be a Jewish custom of blessing the light lit at evening, a small service. Out of this came the service on Easter Saturday where the first light was blessed and then came to represent Christ."

" 'Phos Hilarion' came from the 3rd century after a Spanish nun called (?) Julia went to Jerusalem and kept a diary. She was fascinated by all the services and practices of worship there. She recorded this hymn of the blessing of the light in use then, around the year 250 AD." 

First love, then faith

05/2003  

"Jesus can't or won't do much amongst those who won't believe. Perhaps he would have to convince them in the wrong way. It would be too much like magic."

"Faith is dependent on love. First God loves us. Then we have a little faith in him. First there must be some love, then there can be some faith."

"Belief alone isn't much. The devils believe in God, and they shake with fear. But it doesn't lead them to loving action."

"The letter of St James says faith without works is dead. St Paul, however, has another view of faith. For him faith always has an element of loving action."

Belief and good works

16/02/2006

"Octavia Hill started those estates near Victoria for the poor. A priest called Jellicoe was very famous at St Mary's, Summertown, near Euston. He set up a lot of social housing near there. He died quite young. Worked himself to death, I suppose. Burnt himself out."

"Luther said that St Paul wrote about justification by faith alone, whereas in St James' letter faith without works is useless. In reality faith and works are complementary."

"For there are different levels of belief, but the belief that goes deeper, into your heart and that becomes part of you, is what we want. That generates works. If you live your belief, if the belief has gone into your heart, then it is going to spur you for doing something for your neighbour."

Faith fades as generations pass

16/02/2006

I was with Fr Gresham in company in a pub. His friend said he didn't go to church but he believed in Christian morals. Fr Gresham answered, "Yes, you were brought up in that culture. And your children will absorb it from you. But what about their children? Without faith, without belief, it doesn't go on past two or three generations." 

'The Shape of the Liturgy'

23/03/2006

Fr Gresham said, in a discussion about Gregory Dix's book, and to help me with it, that, "In 'The Shape of the Liturgy' the 3 chapters to read are the one on the meaning of the Eucharist, the one on the Reformation & the English Prayer Book, and the final one, which is in magnificent English (I forget what Fr Gresham entitled that.)"  He said much of the rest of the book was academic in content.

Transubstantiation & St Thomas Aquinas

(21/07/05)

Fr Gresham said, "Plato's idea was that the only reality was the ideas in your head. Aristotle said reality was in material things. Their writings were lost in Europe when Rome collapsed and the dark ages came. But Muslim scholars got hold of them and translated them into Arabic. They taught them in universities in Cordoba in Spain. Thomas Aquinas got hold of a Latin translation of Aristotle in Arabic which, having been translated twice, was a bit garbled. He thought very highly of it. He (Aquinas) expounded the doctrine of transubstantiation, which isn't a doctrine but an explanation. He said the substance of the bread and wine become the substance of the body and blood of Christ. It all depends what you mean by substance. As a Christian you do not have to subscribe to any particular philosophy."

"I would say the substance means the inner reality. As an example that table." Fr Gresham points to the dining table near us in the room. "It appears as a table. But its inner reality is atoms and energy. When you consider matter as atoms you consider a spiritual element to it."

I would add to the above, gathered from other conversations with Fr Gresham, that everything you see is in reality composed of atoms. And sub-atomic particles are famously interchanging at any one time between mass and energy. So you could consider the energy of the bread and wine to be changed during the communion service into the energy of the body and blood of Christ. This seems to me helpful, if you want to reconcile the transubstantiation with reason. It helps my belief. In his biography of Christ Fr Conrad Noel uses this reasoning to explain Christ's "glorified" body passing through solid objects, and also the glorified Christ eating with the disciples.

Types and shadows 

26/04/00

"Jesus had the Old Testament scriptures. He studied these and pondered their meanings. Things in the Old Testament are types and shadows of greater things to come in the New Testament. Jesus fulfilled the things in the Old Testament in his life and work."

"Consider Jonah. three days in the whale, clearly a tale. But it is to be taken as a type and shadow of Jesus' three days in the tomb. That is the way to look at the material in the Old Testament, as types and shadows that have their fulfilment and completion in the Gospels."

"So it doesn't matter if the Old Testament writings are legends, they work as types and shadows of things Jesus fulfils and completes in his life. It is in this way that they are to be taken seriously."

Sea of Reeds

03/03/2005

"The Lowther-Clarke commentary tells us that in the flight from Egypt the 'Red Sea' is really the 'sea of reeds'. Because the Old Testament was originally transmitted orally, then in Hebrew, then Greek, the Latin, then English, the final version may be a mistranslation of the original, or at least some of the original meaning may be lost."

20-04-2004

"I am interested in bringing together the opposites. Both the American protestants and the Catholic intellectuals are mistaken because they believe in the second coming of Jesus on earth.

The Catholic intellectuals don't know their Bibles. There was a discussion in the letters page (?in the Tablet) about the Israeli escape from the Egyptians through the Red Sea. One said you should consider it a miracle. None of them seem to have read a good Commentary. Lowther-Clarke explains how they could have threaded their way through marshland, leaving the Egyptian chariots to get bogged down. The Hebrew word is (?)Sokh, meaning Sea of Reeds. One thing you wouldn't get in the Red Sea is reeds.

The Book of Joshua relates events of about 1200BCE, but was only written up about 500BCE, when they wrote it up as the history they thought it should have been. We are now learning, thankfully, that they weren't such a bloodthirsty lot massacring people. Rather, they intermarried with the indigenous people.

On Prefaces

07/04/2003

“You get the best sense of the meaning of a mass from the preface. I used to read them before preparing a sermon. It used to give me something to preach about."

"The Prayer Book preserves only about seven prefaces ( ?Christmas, ?Easter, ?Trinity Sunday, ….) The Roman Rite doesn’t preserve many more."

"The Diocese of Milan does preserve others, though. They have a dispensation to use a different liturgy because they have preserved their teachings and practices from St Ambrose’s time, so they use the Ambrosian prefaces, which are very rich. The Prayer Book and Roman prefaces are bare, but the Milan Church prefaces are rich."

"The Roman Church had a rule that if something had been continuously in use for over 300 years the local church was allowed to continue with it. Originally all the prefaces and liturgy were local to an area; each place had developed its own. It was only gradually that everywhere became the same as churches took on the Roman rite, as in general it was the best."

"The Spanish church has also preserved some prefaces. A bishop endowed the cathedral in Toledo to continue using an original preface, which he was keen on, in the mass. So it still does, perhaps once a week, on Sunday. I heard about and and went along, and was present at this weekly mass, which was in Latin so I couldn’t understand, but I think it has more variety.”

Liturgy

Fr Gresham said the subject of liturgy simply required good taste and a sense of humour. Humour, because "they all took it so seriously. They agonised about it."

Christ’s perfect health

1-12-2004

"Christ had a perfect human brain and a perfect human body, perfect health, no inhibitions, unlike the rest of us who are full of inhibitions. He did not use supernatural powers to achieve his ministry, but sometimes they broke through.

Jesus had a human brain that developed as he grew.  And with it his knowledge, insight and wisdom grew. The idea that has been current in some places that the infant Jesus was consciously full of all knowledge is wrong and ridiculous."

Cosmic Christ & the Trinity

03/07/2003

P220 of Dr Lowther Clark bible commentary - Cosmic Christ. "God made the world through Christ, so Christ was in creation from the beginning, in all of creation. Then Christ was incarnated as a man, then crucifixion, resurrection and ascension. After this there is Christ in all creation plus the risen Christ.

The trinity, God in three persons. One God. We make a mistake to think of three persons. The difficulty is the words we have to use. In Greek drama a persona was a mask an actor put on to play various characters. The Trinity could be considered in that way." 

Christ's Victory over Evil

17/03/2005 

Fr Gresham said, "Christ won the victory over evil on the Cross. But humankind now has to appropriate that victory to themselves."

"Christ paid the price for our sins. But who did he pay it to? I would not hold that God demanded a payment to redeem our sins. But I'd be prepared to agree that evil demands a payment. Whether you consider evil as an energy in creation or personify evil as the devil doesn't much matter. Oh yes, evil exists."

Developing knowledge of God in the Old Testament

20/11/98 
I asked about the evil spirits going into the Gadarene swine.  Fr Gresham said that the sanity of a person is worth more than the lives of the pigs.           

"Old Testament stories were told for 600 years before they were written down. They became stylised and embellished. But at the root of them is a truth which they embody. 
      

There were natural explanations for the stories such as the death of the first-born Egyptians. There is a disease that can effect ears of corn/ wheat/ cereal that makes it poisonous. The first born is traditionally fed more so he/she died. The Israelites were healthier, perhaps because of harder outdoor work or a different diet.
          

And the Nile turning red. There could be a red silt washed down river that killed the fish. 
         

Elijah was a great man.  Moses said you should only worship God, but he didn’t deny the existence of other Gods.  Later prophets saw that there was only one God, and taught people this.  
         

When exiled to Egypt the Jewish people thought they had left God behind in Jerusalem. But Jeremiah(?) in exile taught them that God was in Egypt with them as well. This is a development in understanding about God. 
          

In later prophets (eg Hosea – from his experience of a harlot wife) the concept dawned that God is a forgiving God, even if we misbehave, as long as we repent.  Hosea still loved his wife, wanted to win her back, wanted to make her new. Just so God, and this is a new understanding of him.
         

When Christianity passed into the hands of the Gentiles there was a great falling away of the worship and belief, as can be seen in the writings of the 1^st and 2^nd Centuries AD,  compared with the New Testament.  The Gentiles didn’t understand the Jewish mind. 

In the Middle Ages,  Mediaeval religion was awful.  A great decline.
           

The three pillars, the Bible, Tradition, and our reason, guide our developing knowledge of God.

About Scripture

23/12/2004

Fr Gresham had been given a leaflet produced by the local church about the Bible, or some Bible classes. I do not now know the details of what it said, but he did not agree with them. He quoted some of its enormities, and it prompted him to say, "The bible is the source material we have that is written down nearest the events, and therefore acts as a corrective and a guide upon later developments."

Fr Gresham added that he believed "the Bible's revelations are just as true as scientific revelations. Science often begins with intuition and is then proved by experiment." He believed that "the Scriptures are divinely inspired. They are as true as the recipient can handle, in view of their mental capacities and the context(?) at the time. The early prophets were like charismatics, dancing and singing, but later tradition developed out of that. Something may have to start quite crudely, but then develops."

I think as an example of the way abilities and knowledge develop, Fr Gresham said that "people in the 4th century were surprised that Saint Ambrose could read silently. Up until then people had read aloud, a slower way of reading."

Faith wins through

09/02/2006

I asked Fr Gresham about the Gospel account of Christ answering the importunate woman by telling her he mustn't give to the dogs what is meant for the children. Fr Gresham replied that it depended how Jesus said it, whether with a smile on his face. He continued, "Jesus demanded a certain faith in people, and the woman had it, in her own (?) peculiar way."

Fr Thornton - A Brilliant Lecture Remembered

24/02/20005

Fr Gresham spoke of Fr Thornton, a tutor at Mirfield when he was there, who was brilliant but shy and so didn't have much conversation. But Fr Thornton could be humourous, and once, when Fr Gresham told him he was going to Gloucester, advised him where to get the best pint.

Fr Gresham went back to Mirfield for a conference with the Methodists and Baptists at which Fr Thornton gave a lecture. The Methodists and Baptists were astonished at Fr Thornton because he quoted verbatim and without notes, extensive Old Testament and Gospel passages.

In the lecture he started by saying that the writing on the Cross was in three languages, Hebrew, Greek and Latin, and that these were three original strands of Christianity. "The Hebrew gave a sense of God acting in history, of events having a meaning and working out God's purposes for humankind. We lost this strand; it had died out by the second century AD. 

The Greek strand was the questioning of everything, the working things out, and flowering in the formulation of the Creeds, including the Athanasian Creed." (The Athanasian Creed - God the Father is incomprehensible, God the Son is incomprehensible, God the Holy Ghost is incomprehensible, yet there are not three incomprehensibles, but one incomprehensible, ....etc.) "This traditionally was said at (?) matins on six or eight festivals a year, though it has almost died out now. It is sometimes said in a shortened form as the (?) 'Song of the True Faith', especially on Trinity Sunday."

"This Greek strand died out in the 4th or 5th century, when the Eastern Church stopped thinking." (In the notes I put a question mark (?) after this to indicate maybe I was not sure if Fr Gresham said this. Whether or not he did, I think this is a funny statement in itself, perhaps disagreed with by the Eastern Church.)

"So we are left with the Roman Church, which has a legal emphasis. So we are left with an emphasis on laws. It influences the way we understand the Gospels and the Letters. We understand the New Testament today with the minds of modern society."

The Old and New Testaments, Advent, the End of Time

Fr K 3/12/98

On the cross the inscription is in Hebrew, Greek & Latin.           

Hebrew/Aramaic  - symbolic tree, with roots in the ground, that reaches up to leaves in sky. Christianity is a religion firmly based in real life.          

Greek -  the Greeks were thinkers, the creeds were worked out in Greek. Example, “of one substance with the Father”.  Substance was a Greek idea. The Greek language enabled truth and ideas to be developed about Christianity. Greek language was used for this and made this possible in first few hundred years.   

         

Latin – legal thinking – the structure of the Church, the laws.  Also Roman Empire built roads that Paul could travel along in his missionary journey. In the West, Christianity inherited legalistic (Latin) Christianity & hence it has split up.

In the East Christianity inherited Greek thought, which is more supple (?subtle), and so has not suffered so much from splits.

Some of the more extreme protestant groups, eg Billy Graham, have the legalistic form more strongly than Rome. Bible literally true, for example. At least sometimes Rome will give way.           

At the end of the first century Jewish Christianity died out and Christianity became a Gentile religion. We lost a lot then, and lost Greek, so church was unbalanced, just legal Roman left.  Need to recover Greek and Aramaic aspects – Unity sermon.    

Greeks didn’t understand Jewish thought. Jews like bright garish colours, also all the writing of Daniel and Revelations.  Not to be taken literally, but is to be taken seriously. The Ancient Greeks with their careful thought had only their religion of gods and goddesses, whereas the Jews with their pyschedelic thought hit upon the truth.

Daniel – beasts out of the Sea.  Jews didn’t like the Sea, not a seafaring people. Sea – the deep.  Beasts as metaphors for other Kingdoms.

Son of Man = representative man, later identified with the Messiah. Jesus took the title “Son of Man” = human/representative man. 

          

Great State, powerful State = figure, head of Gold, Chest of  bronze/silver = strong, legs of iron, feet of clay. Came true. Fatal flaw, feet of clay, eventually destroyed the State even though it was powerful.  

          

Advent is to do with the end of Time, not a little lent, as some say. In the Eastern Church red & flame vestments and altarpieces (?) – atmosphere of quiet joy and expectation,  to do with Christ coming and the end of time. The feast of Christ the king coming Sunday before advent helps.

The Gospel of Mark – fresh gospel. Mark probably young lad in Garden of Gethsemane who fled leaving his garment when he was accosted there. Mark is thought to have written what Peter told him, so Peter’s gospel. Mark probably saw more of the passion than anyone – in Gethsemane etc…  

         

Luke was a gentile, written for another important gentile, Theophilus.

           

Matthew – has a lot of Jesus’ sayings in.  Matthew is a tax collector so he is used to writing things down. The Gospel may have originally been a smaller Gospel of sayings, maybe the first Gospel, then expanded, repeating much of Mark’s Gospel plus these sayings – regarded  as later than Mark’s Gospel in this form.    

       

John's Gospel is the latest one – 90 or 100 BC. 

                      

Jesus spoke Aramaic, but knew a smattering of  Greek, just as people all over the world now know some English.           

Some sayings may have been noted down in Aramaic, but the New Testament (NT) written in Greek. After all the earliest part of the NT is the epistles, written in Greek as letters sent to Gentiles who communicated in Greek.

Revelations is not about the end of time. It is about the time then and in the near future. One example, the Romans were defeated by some peoples in Iran (modern name) who had archers - the Romans hadn’t bargained for those - and this comes into Revelations.     

      

Daniel – also about the situation then.

The Cross - Greek, Aramaic & Latin Inscription

10/07/2003

"In Genesis the tree of life shows a religion rooted in the earth that grows up into the sky, a religion based in real life.  The Cross. 

The inscription on the Cross is in Greek, Aramaic & Latin. The Greeks were thinkers, the creeds were worked out in Greek. "Of one substance with the Father". Substance was a Greek idea. Latin - the structure of the Church, the laws." 

Fr Gresham quoted someone (? Fr Whelan) who said we lost the Aramaic influence in the 2nd century, and that it was a great loss. Also we have lost the Greek influence. So the Church is unbalanced, just the legal Roman left. We need to recover the Greek and Aramaic aspects - Unity sermon.

The Commandments

16/02/2006

"King Hammurabi, before Moses, had a set of ten commandments similar to Moses. Moses' commandments were rather better, rather finer, because he had a greater feeling for God.

Jesus picked out two separate teachings from Leviticus and put them together in response to a questioner. He answered, "You shall love God with all you heart ....... and you shall love your neighbour as yourself." Of course, in that is some degree of self-love. You must love yourself in order to love your neighbour."  

Stations of the Cross

23/03/2006

Fr Gresham said, "Pilgrims used to go to the Holy Land to walk the Way of The Cross, but when the Turks invaded it became no longer possible. So they set up the stations in their own churches."

A Roman Catholic priest Fr Gresham was friendly with, maintained the Franciscans came up with the Stations of the Cross (in about 1000 AD) because they were jealous of the Dominicans' Rosary.

Stations of the Cross booklet

24/02/2005

I showed Fr Gresham a booklet of the Stations of the Cross that I had bought. He looked at it and commented that traditionally there were a few words on the events at that station, then set prayers such as 'Glory be', 'Hail Mary', 'Our Father' and then a prayer of penitence such as 'I'm sorry I have sinned, I promise to sin no more'. This booklet didn't have these elements; it had prayers and commentary written by the author. 

It is true to say that ordinary people (speaking about myself here), don't know anything about Church matters, and come to a 'Stations of the Cross' booklet, for instance, unable to take a view about it without some guidance.

Fr Gresham went on to say, "The Stations of the Cross started at Jerusalem with visitors going to events happened. And then representations of these places were set up in churches. It was popularised by the Franciscans around 1200AD. (Someone named here, didn't catch who) said the Franciscans were jealous of the Dominicans, who had popularised the Rosary. They wanted something of their own so they seized on the Stations.

Taize

23/03/2006

Regarding Taize, Fr Gresham said, "Young people like to get together, don't they? It's like the Greenpeace festival (Perhaps he meant the Greenbelt festival?) , it's dubious.  There is great enthusiasm at the time, but it doesn't last."

Ignorance about religion

"A professor of theology wrote an article in which she said she had to tell the students the difference between the Old and the New Testaments.  

These days people are so ignorant.  They have turned away from religion, but they don't know anything about it. After a family leaves church a moral residue is passed on to the first generation, but after that it is lost."

Three new things

1997  
Fr Gresham said there are three things new about  Christianity.  1)  The resurrection  faith. 2)  The apostolic ministry – “even as my father sent me so I send you.” 3)  Something to do with bread & wine.