1 Cor 11.26 - Paul's Understanding of Worship

7/28/2019 1 Cor 11.26 - Paul's Understanding of Worship

1/12

"You Proclaim The Lord's Death":

1 Corinthians 11:26and PauVs Understanding ofWorshipBeverly Roberts Gaventa

In 1 Corinthians 11 Paul leaves aside the nature of relationships betweenbelievers and unbelievers, which dominates chapters 5-10, and takes up issuesthat arise from worship at Corinth. Although attempts to hear and understandPaul's conversations with believers are never easy, here the difficulties becomeextreme. In part that is because we bring to this text our own conflictingconvictions about the place of women in worship, the right observance of theLord's Supper, and the meaning of spiritual gifts. Such convictions inevitablyinhibit our listening to the text on its own terms. These difficulties do not stemexclusively from our contemporary disputes, however. They also arise fromproblems inherent in the text itself.

The first issue Paul takes up in 1 Corinthians 11 provides an obviousillustration of both sorts of difficulties. Contemporary discussion about womenin church leadership has pushed 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 to the forefront of discus

sion. Despite intense exegetical scrutiny, however, it remains unclear exactlywhat situation stands behind Paul's argument for the veiling of womenor whathe intends by certain parts of that argument.1

Paul's discussion of the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:17-34, which isthe focus of this article, is subject to similar difficulties. Nearly two thousandyears of Christian discussion of the Supper meet up with the ambiguities ofPaul's language to create a multitude of interpretations. These interpretationscan be roughly divided into two approaches. The dominant approach concernsitself with the tradition Paul cites in verses 23-26 and is primarily interested inPaul's theological understanding of the Supper and in the relationship between

this tradition and traditions about the Last Supper that are found in theGospels. Prominent examples of this approach are Hans Lietzmann's Mass and

Lord's Supper2 and Joachim Jeremas' The Eucharistie Words of Jesus.* Thesecond approach has emerged more recently and is less concerned with questions of the meal's origin and meaning than with its Corinthian context. Thisapproach asks how the Corinthians are observing the Supper and devotes majorattention to problems of social setting as reflected in verses 17-22 and 27-34.Gerd Theissen's work, recently translated as The Social Setting of PaulineChristianity: Essays on Corinth,4 is a significant example of this growingarea of

377


2/12

interest.Tb a large extent these divergent approaches reflect the changing interests

of New Testament scholars. Earlier generations understood their task as one ofdescribing the thought of various New Testament writers and tracing thehistory of ideas and practices. Although that task has by no means beencompleted or neglected, contemporary scholars have expanded the questionsthey bring to the text and thereby include questions of social setting thatpreviously received less attention.

It would be a mistake to conclude that these two approaches merely represent two scholarly fads. The differences between them reflect not only two sets

of questions brought to the text but a problem that exists within the text: howdoes the traditional material that Paul employs in verses 23-26 relate to theproblems of the Corinthian community to which he refers in verses 17-22 and 27-34? In the early part of this century Johannes Weiss recognized this difficulty.He observed that social matters dominate the beginning and the ending of thistext, sacramental matters dominate its center, and how the two are connected isleft unclear.5

Weiss was content, as most scholars have been, to conclude with the generalobservation that the conduct of the Corinthians indicated that they did notunderstand the nature of the meal. Albert Schweitzer commented similarly:"Paul calls the historic meal of Jesus with his disciples to their remembrance,with a view to making clear to them the solemn ceremonial character of thecommon meal."e This conclusion is surely right, yet it is far from satisfying.Although Paul interprets the celebration of the Lord's Supper at Corinth as amisunderstanding of the meal (cf. 11:20), we would like to be more specific aboutthe nature of the misunderstanding.

Does the text offer us any clue to a fuller perception of the connectionbetween the setting at Corinth and Paul's introduction of the tradition? Wemight expect to find a connection when Paul introduces the tradition. Such isthe case, for example, in 1 Corinthians 15, where Paul introduces traditionsabout the resurrection appearances by claiming that they are something whichmust be believed (1 Cor. 15:1-2). In Chapter 11, however, he takes up thetradition of the Lord's Supper quite abruptly by moving directly from anindictment of the Corinthians to the statement: "For I received from the Lordwhat I also delivered to you."

In this instance the clue we seek comes not with the introduction of thetradition but with its conclusion: "For as often as you eat this bread and drinkthe cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes." It is generally agreedthat Paul's quotation of traditional material concludes with verse 25. In whatfollows, we will see that verse 26 serves not simply as the recapitulation of thetradition but as the basis for the connection between the tradition and the

difficulties in the Corinthian congregation's practice of the Lord's Supper.

378


3/12

"You Proclaim the Lord's Death": 1 Corinthians 11:26and

PauVs Understanding of Worship1 Review and Expositor

Moreover, verse 26 connects Paul's discussion of the Lord's Supper to issues hehas raised throughout this letter.

Such claims for the importance of1 Corinthians 11:26 will seem odd in thelight of the exegetical approaches described above. Neither approach paysparticular attention to this verse. Those interested in the history of the Lord'sSupper overlook verse 26 because it is not part of the traditional material Qnthe other hand, those interested in the social setting find nothing here that aidsin the reconstruction of that setting.

When the verse is discussed in commentaries, it is usually read as a re

minder to the Corinthians that when they observe the Lord's Supper they alsopreach about the meaning of Jesus' death ("You proclaim the Lord's death") andthat they will continue to observe the Supper in this way until the parousia("until he comes"). We will discuss the reasons for this interpretation below.What is important here is to notice that, on this reading, 11:26 is superfluous.Having introduced a problem in quite dramatic terms ("It is not the Lord'sSupper that you eat Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?") andhaving reminded his audience of the words of Jesus about this meal, Paulconcludes the use of the traditional material by reiterating what is, according tothe standard interpretation, already known by all: Preaching accompanies themeal, and the observance of the meal continues until Jesus returns. On the face

of it, this reading fails to convince, to say the least. In order to respond to thiswidely held view of the verse,7 we will study it in some detail and then reflect onits role in the context of chapter 11 and, indeed, in the context of the letter as awhole.

Verse 26 begins with a recapitulation of the tradition Paul has just concluded: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup." "As often as"(hosakis) repeats the aclverb found in verse 25 but nowhere else in Paul Theexpression "you eat this bread and drink the cup" effectively summarizes thetradition of verses 23-25. Indeed, with the exception of "you eat" (esthieinf,every word in this expression repeats a word in the earlier tradition.

Linking this recapitulation to what precedes is the conjunction for (gar).Paul generally uses this very common conjunction to provide the reason orcause of something, as the following examples illustrate:

Without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God's will I may now at last succeed in coming to you. For igarfIlong to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthenyo u. .. (Rom. l:9b-ll).

When I came to you, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you thetestimony of God in lofty words or wisdom. For [gar]I decided to know

nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified (1 Cor. 2:1-2).For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached


4/12

by me is not man's gospel. For \gar]I did not receive it from man, nor was Itaught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:11-12).

Although commentators have acknowledged that for (gar) provides the grounding for something already said, few have asked precisely how for functions inthis context.8 That is a question to which we shall return after looking moreclosely at the remainder of the verse.

Following this recapitulation of the tradition, we come to the main clause,which the RSV translates "you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes." Thistranslation alters the word order of the Greek text. "The death of the Lord you

proclaim until he comes" is a more literal translation. How significant is thisword order? Paul often follows the Semitic practice of placing the verb first. Wewould thus expect to find the word order of the RSV, "you proclaim the death."Elsewhere, when he reverses this customary word order, he seems to do so inorder to emphasize the word placed first.9 For example, in Romans 11:13 wefind, "But to you I speak, the Gentiles," and in 1 Corinthians 13:1, "If with thetongues of men I speak" (translations mine). We may suspect, therefore, thatthe phrase "the death of the Lord" receives special stress, although it would be amistake to lean heavily on this change from normal word order.10

Whether the word order is significant or not, the phrase itself clearly is.

Paul speaks of neither the "gospel" nor the "death and resurrection" but of the"death of the Lord" (ton thanaton tou kuriou). This exact wording occursnowhere else in Paul's letters, although he does use similar expressions (cf. Rom.5:10; 6:3-5; Phil. 2:8; 3:10). Even the word death (thanatos) appears infrequentlyin 1 Corinthians, primarily in chapter 15. The phrase "the death of the Lord"does recall earlier portions of this letter, however. In 1:18 Paul writes that "theword of the cross" (ho logos ho tou staurou) is God's power for those who arebeing saved. Shortly thereafter he characterizes the subject of Christian preaching as "Christ crucified" (2:2). In other words, language about the crucifixion ordeath of Jesus occupies a primary place at the outset of this letter.

That Paul in 11:26 connects the bread and cup of the Lord's Supper with the"death of the Lord" does not mean that the Supper remembers only the barefact of Jesus' death. On the other hand, the impact of the phrase "death of theLord" should not be diminished by assuming that the resurrection is included inthis phrase.11 In my judgment, the phrase "the death of the Lord" refers toJesus' death in all its significance as the scandalous event in which all humanvalues and expectations are overturned (cf. 1 Cor. 1:23). How this relates to thelarger context of 1 Corinthians we can best appreciate after examining theremainder of the verse.

"The death of the Lord" is, as we have already seen, the object of "you

proclaim" (kataggellein). Here we arrive at the major exegetical problem ofverse 26. Does the phrase "you proclaim" refer to proclamation that occurs

ithi th L d' S (th t i th S it lf i l ti ) d


5/12

"You Proclaim the Lord's Death": 1 Corinthians 11:26andPaul's Understanding of Worship

Review and Expositor

the phrase refer to a proclamation accompanying the Supper (that is, an explicitverbal proclamation or homily)?12

By far the most frequent response to this question is the latter. The conventional reading of the verse, as described above, is that some proclamation aboutthe meaning of the Lord's death occurs in connection with the observance of theLord's Supper. Many who take this position give no reason for doing so.18

Others invoke the "word character" of the expression "you proclaim," withoutexplaining what that means.14 Hans Conzelmann simply states that Paul musthave intended an explicit proclamation, "since there is no such thing as asacrament without accompanying proclamation."16 It is difficult either to un

derstand or to respond to arguments of this nature.The strongest argument for kataggeUein as verbal proclamation accompa

nying the observance of the Supper is lexicographical. In the Theological Dictio-nary of the New Testament, Schniewind argues that kataggeUein always appears in connection with verbal pronouncements.16 KataggeUein is alsoassociated by some with the Hebrew verb higgid(narrate, tell), from which thenoun haggadah is derived. Hence, what Paul refers to is a narrative of the deathof Jesus and the significance of that death, a Christian counterpart to thePassover haggadah.17

The notion that the Greek verb kataggeUein corresponds to the Hebrew

higgid is an interesting one. Scholars who make this claim usually refer toarticles by G. H. Box and Douglas Jones written several decades ago.18 Neitherauthor, however, offered evidence for a connection between the two verbs.Indeed, such evidence would be difficult to produce, since kataggeUein appearsrarely in the Septuagint, and nowhere does it translate higgid or any wordrelated to higgid

The argument that general usage of kataggeUein requires a verbal pronouncement also does not withstand close scrutiny. Elsewhere in the letters ofPaul kataggeUein does consistently refer to proclamation and seems to be theequivalent ofeuaggeUzesthai (to preach the good news). The word only appears

five other times, however (Rom. 1:8; 1 Cor. 2:1; 9:14; Phil. 1:17; 1:18), whichshould caution against concluding that it must mean "preach" in our text aswell.19 Outside of Paul, kataggeUein occurs only in Acts, where it characterizesthe giving of promises to Israel (Acts 3:24) and the announcing of the gospeland its consequences (Acts 4:2; 13:5; 13:38; 15:36; 16:17; 16:21; 17:3; 17:13;17:23; 26:23).

Though in other Hellenistic texts kataggeUein most often has this samemeaning of announcing or proclaiming, there are some instructive exceptions tothat usage. The author of2 Maccabees tells the story ofNicanor, an agent of theSeleucid rulers who attempts to take Jewish prisoners and sell them as slaves.Under the leadership of the Maccabean family, the Jews soundly defeat Nicanor, and he flees the country alone. The account concludes with this comment:

381


6/12

Thus he who had undertaken to secure tribute for the Romans by thecapture of the people of Jerusalem proclaimed (kataggeUein) that the

Jews had a defender, and that therefore the Jews were invulnerable,because they followed the laws ordained by him (2 Mace. 8:36).

The context makes it obvious that Nicanor did not travel around preachingabout the God of the Jews. Instead, his defeat and flight constituted such anannouncement or demonstration.

KataggeUein appears elsewhere in ways that may refer to proclamation bydeeds rather than by speech. For example, in his discussion of the significance ofthe number seven, Philo of Alexandria writes that seven brings perfection by

demonstrating (kataggeUein) two sorts of correspondences (On the Creation,106). Elsewhere, when Philo criticizes myths in which the earliest humans aredepicted bearing weapons, he comments that it would be better if the heraldstaff, the symbol of peace, would spring forth and demonstrate (kataggeUein)peace to all people (The Eternity of the World, 68). Similar usage is found inJosephus' narrative about the patriarch Joseph. When Joseph has a dreamabout his future, his father Jacob rejoices because of the good fortune it proclaims (kataggeUein; Antiquities 2:15). Again, when Joseph interprets Pharaoh's dream, he describes the ears of corn as proclaiming (kataggeUein) faminefor Egypt (Antiquities 2:85).

These examples, although they are admittedly exceptions to the normalusage ofkataggeUein, should make us wary of the notion that kataggeUein in 1Corinthians 11:26 must imply a sermon that accompanies the Lord's Supper. Itmay be that Paul means that the Supper itself constitutes a proclamation. Thatunderstanding of this verse is entirely consistent with remarks Paul makeselsewhere concerning the proclamation character of action and faith. In 1Thessalonians, for example, when Paul describes his experiences at Thessa-lonica, he remarks that he and his colleagues became the sort of people whoattracted others to the gospel (1 Thess. 1:4-5). The Thessalonians, in turn,responded in a way that was an example to others: "For not only has the word of

the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith inGod has gone forth everywhere, so that we need not say anything" (1 Thess.1:8). Both the actions of Paul and the response of believers in Thessalonicademonstrated the gospel.

Even the context of 1 Corinthians 11:26 confirms the claim that Paulunderstands the observance of the Lord's Supper as a proclamation. After all,

382


7/12



what follows immediately in verses 27ff. explicitly has to do with the consequences of observing the meal in an unworthy manner. Believers who do notparticipate as they should are liable to the judgment of illness and death. Such aconcrete notion of the negative results of misapppropriating the Supper followseasily upon verse 26, in which Paul describes a result of the right observance ofthe Supper.

All these considerations taken together require us to reject the consensusregarding the meaning of kataggeUein in our text. Not only is it possiblelexicographically that Paul understands the Supper itself as an act of proclamation, but the context and Paul's comments elsewhere make this the more

compelling interpretation.90

The final clause in verse 26 specifies that proclamation via the Lord'sSupper continues "until he comes" (achris hou elths). Some commentators, asnoted above, see in this merely the point at which observance of the Lord'sSupper terminates.21 That is, believers will no longer celebrate the meal whenthe parousia has occurred. At the other extreme, Jeremas understands this as apurpose clause ("in order that he might come"); thus, the supper reminds God ofhis promise and urges God to send Jesus.22

It is difficult to imagine that Paul would refer to the parousia as a meredeadline. Most often when he mentions the expectation of the parousia, he does

so in connection with the triumph of God (1 Cor. 15:24-28) or the life of believerstogether with the returning Lord (1 Thess. 4:14-18). An event of such significance does not readily become a way of marking the end of a present custom.That is not to affirm Jeremas' position, however. Paul is clear that the time ofthe parousia is a matter of God's choosing (1 Thess. 5:1-3), not an event that canbe hurried by means of human action.

How are we to understand the phrase "until he comes" if it is not a deadlineor a way of urging God to hasten Jesus' return? Perhaps it is, instead, areminder to the assembled believers at Corinth that the Lord will return andthat worship must be understood in light of that expectation. First Corinthians

15 indicates that they rejected the resurrection of Jesus, or at least its corporeality. They may also have rejected the belief that he would return (15:23). If so,Paul's final words in verse 26, together with the warning afterwards regardingabuse of the Supper, stood as a reminder that the manner in which the meal isobserved does matter.

As we pull together these various exegetical observations, verse 26 emergesin a strikingly different light. What Paul says here is that when believerscelebrate the Lord's Supper they proclaim the death of the Lord in its eschato-logical significance. The celebration itself demonstrates the gospel. Far frombeing a superfluous comment that preaching accompanies the meal and that the

meal will continue until Jesus' return, verse 26 announces the meaning of theLord's Supper.

383


8/12

This understanding of verse 26 is important because it allows us to see moreclearly the relationship between problems Paul discusses in verses 17-22 and 27-34 and the tradition he cites in verses 23-25. It enables us to bridge the gapbetween the approach which is concerned primarily with the social setting of themeal and the one which is concerned primarily with the meaning of the meal andits historical development.

Gerd Theissen has argued convincingly that conflicts had arisen concerningthe Lord's Supper at Corinth as a result of tensions among those of differingsocial status.28 The more affluent believers not only had more food for thecommon meal but also food of superior quality. Because they offered their

homes as a place in which the community could gather and their food for thosewho had little to share, they regarded their own better, more ample, portionssimply as their right as hosts. Others within the community rejected thedisparity created by this practice. Paul does not deny the claims of the community's patrons, who were well within the rights ascribed them by social standards of the day, but he does press for the moderation of those rights. Those whohave special food which they are unwilling to distribute among the congregation should partake of it at home (w. 22, 34). The community meal is for all.

We might conclude from Theissen's analysis that Paul's response to thesocial conflict at Corinth is merely pragmatic. Verses 23-26 indicate otherwise.

Paul reminds them of the tradition concerning the meal in order to show thatthe meal is nothing less than an eschatological proclamation of the gospel. Thewords of institution in verses 23-25 do not simply remind the Corinthians thatthe meal originated with Jesus or that the meal, rightly celebrated, proclaimsthe death of the Lord. That death, in Paul's view, stands diametrically opposedto the claims of social status that were at work in the Corinthian community, l bproclaim the death of the Lord is, to say the least, not to proclaim one's ownrights or prerogatives.

Paul's method of addressing this issue has certain similarities to his way ofapproaching other issues at Corinth. In chapter 8 he introduces the problem of

whether Christians may eat meat that has been sacrificed to idols. Chapter 9concerns Paul's own freedom as an apostle and his decision to limit that freedomin order to win more people for the gospel. Then, in chapter 10 he returns to theproblem of meat that has been sacrificed to idols and urges believers to modifytheir own rights for the sake of others (10:23-30). Similarly, the discussion ofspiritual gifts in chapters 12 and 14 has at its core Paul's remarks about loveand maturity in chapter 13, which provide something of a theoretical framework for the consideration of the problem. Paul's treatment of the Lord'sSupper, then, follows a typical pattern in which theological warrants are placedat the center of the consideration of a "practical" issue.

First Corinthians 11:26 is important for understanding how Paul's remarkson the Lord's Supper fit together. The verse is also important because it

384


9/12



connects this passage with the larger dynamics of the letter. Paul and thebelievers at Corinth, or at least a significant group of them, had strikinglydifferent understandings of the gospel The Corinthians apparently thoughtthat their relationship with Jesus Christ had already secured their salvation.They had, in their view, arrived at a special knowledge that allowed themfreedom from this world and its limitations and standards. The triumphantChrist whom they served was one who offered them power and wisdom andsecurity.24

Paul's response to this enthusiasm indicates that he sees the situation verydifferently. The gospel he preaches is of Christ crucified (1 Cor. 1:17; 2:2). It is

the scandal of that cross that forms the center of the gospel and the stumblingblock for Jews and Gentiles alike (1 Cor. 1:18-25). Although we may wish to seereferences to the resurrection included in these statements, it is striking thatPaul postpones any explicit discussion of Jesus' resurrection to chapter 15.That literary observation is consistent with Paul's thought: the believer livesbetween the cross and the resurrection.

Paul's understanding of worship, then, is consistent with the position hetakes throughout the letter. The community's celebration of the Lord's Supperis not a time for rejoicing in one's salvation. Instead, the celebration of theLord's Supper proclaims the death of Jesus and awaits his return.

At the outset I noted the difficulties we have when we take up Pauline textsthat touch on worship. We often go with our own contemporary concerns andquestions. In this instance, we frequently read 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 and askabout our own worship practices. What constitutes the right observance of theLord's Supper? Who should be included at the table and who excluded from it?Is the Lord's Supper to be understood as a sacrifice or as a memorial meal? Assignificant as these questions are, our own preoccupation with them may prevent us from hearing Paul. In this instance, his concerns differ from our own.His question is whether the celebration actually proclaims the death of the Lordor whether it proclaims simply the standards and values of the larger society.

As is often the case with scripture, our questions are turned back upon us.

1The literature on 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is enormous. See the following attempts to unravel this

difficult text: Ernst Kahler,Die Frau in denpaulinischen Briefen (Zrich: Gotthelf, 1960), pp. 45-46;Morna Hooker, "Authority on Her Head: An Examination ofI Cor. xi. 10," New Testament Studies,19 (1963-64), 410-16; J. A. Fitzmyer, "A Feature of Qumran Angelology and the Angels of 2 Cor.11:10," Paul and Qumran, ed. Jerome Murphy-O'Connor (London: Chapman, 1968), pp. 31-47;Madeleine Boucher, "Some Unexplored Parallels to 1 Cor. 11, 11-12 and Gal. 3, 28: The NewTestament on the Role of Women," Catholic BiblicalQuarterly, 31 (1969), 50-58; W. J. Martin, "1Corinthians 11:2-16: An Interpretation," Apostolic History and the Gospel Biblical and Historical

Essays Presented to E E Bruce on His 60th Birthday, ed. W. Ward Gasque andR. P. Martin (Exeter,

England: Paternoster Press, 1970), pp. 231-41; Annie Jaubert, "Le voile de femmes (1 Cor. xi, 2-16),"New Testament Studies, 18 (1971-72), 419-30; Robin Scroggs, "Paul and the EschatologicalWoman," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 40 (1972), 283-303; idem, "Paul and the


10/12

Eschatological Woman: Revisited,"Journal ofthe American Academy of Religion, 42 (1974), 532-57;Elaine Pagels, "Paul and Women: A Response to Recent Discussion," Journal of the American

Academy of Religion, 42 (1974), 543-49; W. O. Walker, "1 Cor. 11:2-16 and Paul's Views RegardingWomen," Journal of Biblical Literature, 94 (1975), 94-110; Jerome Murphy O'Connor, "The Non-Pauline Character of1Corinthians 11:2-16?" Journal of Biblical Literature, 95 (1976), 615-21; idem,"Sex and Logic in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 42 (1980), 482-500; LamarCope, "1 Cor 11:2-16: One Step Further," Journal of Biblical Literature, 97 (1978), 435-46; J. P.Meir,"On the Veiling of Hermeneutics (1 Cor. 11:2-16)," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 40 (1978). 212-26: G.W. TVompf, "On Attitudes Toward Women in Paul and Paulinist Literature: 1 Cor 11:3-6 and ItsContext," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 42 (1980), 196-215.

*A SPady in the History of the Liturgy, trans. Dorothea H. G. Reeve (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979).8 Trans. Norman Perrin (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966).4

Ed. and trans. John H. Schtz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982).6 Earliest Christianity: A History of the PeriodA.D. 30-150, trans. F. C. Grant, 2 vols. (New York:Harper & Row, 1959), II, 648-49.

* The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle, trans. William Montgomery (New York: Seabury Press,1968), 263-64.

7 This is not to say, of course, that any exegete has actually termed the verse superfluous.Nevertheless, the common interpretation of the verse inevitably results in such a view.

8Among those who do address this issue are H. A. W. Meyer, Critical andExegeticalHandbook

to the Epistles to the Corinthians, trans. Douglas Bannerman, trans, rev. W. P. Dickson (5th ed.;NewYork: Funk and Wagnals, 1890), p. 265, and C.K. Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistleto the Corinthians (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1968), p. 270. Barrett comments that "it is hard to seewhat the new sentence explains if not the memorial character of the Supper" (p. 270).

9 Nigel Turner, Syntax, vol. 3 in A Grammar of New Testament Greek, J. H. Moulton (Edin

burgh: T. & T.Clark, 1963), p. 94.10 The exegetical importance of such alterations is strenuously reiected by F. Blass and A.

Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans,and rev. Robert W.Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), p. 252.

11 Dom Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy (London: Dacre Press, 1945), p. 242.12 Technically, there is another question to be asked. The form in which proclaim (kataggeUein)

appears here may be either indicative or imperative. The for(gar) at the beginning of the verserequires, however, that we readproclaim as an indicative statement rather than a command.

13 Ernst Kasemann, "The Pauline Doctrine of the Lord's Supper," Essays on New TestamentThemes, trans. W. J. Montague (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982), pp. 120-21; Barrett, First

Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 270; Walter Schmithals, Gnosticism in Corinth, ed. John E. Steely(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1971), p. 251; Nils Dahl, "Anamnesis: Memory and Commemoration in

Early Christianity," Jesus in the Memory of the Early Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg PublishingHouse, 1976), p. 23.14 Gnther Bornkamm, "Lord's Supper and Church in Paul," Early Christian Experience, trans.

Paul L. Hammer (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), p. 141.16

1 Corinthians, trans. James W. Leiten (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), p. 201.18

"Kataggello, " Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans, and ed.G. W. Bromiley, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1964), I, 70-72. The same conviction isexpressed in Charles J. Ellicott, St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: Longmans,Green, and Co., 1887), p. 218; Meyer, Epistles to the Corinthians, p. 266; and F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2Corinthians (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1971), pp. 113-14.

17 Joachim Jeremas, The Eucharistie Words of Jesus, pp. 106-07.18

G. H. Box, "The Jewish Antecedents of the Eucharist," Journal of Theological Studies, 3(1901-1902), 357-69; Douglas Jones, "Anamnesis in the LXX and the Interpretation of1 Cor. xi. 25,"

Journal of Theological Studies, 6(1955), 183-91.19

KataggeUein also appears in Col. 1:28.


11/12

"You Proclaim the Lord's Death": 1 Corinthians 11:26 andPauVs Understanding ofWorship


"The following scholars implicitly or explicitly agree with the interpretation ofkataggeUein

offered here: Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early

Christian Literature, trans. W. F. Arndt and F. W. Gingrich, rev. F. W. Gingrich and F. W. Danker(2nd ed.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), p. 409; Johannes Weiss, Der erste Korin-

therbrief(Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910), p. 288; Hans Lietzmann, An die Korinther

MI, rev. W. G. Kmmel (Tbingen: J. C. . Mohr, 1969), p. 58;Schweitzer, The Mysticism ofPaul, p.33; Lenski, Corinthians, p. 474; Jean Hering, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians,trans. A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock (London: Epworth Press, 1962), pp. 118-19; MargaretThrall, landII Corinthians(Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1965), p. 84;WilliamBaird, 1Corinthians, 2Corinthians(Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1980), p. 48. Seldom is any reason given forthe interpretation offered.

n

Meyer, Epistles to the Corinthians, p. 266; R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation ofSt Paul'sFirstandSecond Epistles to the Corinthians (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1937), p. 474.

n

Eucharistie Words of Jesus, pp. 249-55.n

Social Setting of Pauline Christianity, pp. 145-74.M This picture is painted with a large brush and many fine points are therebyneglected. Thehistorical-critical questions involved in this summaryare numerous, and the commentaries provide,some introduction to them.

387


12/12

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual useaccording to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and asotherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without thecopyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be aviolation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permissionfrom the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

Documents

1 Cor 11.26 - Paul's Understanding of Worship