LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary

102 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII
washings so that they can “clear the conscience”, and these powerful cultic
rites manifest themselves as effective in the New Covenant as Baptism and
the Eucharist.
Such a view helps to explain one of the “classic conundrums” of the
Hebrews text, that to which the “models of heavenly things”, or “Heavenly
sanctuary” (u`podei,gmata tw/n evn toi/j ouvranoi/j tou,toij) and “heavenly
things” (auvta. ta. evpoura,nia) refer which the author states need to be
cleansed. What could it mean that heavenly things would be in need of
cleansing? Drawing upon the careful analysis of this passage by J. W.
Roslin, 43 which finds the heavenly sanctuary and heavenly things of 9:23 to
refer to the same thing, Swetnam argues that just as the Most Holy Place was
cleansed in the Day of Atonement ritual so that it could become a worthy
place for Yahweh’s special presence, so this same place is purified once and
for all by Christ as a worthy place for God’s presence with His people. In
other words, Christ Himself “enters” the Old Covenant sacred copies of
heavenly things in order to sanctify them with His very own Divine Presence
for use in the sacred things of the New Covenant. “The Eucharist—Christ’s
Real Presence!—is really the heir of ancient cultic practices involving God’s
presence and brought to their divinely-willed fulfilment in Christ.” 44
How confidently can one conclude that the author of Hebrews did in fact
intend such a Eucharistic theme throughout his epistle? Swetnam is the first
to say that his hypothesis is not absolutely conclusive; it is “in need of
further study”, 45 and, in fact, still has “serious difficulties”. 46 Perhaps the
most serious difficulty is the fact that in spite of all these apparent allusions
to the Eucharist, it seems remarkable that the author of Hebrews would never
actually mention it by name if it was, in fact, “a central point of the
epistle”. 47 Bruce finds it to be a decisive argument for a Eucharist-free
Hebrews that “our author avoids mentioning the Eucharist when he has
every opportunity to do so.” 48
However, such silence need not pose insurmountable difficulties.
Because the Hebrews community, as with the whole early church, would
have been strictly under the “discipline of the Secret”, such “secrecy” about
the Eucharist within a document read during the more public parts of the
Liturgy of the Catechumens should not be thought of as strange. 49 Also,
Swetnam notes that this “indirect method of presentation is probably much
43
J. W. Roslin, “TA EPOURANIA in Epistola ad Hebraeos (8:5 et 9:23)”, Roczniki
Teologiczno-Kanoniczo-Kanonicze 10.2 (1963): 31-44.
44
Swetnam, “Christology” 94.
45
Swetnam, “Imagery” 172.
46
Swetnam, “Imagery” 173.
47
Swetnam, “Christology” 94.
48
F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1967) 401.
49 Swetnam, “Tent” 96.