1 files changed, 534 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/macros/latex209/contrib/paper/paper-sample.tex b/macros/latex209/contrib/paper/paper-sample.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..80e381c5a3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/macros/latex209/contrib/paper/paper-sample.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,534 @@
+\documentstyle[titlepage,11pt]{paper}
+\title{A Change of Heart}
+\author{Don Hosek}
+
+\newcommand{\ltoc}{{\em The Last Temptation of Christ\/}}
+
+\begin{document}
+\maketitle
+In {\em The Last Temptation of Christ,\/} Nikos Kazantzakis
+presents a model of Jesus which includes a rather dramatic change
+in his character during the time he spends in the desert: before
+that time, he preaches love, but afterwards, he also preached
+change on earth. This conflict over Jesus' r\^ole on earth is
+demonstrated well in his conversation with John the Baptist:
+\begin{quotation}
+``Isn't love enough'' [Jesus] asked.
+
+``No,'' answered the Baptist angrily. ``The tree is rotten. God
+called to me and gave me the ax, which I then placed at the roots
+of the tree. I did my duty. Now do yours: take the ax and
+strike!''
+
+``If I were fire, I would burn; if I were a woodcutter, I would
+strike. But I am a heart, and I love.''
+
+``I am a heart also, that's why I cannot endure injustice,
+shamelessness or infamy. How can you love the unjust, the
+infamous and the shameless? Strike! One of man's greatest
+obligations is anger.''
+
+``Anger?'' said Jesus, his heart objecting. ``Aren't we all
+brothers?''
+
+``Brothers?'' the Baptist replied sarcastically. `` Do you think
+love is the way of God---love? Look here---'' He stretched forth
+his bony, hairy hand and pointed to the Dead Sea, which stank
+like a rotting carcass. ``Have you ever bent over to see the two
+whores, Sodom and Gomorrah, at her bottom? God became angry,
+hurled fire, stamped the earth: dry land turned to sea and
+swallowed up Sodom and Gomorrah. That's God's way---follow it.
+What to the prophecies say? `On the day of the Lord blood will
+flow from wood, the stones of the houses will come to life, will
+rise up and kill the house owners!' The day of the Lord has set
+out and is coming. I was the first to discern it. I uttered a
+cry, took God's ax, placed it at the root of the world. I called,
+called, called for you to come. You came, and now I shall
+depart.''~\cite[pp.~241--2]{ltoc}
+\end{quotation}
+
+Is this conflict of values accurate? Or is it simply part of
+Kazantzakis' interpretation of the Jesus story?\footnote{It may
+be worthwhile to summarize the intellectual history of
+Kazantzakis as presented in the ``Note on the Author'' in the
+Simon \& Schuster edition of {\em The Last Temptation of
+Christ\/}: he spent his childhood in Crete where ``he first
+experienced revolutionary ardor.'' Then, during a time in a
+school run by Franciscan monks, he was introduced to Western
+thought, contemplation, and the virtue of Christ. After a time in
+an all-male monastery (to the point of excluding hens and cows),
+he then turned to Nietzsche. ``He was thereafter to renounce
+Nietzsche for Buddha, then Buddha for Lenin, then Lenin for
+Odysseus. When he returned to Christ, as he did, it was to a
+Christ enriched by everything that had come
+between.''~\cite[pp.~497--8]{ltoc}} Too a certain extent, the
+answer to {\em both\/} questions is ``yes.'' Certainly, the
+extent to which the conflict between the two approaches to Jesus'
+mission exists is primarily part of Kazantzakis' interpretation
+of the story, but that the conflict existed would be difficult to
+deny; Bertrand Russell, in {\em A History of Western
+Philosophy\/} notes:
+\begin{quotation}
+The Jews believed that the Messiah would bring them temporal
+prosperity, and victory over their enemies here on
+earth.~\cite[p.~309]{russell}
+\end{quotation}
+And the New Jerusalem Bible, in a footnote comments:
+\begin{quotation}
+The Gospel shows Jesus at this critical moment abandoning his
+policy of the messianic secret \ldots\ and unequivocally
+accepting the title of Messiah, although making clear that he is
+Messiah not in the traditional sense of a political liberator,
+but in the sense of the glorious personage whom Daniel has seen
+in vision.\cite[p.~1655]{new-j}
+\end{quotation}
+
+This Jewish perception of what the Messiah was certainly makes
+the conflict in Kazantzakis' work somewhat more clear; by acting
+as a social liberator, Jesus was, in effect, reacting to certain
+market pressures. That is, to obtain the following of certain
+supporters of the zealots, he needed to adopt some of their
+policies.
+
+The next question we should ask, then, is can we find any
+supporting text of the Jewish messianic personality of Jesus in
+the scriptures? We can infer from how Christianity developed in
+the years after Jesus' death that the
+Messiah-as-liberator-of-souls view of Christ was the one that
+shaped how Christian beliefs, and from reading the four canonical
+Gospels, we see that for the most part, the teachings of Christ
+appear in that light. However, in Matthew, we can read:
+\begin{quotation}
+``Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth; it
+is not peace I have come to bring, but a sword. For I have come
+to set son against {\em father, daughter against mother,
+daughter-in-law against mother-in-law; a person's enemies will be
+the enemies of his own household.\/}''~\mbox{[Mt~10:34--6]}
+\end{quotation}
+Luke contains a prophecy from Simeon saying
+\begin{quotation}
+Look, he is destined for the fall and for the rise of many in
+Israel, destined to be a sign that is opposed.~\mbox{[Lk~2:34]}
+\end{quotation}
+Luke also has John the Baptist declare
+\begin{quotation}
+``I baptise you with water, but someone is coming, who is more
+powerful than me, and I am not fit to undo the strap of his
+sandals; he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and
+fire.~\mbox{[Lk~3:16]}
+\end{quotation}
+And later, Jesus says,
+\begin{quote}
+``I have come to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were
+blazing already.''~\mbox{[Lk~12:49]}
+\end{quote}
+The ``cleansing of the temple'' which takes place in all four
+gospels is yet another example of a possible social mission of
+Jesus. John describes it thus:
+\begin{quotation}
+When the time of the Jewish Passover was near Jesus went up to
+Jerusalem, and in the temple he fond people selling cattle and
+sheep and doves, and the money changers sitting there. Making a
+whip out of cord, he drove them all out of the Temple, sheep and
+cattle as well, scattered the money changers' coins, knocked
+their tables over and said to the dove sellers, ``Take all this
+out of here and stop using my Father's house as a
+market.''~\mbox{[Jn~2:14--6]}
+\end{quotation}
+There are alternate interpretations of the quotes given above;
+they do not {\em necessarily\/} support the
+Jesus-as-revolutionary theory, but they also do not necessarily
+contradict it either.
+
+That there is little indication of Jesus as revolutionary in the
+Gospel according to Mark is not as remarkable as it might seem;
+it is generally agreed that Mark is a later gospel than Matthew
+and John.\footnote{However, there are still many sources which
+will claim that Matthew and Luke were based on Mark. This is true
+to a certain extent, according to the editors of {\em The New
+Jerusalem Bible\/} who postulate a proto-Mark which served as a
+source for all three extant synoptic gospels. ``The last revision
+of Mark must have been made after [Matthew and Luke] had already
+made use of [the previous version]. This would account for the
+features which appear late and the cases where Matthew and Luke
+agree against Mark; they would both reflect an earlier version of
+his text.''~\cite[p.~1601]{new-j}}
+ Rather than giving an image of Jesus as a liberating  
+Messiah, ``the real point of its message is the {\em
+manifestation of the crucified
+Messiah.\/}''~\cite[p.~1605]{new-j} The commentator of {\em The
+New Jerusalem Bible\/} comments on the conflict between the
+expected and actual r\^oles of Jesus:
+\begin{quotation}
+Jesus laid down a way of humility and submission; but the Jews, 
+expecting a victorious warrior-Messiah, were ill-prepared for
+this answer to their hope; the reason why the Jesus wanted
+silence about his miracles (5:43) and his identity (7:24;~9:30)
+was to avoid an enthusiasm which would have been as ill-advised
+as it would have been mistaken.~\cite[p.~1605]{new-j} 
+\end{quotation}
+                          
+The gospels, if they do not present Jesus as a social agitator,
+do indicate that the conservative Jews did view him that way.
+Luke has Pilate say of Jesus:
+\begin{quotation}
+``You have brought this man before me as a popular agitator. Now
+I have gone into the matter myself in your presence and found no
+grounds in the man for any of the charges you bring against
+him.''~\mbox{[Lk~23:14]}
+\end{quotation}
+and in John, we find:
+\begin{quotation}
+Meanwhile a large number of Jews heard that he was there and came
+not only on account of Jesus but also to see Lazarus whom he had
+raised from the dead. Then the chief priests decided to kill
+Lazarus as well, since it was on his account that many of the
+Jews were leaving them and believing in
+Jesus.~\mbox{[Jn~12:9--11]}
+\end{quotation}
+Also, we should not ignore the Revelation to John, which
+incontrovertibly shows Jesus (as the lamb) acting violently
+against the unholy people of the ancient world.
+
+We can find some external evidence that lends some credence to
+this theory; for example, Shirley Jackson Case writes:
+\begin{quotation}
+Even the meager formalities of John's movement seemed soon to
+have proved unsatisfactory to Jesus. Apparently he heartily
+espoused John's cause, so far as it represented a new attitude of
+consecration and a renewal of confidence in God's readiness to
+deliver his people\ldots [Unlike John the Baptist, Jesus] took
+his stand in the midst of society where he might conduct an
+aggressive propaganda on behalf of his new interests.
+
+This aggressive policy of Jesus had its advantageous as well as
+its disastrous possibilities. It gave him a much wider range of
+social contacts than would have been available had he followed
+the plan of John. But at the same time it greatly augmented the
+possibilities of opposition\ldots
+
+The impression made be Jesus upon his contemporaries was so
+unusually forceful that it aroused a public opposition which
+presently cut short his public career\ldots it was the
+unconventional methods by which Jesus sought to bring these
+results to pass that constituted the real basis of opposition
+between him and his contemporaries. The problem at issue was not
+so much the question of what end was to be sought, as of the safe
+path to be pursued in order to arrive at the desired goal. It was
+on this emblem of safe procedure that Jesus and his enemies came
+to deadly grips.~\cite[pp.~52--4]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+
+Richard Cassidy is one writer who reads a revolutionary Jesus out
+of the gospel of Luke. He writes of the temple
+disturbance~(Lk~20):
+\begin{quotation}
+Luke shows Jesus acting against ``those who sold'' and accusing
+the traffickers of having made the temple a ``den of robbers.''
+The chief priests exercised tight control over all temple
+activities and very likely derived a portion of their personal
+incomes from the buying and selling that took place within temple
+precincts. In the passage above, Luke does not explicitly state
+that Jesus' actions actually placed him in conflict with the
+chief priests; but it does clearly portray Jesus as acting
+against the prevailing economic practices.~\cite[p.~35]{cass}
+\end{quotation}
+
+Case expresses the view that Jesus was not sympathetic to the
+position of the revolutionists:
+\begin{quotation}
+In all probability Jesus' earlier popularity had been partially
+due to the presence of such hopes among the common people of
+Galilee. On the other hand, it is apparent that Jesus himself
+never seconded these ambitions, and on occasion very definitely
+expressed himself as out of harmony with the revolutionists. When
+this fact became known among his sympathizers many turned away
+from him and thus reduced the strength of his popular
+following.~\cite[p.~58]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+However, this reading simply means that Jesus did not wholly
+agree with the {\em zealots.\/} His position clearly is opposed
+to that of the temple priests, as exhibited by his continual
+conflicts with the scribes and pharisees as well as the
+disruption of the temple; that he did not openly and violently
+oppose {\em Rome\/} as he did the Jews of the temple lead to the
+conflict with the zealots and the loss of supporters that Case
+noticed.
+
+We set out to see if we could justify Kazantzakis'
+characterization of Jesus in \ltoc; to see whether there is any
+justification for Kazantzakis writing of John the Baptist passing
+the axe on to Jesus. Cassidy would think that perhaps this is
+justified. The attacks against the temple and Jewish
+establishment are certainly quite clear, but did he also rise up
+against Rome? Cassidy says,
+\begin{quotation}
+Although Jesus did not constitute the same type of threat that to
+Roman rule as the Zealots and the Parthians, the threat that he
+posed was, ultimately, not less dangerous. Unlike the Zealots,
+the Jesus of Luke's gospel does not make the overthrow of Roman
+rule the central focus of his activity, nor does he support any
+of the other forms of government (including that probably
+advocated by the Zealots) that might have been considered as
+replacements for Roman rule. Nevertheless, by espousing radically
+new social patterns and by refusing to defer to the existing
+political authorities, Jesus pointed the way to a social order in
+which neither the Romans nor any other oppressing group would be
+able to hold sway.~\cite[p.~79]{cass}
+\end{quotation}
+Cassidy recognizes the fact that the view of Luke is possibly
+distorted, but claims that this is unlikely:
+\begin{quotation}
+Certainly in the years between Jesus' death and the time of
+Luke's writing, there were ample opportunities for errors to be
+made and for those who handed on the traditions about Jesus
+(including Luke himself) to alter them in such a way that Luke's
+final account could contain as much distortion as accuracy. On
+the other hand, we know that Luke wanted to write ``an orderly
+account,'' and we also know that Luke's descriptions relative to
+empire history are, in fact, amazingly accurate.
+
+We find these latter two considerations persuasive and are thus
+inclined to hold that the stance Luke attributes to Jesus
+corresponds to the stance that Jesus actually had. It can be
+argued, however, that such a position is as much a matter of
+perspective as it is of reasoned analyses and judgment, and this
+we are willing to admit. {\em Do Luke's descriptions give an
+accurate portrayal of Jesus' stance?\/} In the end, given the
+lack of conclusive evidence, it is likely that any reply will
+hinge on one's personal perspective.~\cite[pp.~85--6]{cass}
+\end{quotation}
+It is still difficult to say whether Kazantzakis' portrayal of
+the internal conflict of Jesus over the nature of his mission is
+justificable.
+
+However, in examining the teachings of the founding fathers of
+the Church, we find that the preachings tend more towards the
+morals of individuals than towards the movement for social
+justice that Cassidy finds in Luke and Kazantzakis' John the
+Baptist calls for from Jesus. In the apocryphal Acts of Paul,
+Paul is credited with preaching the following aphorisms in the
+house of Onesiphorus:
+\begin{quotation}
+Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
+
+Blessed are they that keep the flesh chaste, for they shall
+become the temple of God.
+
+Blessed are they that abstain ({\em or\/} the continent) for unto
+them shall God speak.
+
+Blessed are they that have renounced this world, for they shall
+be well-pleasing unto God. 
+
+Blessed are they that posses their wives as though they had them
+not, for they shall inherit God.
+
+Blessed are they that have the fear of God, for they shall become
+angels of God.
+
+Blessed are they that tremble at the oracles of God, for they
+shall be comforted.
+
+Blessed are they that receive {\em the\/} wisdom of Jesus Christ,
+for they shall be called sons of the Most High.
+
+Blessed are they that have kept their baptism {\em pure,\/} for
+they shall rest with the Father and the Son.
+
+Blessed are they that have compassed the understanding of Jesus
+Christ, for they shall be in light.
+
+Blessed are they that for love of God have departed from the
+fashion of this world, for they shall judge angels, and shall be
+blessed at the right hand of the Father.
+
+Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy and shall
+not see the bitter day of judgement.
+
+Blessed are the bodies of virgins, for they shall be
+well-pleasing unto God and shall not lose the reward of their
+continence (chastity), for the word of the Father shall be unto
+them a work of salvation in the say of his Son, and they shall
+have rest world without
+end.~\mbox{[ActsPl~2:5--6]}\footnote{Quoted from \cite{nta}.}
+\end{quotation}
+These do not sound like the teachings of a Jesus who ``knocked
+tables over'' in the Temple of Jerusalem.\footnote{And while the
+presentation in Revelation might be taken this way, it is also
+worth noting that this book of the Bible nearly did not become
+canonical.~\cite[pp.~2027--8]{new-j}} Is it possible that the
+fathers of the church had ``toned down'' the revolutionary nature
+of Jesus' acts? A sentiment expressed in Romans is not atypical:
+\begin{quotation}
+Let love be without any pretence. Avoid what is evil; stick to
+what is good. In brotherly love let your feelings of deep
+affection for one another come to expression and regard others as
+more important than yourself.~\mbox{[Rm~12:9--10]}
+\end{quotation}
+Or in Corinthians when the following is expressed:
+\begin{quotation}
+Keep away from sexual immorality. All other sins that someone may
+commit are done outside the body; but the sexually immoral person
+sins against his own body. Do you not realize your body is the
+temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you and whom you have
+received from God? You are not your own property, then; you have
+been bought at a price. So use your body for the glory of
+God.~\mbox{[1~Co~6:18--20]}
+\end{quotation}
+
+Let us examine the question of why the founding fathers of the
+Church might have abandoned the social revolution portion of
+Jesus' teachings to the degree that they did (many of the quotes
+from the New Testament cited above have non-social-reform
+interpretations generally ascribed to them).
+
+Perhaps the main reason for the abandonment of Jesus as the
+warrior-Messiah in the teachings of the Christian church is that
+\begin{quotation}
+Not only was the social environment of the Christian movement
+largely gentile well before the end of the first century, but it
+had severed almost completely and earlier bonds of social contact
+with the Jewish Christians of Palestine. During the first
+generation, in the time of Peter, Paul, and Barnabas, the
+Christians of Jerusalem were treated by their gentile brethren at
+least as peers, if not as superiors. But after the year 70, when
+the Jewish war against Rome resulted in the destruction of the
+Temple and inspired a new disdain on the part of the Gentiles for
+all things Jewish, Palestinian Christianity rapidly lost
+prestige. It made few if any gains in membership, while the
+gentile communities constantly increased. By the year 100
+Christianity is mainly a gentile religious
+movement.~\cite[pp.~27--8]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+The expectation that the Messiah would be a force that {\em
+actively\/} liberates the Jews from Rome was, as the quote from
+Russell above indicated, primarily a Jewish belief. As the
+Christian cult became increasingly gentile, the necessary r\^ole
+of the fledgling Christianity's Jesus had to play changed as
+well. Paul, in Galatians said, with respect to the Jewish
+traditions:
+\begin{quotation}
+I, Paul, give you my word that if you accept circumcision,
+Christ will be of no benefit to you at all. I give my assurance
+once again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is under
+obligation to keep the whole Law; once you seek to be reckoned as
+upright through the Law, then you have separated yourself from
+Christ, you have fallen away from grace.~\mbox{[Ga~5:2--4]}
+\end{quotation}
+
+Case believes that 
+\begin{quotation}
+Henceforth the gentile field offered Christians their only hope
+of success. Their efforts to win Jewish adherents proved
+increasingly futile \ldots\ its prospects of further success now
+lay exclusively in its power to perpetuate itself through appeal
+to the non-Jewish population of the Roman Empire. Unless it had
+been able to integrate itself successfully as a movement in
+gentile society, its hope of survival would have been in
+vain.~\cite[pp.~67--8]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+Christianity faced a tough field of competition for followers in
+the Roman empire.
+\begin{quotation}
+All about them was a veritable welter of religious cults offering
+to their devotees a wide variety of satisfactions and presenting
+a great many different forms of appeal. There was hardly a single
+area of interest that had not been already cultivated by some
+older cult.~\cite[p.~69]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+
+In addition to the desire to exclude unfavorable beliefs from
+Christianity to aid in evangelizing the gentiles of the Roman
+empire, there was desire inside the Christian movement to gain
+the support of the empire itself:
+\begin{quotation}
+On more than one occasion Christians had sought to bring their
+cause into favor by calling the attention of the authorities to
+the fact that the Empire's beginnings, and its continued glory,
+had been conincident with the rise and growth of the Christian
+movement. One was to infer that the prayers of the Christians and
+their presence in society were genuine elements of safety which
+should be nourished if future prosperity were to be
+assured.~\cite[p.~209]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+
+Why should whether this interpretation is valid matter to us at
+all? Biblical hermeneutics has been a central feature of Western
+theology for quite some time.\footnote{To explain hermeneutics in
+brief: one begins by attempting to determine the intent of the
+author in interpretting the text; this interpretation is then
+used in the light of understanding current happenings, then with
+that illumination on the text, the reader returns to the text and
+re-interprets it. This process can be continued as much as
+necessary. Berryman~\cite{berryman} contains the following
+example which is illuminating:
+\begin{quotation}\footnotesize
+[Latin Americans] understand the Bible in terms of their
+experience and reinterpret that experience in terms of biblical
+symbols. In theological jargon this is called the ``hermeneutical
+circle''---interpretation moves from experience to text to
+experience. As an example, consider the saying of Jesus, ``Unless
+the grain of wheat falls to the earth and dies, it remains just a
+grain of wheat. But if it dies, it produces much fruit''
+(John~12:24). The original text certainly applies to Jesus' own
+death. Suppose, however, a community leader is murdered, and
+after initial fear and intimidation, people resolve to continue
+their struggle, inspired by the leader's example. When that same
+text comes up, it is seen as referring to their martyred leader,
+whose life is showing fruit. Hence their is an ongoing
+interaction between life experience and its interpretation in the
+light of Scripture.
+\end{quotation}
+Berryman de-emphasizes the r\^ole of authorial intent, but as
+will be noted, it is essential to proper hermeneutical
+interpretation.}
+The earliest attempts to understand the Bible grew out of the
+Reformation:
+\begin{quotation}
+Since Protestant theologians believed, not only that Scripture
+was infallible, but that it had been written with specific
+reference to the needs of all subsequent time, they thought it
+both profitable and necessary to derive therefrom a body of
+normative teaching specifically applicable to their own
+problems.  No primary importance was attached to the particular
+circumstances under which a scriptural document had been
+composed, nor were any questions asked regarding the special
+interests that might have been dominant when the original author
+and his first readers lived. Without hesitation, it was
+unconsciously assumed that the biblical writer had centered
+attention upon the particular issues with which the reformers
+themselves were so vitally concerned.~\cite[p.~5]{case}
+\end{quotation}
+However, if the historical background of the passage being
+interpretted is ignored, then the validity of the interpretation
+can be easily called into question.\footnote{I am reminded of a
+preacher I heard on the radio once who took the phrase ``to the
+victor belongs the spoils'' to refer to ``oil'' despite the fact
+that he was reading a translation and the spoil/oil pairing would
+not have been present in the original text.} If Jesus' mission
+did not contain in it some attempts at changing social conditions
+as well as spiritual conditions, then many schools of theology
+(liberation theology, in particular) would no longer be valid.
+With this in mind, attempting to understand the full background
+behind a text like Luke, is essential not only to Biblical
+scholarship, but to contemporary social movements as well.
+
+More specifically, the hermeneutic circle is especially important
+in understanding Kazantzakis' novel, which can be taken to be
+more-or-less as an interpretation of the New Testament. As was
+noted above, Kazantzakis' spiritual growth went began with
+``revolutionary ardor'' followed by an ascetic Christianity then
+through Nietzsche, Buddha, Lenin, Odysseus, and back to Christ.
+In effect, \ltoc\ is Kazantzakis' own liberation theology. His
+Jesus' change of heart mirrors very much Kazantzakis' own pattern
+of intellectual growth. While Jesus, for a time, adopts a
+``revolutionary ardor'' of his own, he after a time returns to
+the way of love, in a manner similar to that of Kazantzakis.
+\ltoc\ represents not only Kazantzakis' interpretation of the New
+Testament, it represents his interpretation in the light of his
+own experiences.
+
+\bibliographystyle{plain}
+\bibliography{jesus}
+\end{document}