Category Archives: Scripture

The Mission

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday is the 11th Sunday of Ordinary Time. The gospel is from the opening verses of the Matthean Missionary Discourse. In the previous two posts we explored the intention and meaning of the geographical limitations placed on the Twelve’s commissioning. In this post we examine two simple verses that provide the framework for the mission itself: “As you go, make this proclamation: ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, drive out demons. Without cost you have received; without cost you are to give.” (Mt 10:7-8)

This is not the first place in Matthew’s gospel in which the proclamation “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” has been heard. Consider John the Baptist: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” (Mt 3:2) While “repent” is not specifically included in Mt 10, it is not hard to imagine that it is now a given part of the proclamation given Jesus exactly repeats (4:17) the Baptist’s words. The theme of “repentance” reaches back to the OT prophets who called on God’s people to “return” to their true allegiance. Our modern language would call it “conversion.”What is different is that now there is a new note of urgency, of a “now or never” opportunity because the kingdom of heaven has arrived in the person of Jesus.

The proclamation is to be accompanied by actions corresponding to Jesus’ own miraculous activity. As R.T. France  [2007, 383] notes  “four acts of deliverance specified are carefully worded to reflect the miracles in chs. 8–9 … Their mission is an extension of his, and … what he could do they are given the power to do too. Healing through divine power… was widely regarded as an appropriate activity of holy men, and even exorcism was an accepted part of the Jewish scene… Given Jesus’ wide reputation already for such supernatural acts, people would have expected his representatives to do likewise …But within this list the unobtrusive inclusion of “raise the dead” is remarkable. Its very matter-of-fact tone raises the stakes significantly. Only two great men of the past were credited with such a feat (Elijah, 1 Kgs 17:17–24; Elisha, 2 Kgs 4:32–37; cf. 13:21), and Jesus’ resuscitation of the official’s daughter has introduced a new element into the demonstration of the Messiah’s authority…We have no record that the disciples did in fact “raise the dead” during Jesus’ lifetime, though subsequent miracles of Peter (Acts 9:36–42) and Paul (Acts 20:9–12) would no doubt be taken as a fulfilling of this charge.”

The final verse, “Without cost you have received; without cost you are to give.” does not need a great explanation. What the Twelve have received is all gift and they are to give freely what they have freely received.

Image credit: Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311, National Gallery of Art, Public Domain

To the lost sheep

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday is the 11th Sunday of Ordinary Time. The gospel is from the opening verses of the Matthean Missionary Discourse. In the previous post we discussed Jesus’ commissioning of the Twelve but noted the geographical limitations on the mission. It is worth exploring this limitation a bit more.

R.T France [2007, 381] notes: “Jesus is the Messiah of God’s people Israel (Mt 2:6), coming in fulfillment of Israel’s scriptures (as we have seen repeatedly in chs. 1–2 and since) to save “his people” from their sins (1:21). So it is at first sight not surprising that it is specifically to Israel that his disciples are also sent. That will be more than enough to keep them busy until “the Son of Man comes.”

As the Twelve continue to journey with Jesus, there will be encounters with non-Israelites, for example,

  • The encounter with the Canaanite woman in Mt 15
  • Responding to a Roman soldier in Mt 8
  • Delivering a Gentile demoniac also in Mt 8 while clearly in non-Jewish territory on the other side of the Sea of Galilee

But then again Jesus can certainly define his own area of mission nonetheless Jesus’ own response to the faith of the Canaanite woman and Roman soldier are a foreshadowing of a salvation other than an exclusively Jewish presence in the kingdom of heaven.

It is also noteworthy that Galilee is completely surrounded by gentile territory except to the south, but then that is Samaria. The mission is effectively restricted to Galilee, but even then in the mixed society of Galilee there would inevitably be some earlier contact with Gentiles.

Image credit: Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311, National Gallery of Art, Public Domain

The Commission

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday is the 11th Sunday of Ordinary Time. The gospel is from the opening verses of the Matthean Missionary Discourse. In the previous post we discussed the summoning and significance of the 12 disciples called “apostles” (this one and only time in Matthew) and later called “the Twelve.” In this post The commission of the Twelve is spelled out in strictly functional terms as an extension of Jesus’ mission described in Mt 8 and 9. Note that the commission and its terms are also found in in Mark 6:7–11; Luke 9:1–5; 10:1–12.

5 Jesus sent out these twelve after instructing them thus, “Do not go into pagan territory or enter a Samaritan town. 6 Go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 As you go, make this proclamation: ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ 8 Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, drive out demons. Without cost you have received; without cost you are to give.

The text of the commissioning covers three aspects of their mission: to whom they are to go (vv. 5–6); the nature of their mission in both word and deed (vv. 7–8); and although not part of our gospel the natural boundaries of Matthew’s pericope (a set of verses that forms one coherent unit or thought) extend to v.15 and includes the familiar:

Do not take gold or silver or copper for your belts;  no sack for the journey, or a second tunic, or sandals, or walking stick. The laborer deserves his keep. Whatever town or village you enter, look for a worthy person in it, and stay there until you leave. As you enter a house, wish it peace. If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it; if not, let your peace return to you. Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words—go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet. Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. (Matthew 10:9–15)

Many people note that the commission is given with geographical boundaries established: “Do not go into pagan territory or enter a Samaritan town. Go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” How does this make sense in the final mission statement in Mt 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations”? There is an argument to be made that Jesus’ mission and the commissioning of the Twelve was to engage the God’s people Israel to be the light to all the nations – the work for which they were commissioned. By Mt 28, Jesus has been firmly rejected as Messiah, but the larger mission of drawing in all the nations remains. In this God’s people Israel are replaced by the Twelve.

Image credit: Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311, National Gallery of Art, Public Domain

The Apostles

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday is the 11th Sunday of Ordinary Time. The gospel is from the opening verses of the Matthean Missionary Discourse. From the first verses one should notice a change in vocabulary as Jesus “summoned his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits to drive them out and to cure every disease and every illness. The names of the twelve apostles…” (Mt 10:1-2) Up until this point those who follow Jesus have been referred to as “disciples.”

The term “disciple” generally refers to a follower or student of a teacher. In the context of the Gospel of Matthew, it primarily refers to those who followed Jesus during his earthly ministry, learning from his teachings and observing his actions. The disciples were individuals who chose to follow Jesus, committing themselves to his teachings and the way of life he exemplified. They were his close companions, accompanying him on his journeys, witnessing his miracles, and receiving personal instruction from him.

The term “apostle” specifically refers to a subset of disciples who were appointed by Jesus for a specific mission. The word apostle comes from the Greek word apostolos, which means “one who is sent out.” In Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus chooses twelve of his disciples and designates them as apostles. The names of the twelve apostles are listed: Simon (Peter), Andrew, James and John (the sons of Zebedee), Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James (son of Alphaeus), Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, and Judas Iscariot (who later betrayed Jesus). While all apostles were disciples, not all disciples were apostles. The apostles had a unique commission to continue the work of Jesus after his departure, spreading the good news, establishing the church, and teaching others to observe all that Jesus had commanded them (Matthew 28:19-20).

This is the only time Matthew uses the word “apostle.” In the remainder of the gospel they are indicated by context or are referred to as “the Twelve.” R.T. France [2007, 375] notes: “It is surprising that Matthew does not use again what must have been, by the time he wrote his gospel, a familiar title for this inner group, but perhaps this indicates his awareness of a difference in function between the ‘apostles’ as church leaders in his day and the role of the Twelve as companions of Jesus during his ministry.”

Note that this is not an account of their “calling” as a group of 12. As individuals they had already been called, but even here they seem to be an already established group as they are “summoned.” The Gospels of Mark and Luke also list the apostles. With the exception of Thaddeus, the names are the same in all these lists, though the order of the names and the descriptions of the individuals vary a little. Scholars have noted that Matthew’s list has two distinctive features: it is arranged in pairs (perhaps reflecting the tradition that they were sent out in pairs and Simon (Peter), who comes first in all the lists and whose leading role among the twelve is clear in all the gospels, is explicitly designated in Matthew as “first,” even though no further numbering follows for the remainder of the names.

France [2007, 376] notes:

Jesus’ choice of twelve as the number of his inner circle has, and must surely have had at the time, obvious symbolic importance as the number of the sons of Jacob and thus of the tribes of Israel. People might have remembered Moses’ choice of twelve tribal leaders in Num 1:1–16, and it is even possible that Matthew’s phrase “These are the names of …” is a deliberate echo of Num 1:4, “These are the names of the men who shall assist you.” The symbolism will become explicit in 19:28, where these twelve disciples are given an eschatological role when, alongside the Son of Man seated on his own glorious throne, they too “will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” There is no reason to believe that these twelve Galilean men were in fact drawn from all twelve traditional tribes; their significance was in their number, not in their ancestry. When one of the Twelve was lost (note the emphatic “the eleven disciples” in 28:16, after Judas’ death), the number was sufficiently important for him to need to be replaced (Acts 1:15–26), though even before that Paul continues to refer to them as “the Twelve” (1 Cor 15:5). So from an early point in his ministry Jesus was apparently thinking in terms of an alternative “Israel” with its own leadership based now not on tribal origin but on the Messiah’s call.

Image credit: Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311, National Gallery of Art, Public Domain

The Galilee Mission

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday is the 11th Sunday of Ordinary Time in Liturgical Year A. The gospel is taken from Matthew 9:36 – 10:8 which falls in a section that is part of the Galilee ministry, but towards the end with a third cycle of Jesus’ mighty acts (9:18–34) which reveals his power over death and chronic illness, blindness, and speechlessness. The Galilee ministry ends with essentially a summary verse: “Jesus went around to all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and curing every disease and illness.” (Mt 9:35, a virtual repeat of Mt 4:23)

It is from this summary verse that we see the connection between discipleship and mission:

At the sight of the crowds, his heart was moved with pity for them because they were troubled and abandoned, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is abundant but the laborers are few; so ask the master of the harvest to send out laborers for his harvest.” (vv. 36-38)

The connection is made clear in that both endeavors, shepherding and harvest, need workers to bring the endeavor to its completion. God is the ultimate shepherd and harvest master, but he needs the cooperation of those who accept Jesus’ invitation to discipleship. The three sections on discipleship in chapters 8–9 emphasize the radical demands that it can involve, the fact that all kinds of people can be called to it and the radical newness that it represents, and its missionary dimension (9:35–38). The final verses of Matthew 9 serve as the prologue for the great Missionary Discourse (Mt 10:1-42).

The disciples’ mission is limited to the people of Israel (vv. 5b–6), and they are to avoid entering the cities of non-Jews and Samaritans (whose Judaism was suspect in the eyes of Judeans and Galileans). Only after the death and resurrection of Jesus does the mission to the latter groups begin (see 28:19). The disciples’ mission replicates and extends the mission of Jesus in preaching the coming of God’s kingdom and in healing the sick. As discipleship has been offered to them as a gift, so they are to offer it to others.

Wandering preachers representing various philosophies and religions were a common sight in the world of Jesus’ time. Jesus’ disciples are instructed not to be anxious about money or baggage or lodging, but rather to depend on the charity of their hearers (vv. 9–13). Their lack of concern for money, clothing, and lodging allows them to carry out the mission in a more single-minded way. It also bears witness to their trust in God’s care for them and to their conviction that what has been freely received should be freely given.

Image credit: Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311, National Gallery of Art, Public Domain

Ordinary Time

Posted on by
Reply

This Sunday we will celebrate the 11th Sunday in Ordinary Time. Ordinary Time includes the days not part of the Advent, Christmas, Lent or Easter seasons. The Easter season extends to and includes Pentecost Sunday. Ordinary Time starts the Monday following Pentecost. Apart from special feast days and memorials, the liturgical color is green, but you may have noticed the two Sundays following Pentecost used white as the liturgical colors. Still, the Solemnity of Holy Trinity (9th week) and Corpus Christi (10th week) are part of Ordinary Time.

Did you know that the word “ordinary” as used here comes from the ordinal numerals by which the weeks are identified or counted. The weekly count moves from the 1st week of Ordinary Time in January (typically the Baptism of the Lord) to the 34th week that begins toward the end of November. In 2023 we celebrated the 7th Sunday of Ordinary Time just before Ash Wednesday, the week following Pentecost was the 8th Week of Ordinary Time. The 9th and 10th Sundays were noted above – and that brings us to the 11th Sunday.

Will this always be the same each year? Nope. It all depends on when Easter is celebrated which in turn affects the date of Ash Wednesday, which always falls 46 days before Easter Sunday. The earliest Ash Wednesday can be celebrated is February 4th. Of course that last happened in 1818 and won’t happen again until the year 2285. The latest Ash Wednesday can be celebrated is March 10th, but it has to be in a Leap Year with other factors falling into place and that won’t happen again until 2096.

For the record, the last Sunday of Ordinary Time is the Solemnity of Christ the King. And since we are on the topic, the liturgical year can have either 33 or 34 weeks of Ordinary Time. How that shifts is too long to explain, but here is an easy way to remember. If the following liturgical year starts in November, the previous liturgical year’s Ordinary Time will have 33 weeks.  If the following liturgical year starts in December, the previous liturgical year’s Ordinary Time will have 34 weeks.

Image credit: Duccio di Buoninsegna, 1308-1311, National Gallery of Art, Public Domain

Words of Life

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ.  In Jn 6:60, some of the disciples of Jesus react negatively saying ‘This saying is hard; who can accept it.’  Are they referring just to the immediately preceding passages (vv. 51-59) or are they referring to all of Jesus’ claim in v.42, ‘I have come down from heaven.’?  Jesus’ own words give us the context, “Do you take offense at this?  Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?”  That a man from Nazareth should claim that he is a life-giving revealer sent down from God, from heaven, is “hard” to take and only faith can overcome the “offense” or stumbling-block of the Incarnation.  But if his words are too hard to take, then a worse shock awaits them when they see him raised on the cross and then it will be a real test of their faith to believe in his death and resurrection.

In v.63 Jesus’ words provide another stumbling block – “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail…”  Many non-Catholic interpreters believe that this line removes the basis for belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist.  But St John has already provided us the context for interpreting Jesus’ remarks. In Jn 3:6-13, Nicodemus can not understand how a man can be born from above.  By way of explanation, Jesus calls upon the ascension into heaven of the Son of Man; for it is the ascended Son of Man who can give the Spirit.  So also in Jn 6:63, the Spirit is mentioned immediately after the reference to the ascension of the Son of Man.  The contrast between Spirit and flesh in v.63 is the same contrast found in Jn 3:6.  Jesus is not speaking of Eucharistic flesh but of flesh as he spoke of it in Jn 3:6.  There, the natural principle in man, which can not give eternal life, is useless.  The Spirit is the divine principal from above which alone can give life.  In v.63 Jesus once more affirms that man cannot gain life on his own.  Jesus’ role is to communicate to man the principles of eternal life so that those who believe in Jesus receive the life-giving Spirit.

In a sense the non-Catholic interpreters are correct in what they affirm, but they are wrong in what they deny.  The Eucharist is of no avail to the non-believer who has not been blessed by the Spirit to believe the mystery of the Eucharist.  It is only through faith in the resurrected Jesus that the Holy Eucharist has meaning.

A Final Thought – There are many commentaries that insist on a metaphorical interpretation of “eat” and “drink” and are thus unable/unwilling to move beyond “eat” and “drink” as metaphors for belief.  There are some commentators who insist there is no metaphor, that the entirety of Jesus’ discourse is sacramental/Eucharistic.  As Fr. Raymond Brown and Fr. Francis Moloney point out, the truly Catholic position is “both-and.”  What begins in John 6:22-50 as metaphor for belief, is ultimately answered in John 6:51-58 as Eucharist.

Eucharistic Life

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ.  Where the principal focus of the previous section is the bread of life as the divine revelation given to men by and in Jesus, Jn 6:51 moves the focus to a clearly Eucharistic theme – ‘I am the living bread come down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.‘  While some argue the words are metaphor, the Jews clearly understand.  Jesus is referring to eating of his flesh. 

He recounts this action verb several other times between vv. 51-58, while adding the drinking of his blood to the command.  This is no metaphor for accepting his revelation, already adequately expressed.  “To eat someone’s flesh” appears in the Bible as a metaphor for hostile action (Ps 27:2, Zech 11:9).  In fact, in the Aramaic tradition, the “eater of flesh” is the title of the devil.  The drinking of blood was looked upon as a horrendous thing forbidden by God’s Law (Gen 9:4, Lev 3:17, Dt 12:23, and Acts 15:20).  Its symbolic meaning was that of brutal slaughter (Jer 45:10).  In Ezekiel’s vision of apocalyptic carnage (Ez 39:17), he invites the scavenging birds to come to the feast: ‘You shall have flesh to eat and blood to drink.’  Thus if Jesus’ words in v.53 (Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.) are to have positive, favorable meaning, they refer to the Eucharist.

In v.51, we have a parallel with v.35, which is the beginning of the revelation form of the Bread of Life Discourse, except that in v.51 Jesus speaks of the “living bread”, a term more suitable for the Eucharist.  In this same verse we see the connection of the living bread-the flesh-come down from heaven.  Recalling Jn 1:14 where the entrance of the Word among us was spoken of in terms of becoming flesh; and it is this same flesh that is to be given to man as living bread.  In the same passage John invokes the Incarnation and then closes with the death of Jesus, a Eucharistic theme.  Where in v.32 it is the Father who gives the heavenly bread (revelation), in v.51 where the bread becomes identified with the flesh of Jesus, he must give it himself.  Jesus must lay down his life of his own accord and that voluntary death makes Eucharistic participation in his flesh possible.  At the beginning of the Gospel we hear that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the world’s sins (Jn 1:29); now in context of a discourse set at Passover time we hear that Jesus becomes the Paschal lamb and gives his flesh for the life of the world.

In v.52 we see a misunderstanding that parallels vv. 41-42.  Strangely, Jesus does not take any pains to explain away the Jewish repugnance at the cannibalistic thought of eating his flesh; rather in v.53 he emphasizes the reality of “feeding” on his flesh and adds the even more repugnant note of drinking his blood.  Versus 55-56 promises the gift of life to one who feeds on this Eucharist, but the Eucharistic promise follows the main body of the Discourse (vv 35-50) which insists on the necessity of belief in Jesus.  The juxtaposition of the two forms of the discourse teaches that the gift of life comes through belief in Jesus.  The Eucharistic life-giving is not through the “feeding”. Jn 6:57 says ‘..the one who feeds on me will have life because of me [Jesus]’.

The two themes of the Discourse, faith and Eucharist, cannot be separated for neither faith nor the Eucharist are directly the focus of attention, but rather both are unified in the person of Jesus who offers a living relationship through faith and Eucharist.  The sacramental experience does not replace faith in Jesus, but expresses and confirms it.  For John Eucharistic faith is to believe that the same, risen, Incarnate Jesus continues to give himself to believers in a personal communion and to exercise his life-giving mission.  Whoever participates in the exercise of faith and Eucharist ‘remains in me and I in him’.

While the synoptic gospel writers record the institution of the Eucharist, the theological gospel writer is the one who explains what the Eucharist does for the Christian – the personal communion with Jesus and thus with the Father.

Flesh for the life of the world

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ. With all that in mind (the previous posts) we come to the gospel passage for the feast.

51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” 52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?” 53 Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”  

But let’s place this in a larger perspective from the whole of the Discourse: He gave; bread from heaven; to eat. Let’s observe this happen.

  1. He gave (vv. 26–34). In this first section, the emphasis lies on the giving. Jesus will give (vv. 27, 34), not as Moses gave (v. 32) a perishable manna food of mortality, but as the Father, source of eternal life, gives (v. 32). Thus far, Jesus appears as the giver of bread and therefore as the new and superior Moses.
  2. bread from heaven (vv. 35–47). The insistence now shifts to the bread from heaven that Jesus not only gives but actually is (vv. 35, 38, 41, 42). It is important to note here that the operative verb is “believe.” Jesus as bread from heaven is accepted and consumed through the belief required in verses 35, 36, 40, 47. What this means is that this is a faith nourishment. Jesus is bread from heaven, feeding all believers, in the same sense that Old Testament wisdom nourished all who accepted it (Prov 9:1–5).
  3. to eat (vv. 48–59). In this final section, the vocabulary changes radically. The significant words are “flesh,” “blood,” “eat, ” “drink.” Note the constant repetition of “eat” (phagein) in vv.49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 58. “Feed on” (trōgein – an even more physical verb in the Greek than “eat”) occurs in v.57. These verbs become overwhelmingly insistent, as does the constant reference to flesh and blood, food and drink. The meaning of the discourse has changed. Where in the preceding section Jesus nourished through wisdom-revelation those who believed, the verb “believe” has now completely disappeared and is replaced by “eat,” “feed on.” This is language which clearly speaks of sacramental nourishment, of the food and drink that one eats and feeds upon, of the Eucharistic nourishment provided by the flesh and blood of the Son of Man (v. 53). The “Son of Man” phraseology tells us that this is not the physical flesh and blood of the earthly Jesus and that we are asked to eat and drink but the spiritual, Spirit-filled flesh and blood of the heavenly Son of Man. Verse 58 ties the discourse together by referring back to the central phrase of verse 31.

What this discourse has done, therefore, is to deliver a rich and multi-faceted exposition of the Jesus-as-Bread-of-Life theme.

  • Jesus is first of all the giver of the bread, a new Moses.
  • He is also the bread of wisdom and revelation who nourishes all who come to him in faith.
  • He is, finally, the Eucharistic source of eternal life for all who eat and drink the flesh and blood of the heavenly and glorified Son of Man.

Because John uses this Eucharistic material in this Bread of Life homily, it will not be too surprising — yet surprising enough — that the Eucharist will not be mentioned at the Last Supper. Its material has been transferred to this incident. John has also succeeded, with this transfer, to unite in this one chapter the essentials of Christian Eucharist, the word and the bread — the revealing word of vv.35–47 and the sacramental bread of vv.48–59.

Jesus gives his flesh to eat.  The question that emerges from the dispute among “the Jews” is a rejection of Jesus’ outrageous suggestion: “How (ōs) can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (v. 52). But it allows Jesus to conclude his discourse on his perfection of the Mosaic gift of bread from heaven through his gift of himself as the true bread from heaven. Unable to go beyond the physical, “the Jews” by their question misunderstand Jesus’ promise. Jesus insists on a gift of flesh and blood for life by stating negatively (v.53) and positively (v.54) that whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood of Jesus, the Son of Man, has eternal life now and will be raised up on the last day. The midrashic play on the verb “to eat” provided by the Exodus passage in v. 31 has reached its high point. “Flesh” and “blood” emphasize that it is the incarnate life and very real death of the Son that are life giving food. Only the physical body of a human being produces flesh and blood. The argument of vv. 25-51 continues into vv. 52-59, especially in Jesus’ words that point to the resolution of a series of promises (cf. vv. 12-13, 27, 35, 51c). Jesus will provide a food for the life of the world, and that food is his flesh and blood.

As the ancestors of Israel were nourished by the gift of the Torah, Jesus will nourish the whole world with the gift of himself.

The people of Israel were nourished by eating the manna, perennially recalled in the nourishment provided for them by their total receptivity to and absorption of the Law.

Now “the Jews” are told of the absolute need to eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man. Unless they eat the flesh and drink the blood (ean me phagete . . kai piete) of the Son of Man they have no life (v. 53); whoever eats the flesh and drinks the blood (ho treigōn . kai pinon) of Jesus has eternal life (v. 54).

The shift from the more respectable verb “to eat” (phagein) to another verb that indicates the physical crunching with the teeth (trōgein) accentuates that Jesus refers to a real experience of eating. Hints of the Eucharist continue to insinuate themselves into the words of Jesus. Flesh is to be broken and blood is to be spilled. Violence has been in the air since Jesus’ behavior on the Sabbath led “the Jews” to initiate a process that would lead to his death (5:16-18).

Coming to Jesus for Life

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ. In the previous posts in this series we have not yet commented on the verses that comprise the gospel. As noted earlier our verses (Jn 6:51-58) are part of the much larger Bread of Life Discourse (Jn 6:22-69). And so it is good to explore meaning in the verses that precede our gospel passage.

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst. But I told you that although you have seen [me], you do not believe. Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and I will not reject anyone who comes to me, because I came down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me. And this is the will of the one who sent me, that I should not lose anything of what he gave me, but that I should raise it [on] the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have eternal life, and I shall raise him [on] the last day.” (John 6:35-40)

In Jn 6:35-40 Jesus spells out the need of faith in himself, a faith that is an active movement of coming to him.  The Jewish midrash literature identifies manna/bread as signifying the divine word or instruction – the memra.  The Word was the means of the covenant, the means of salvation, the revelation of God, the agent of creation, and the same as God. Jesus clearly says that he is the Word made flesh and tells them of the rewards for those that believe. Much of the OT background for this discourse is found in the descriptions of the messianic banquet. In Jewish thought the joys of the messianic days are often pictured under the imagery of an intimate banquet with Yahweh or his Messiah. Is 55:1-3 echoes the command in Jn 6:27 not to work for perishable food and makes it clear that Yahweh’s invitation to eat is part of his promises to renew the covenant with David, and therefore a messianic banquet. The words of Is 55:3 –  ‘Come to me heedfully, listen, that you may have life’ –  are restated by Jesus, announcing that the banquet is at hand for those servants of Yahweh who believe in the one who Yahweh has sent.

In the following line Jesus says “But I told you that although you have seen [me], you do not believe”.  The connection of these two passages recounts Amos 8:11-13 -‘Yes, days are coming, says the Lord God, when I will send famine upon the land: Not a famine of bread, or thirst for water, but for hearing the word of the Lord.  They shall wander in…in search of the Word of the Lord, but they shall not find it.’  Israel has been given the opportunity to partake of the bread of life but has rejected it.  In the closing lines of Jesus’ statement he clearly states that it is Jesus who mediates this divine life to believers and through whom we enter into a life giving communion with God, now and in eternity.

Like the people in the desert who refuse to believe Moses, In Jn 6:41-50, the crowd reject (‘murmured about him’) the bread from heaven.  Afterall, the crowd knows his father and mother – how can he claim to come down from heaven?  But Jesus does not let their lack of faith pass without comment. “Coming to” Jesus in faith is not only the will of the Father but it is also his work, for the Father draws believers to faith in Jesus.  Consequently, to believe in Jesus is to be open to God.  Moreover the prophets (Is 54:10-13 and Jer 31:33) had spoken of a new covenant when God would teach his people through a new law which would be more than an external message (‘I will place my law within them and write it upon their hearts’).  In listening attentively to Jesus, one hears the Father for he is the source of the teachings of the Messiah.  God then draws the believers to faith in Jesus in two ways: (a) through the message of Jesus and (b) as an interior teacher where he makes the message of Jesus an interior law of the heart.

Jesus restates his message in vv. 47-50 – he is the bread of life, without which there is no life.