THE MAIN COURSE OF OUR EUCHARISTIC SUPPER

Reflection for the 20th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Cycle B

If we follow Patricia Sanchez's suggestion and apply the analogy of "progressive meal" to these four weeks of Jesus' discourse on the Bread of Life, we can say that this weekend we are offered the entrée or main course. In today's gospel, Jesus offers himself as "real food" and "real drink". As you may know, the meaning of Jesus' words in his Bread of Life discourse has been the source of much dispute between scholars and churches. Some say Jesus' image of the bread is a reference to his teaching on heavenly wisdom (hence the choice of a wisdom text for the first reading), others say Jesus is solely speaking about his sacramental presence in the Eucharist. Most likely in his bread of life discourse, Jesus is speaking of both. His teaching is food but he also provides us with Eucharistic food and drink to nourish us.

Scripture scholar Patricia Sanchez has this to say about this disputed text.

In the early church, Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Eusebius understood the Bread of Life to refer to the revelation of God in Jesus' words or teaching. However, some of the Church Fathers, e.g., John Chrysostom, Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Jerusalem and Cyril of Alexandria, emphasized the eucharistic or sacramental character of Jesus' gift of Bread from Heaven. After the consensus of the Protestant Reformers opted for a figurative and sapiential interpretation of John 6, the Council of Trent examined the issue but declined to make a definitive statement. Nearer to our times, a variety of solutions have been proposed, the most balanced and probably truest to the gospel are those of Xavier Léon Dufour, Raymond E. Brown and A. Feuillet. These catholic scholars have suggested that John 6 is interwoven with both sapiential and sacramental motifs. Sometimes, the Bread of Life refers to Jesus' teaching: other times, the Bread of Life refers to the gift of Jesus' eucharistic presence, today's gospel being a preeminent example of the latter. This conviction is also shared by some Protestant scholars, as, for example, Presbyterian pastor and professor Charles Cousar (Texts For Preaching, Westminster/John Knox Press, Louisville, KY: 1993,), who writes that although commentators and scholars may debate the point, we are simply stuck with the words as they appear in this Johannine pericope. It is well-nigh impossible, says Cousar, to escape their eucharistic flavor, particularly when they are drawn together with an allusion to Jesus' death. "Eat my flesh" and "drink my blood" are not simply vivid metaphors. At the heart of our Christian faith is the flesh of Jesus, given for the life of the world, and believers are drawn into sharing that death in order to know the life of Jesus within them; "If you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you" (v.53).

Shocked at the literal idea of eating flesh and drinking blood, Jesus' contemporaries misunderstood and questioned what he might mean: "how can he give us his flesh to eat?" (v. 52). Theirs was an understandable reaction. For Jews, eating flesh was a repulsive thought; drinking blood was equally shocking and forbidden by law. Obviously, therefore, the only acceptable and valid interpretation for eating Jesus' flesh and drinking his blood is a sacramental, eucharistic one.

For believers, the eucharistic encounter, i.e., eating Jesus' real food and drinking Jesus' real drink, would thenceforth be a way of communing with him and with one another as well as a means of knowing God and attaining eternal life (v. 54). Moreover, the attainment of eternal life should be understood proleptically; the one who feeds...and drinks... has eternal life, and will know that life in its fullness on the last day (v. 54). Therefore, each time we meet and eat with Jesus and one another at Eucharist, we are also experiencing a taste of the eternal banquet yet to come. To recall the words of the great Thomas Aquinas, "What could be more wonderful?"

(A parishioner in an email said that she was sometimes confused about what were my reflections in my column and what were other peoples. When quoting others, I usually write their reflections in italics.)

Explaining the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist

Understanding and explaining the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is a big challenge. It seems to me we need to avoid talk that sounds magical, cannibalistic, or 'merely symbolic'. As Catholics, we believe that during the Eucharistic Prayer, through the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus' presence "takes over" the bread and wine. This is so real that after the consecration of the Mass we can say that the bread and wine is no longer just bread and wine. It looks like and tastes like bread and wine but now, through the prayer of the community and through the power of the Holy Spirit, the bread and wine have become the body and blood of Christ. And when we receive this heavenly food and drink we are receiving the life of Jesus into our being.

In speaking to children we ought to avoid explanations that may come across as magical. For example, a parent may say: During Mass, the priest says certain words ("this is my body) and suddenly Jesus is present on the altar. As a kid, we were taught to bow our heads and close our eyes during the words of consecration. I remember peeking up to see if I could catch a glimpse of Jesus rushing onto the altar. Amazing, the way children's minds can work. So what do we say to children? We could say something like this: "In the Bible, Jesus tells us that when we gather together to pray he is with us. When we pray together over the bread and wine they become filled with Jesus' life presence. Hence at Mass, when we go to Holy Communion we receive the very life of Jesus into our being to help us become more like Jesus. As I write above words, I am very aware of how inadequate they are to explain a great mystery of our faith. Also, when we refer to Jesus' presence in the tabernacle have we ever thought that children may imagine poor Jesus as "locked up" in the golden box?