11 Pentecost, Year B

“REALITY – TOTAL & COMPREHENSIVE ”
A sermon by The Rev. Gene Tucker given at Trinity Church, Mt. Vernon, Illinois; Sunday, August 16, 2009
Proper 15 -- Proverbs 9: 1 - 6; Psalm 34: 9 - 14; Ephesians 5: 15 – 20; John 6: 53 – 59

We begin with three questions this morning:

1. Is beauty only skin deep, or is beauty a much more comprehensive thing than the merely observable, physical aspects of it?
2. Is truth more than the physical facts of any situation or problem we might encounter?
3. Is reality comprised of more than the literal aspects of what is real?

Obviously, the answer to all three of these questions is: “yes”!

Beauty, for example, consists of much more than being physically beautiful. In fact, I
can think of a number of people who are beautiful not primarily because they are physically attractive. (Some of these people aren’t especially attractive by society’s standards, but they are possessed of a beautiful spirit, and that is – in part - what makes them beautiful.) Likewise, if we are to testify in court, we swear to “tell the truth, the whole truth,….” For to tell the truth means that we not only are faithful to the facts as best we can understand them, but that we place those facts in a truthful context. And, of course, we know that reality comprises much more than just the literal aspects of reality, for we must contend with the other realities (spiritual, emotional, etc.) of the experience of life, in addition to its literal aspects.

In today’s gospel text, Jesus now brings together all the elements of truth, of reality. He
seeks to get us – and His audience on the shores of the Sea of Galilee 2,000 years ago – to see the totality of truth, the whole picture of what God is doing. The issue at hand is the matter of God’s feeding of His people.

Now, hold onto that thought for a moment. Before we look further at the passage before us today, let’s recall where we’ve been on our walk through the sixth chapter of John’s gospel account….

We began two weeks ago considering this very long chapter.

Two weeks ago, we saw that Jesus was speaking and thinking on a different level from the people who’d been fed by Him in the multiplication of the five loaves and two fish. He tried to get them to see that the work of God involved believing in the one whom God had sent, not in doing the will of God by following the precepts of the Torah, the Law of Moses. We summarized that part of the conversation by saying that being within the will of God is essentially a matter of the heart, not of the hands.

Then, last week, we observed that Jesus now spells out how God calls a people unto Himself. God forms a people for His own possession. And then God saves and sustains His people. We recalled how God had done just that in calling His people together while they were living in Egypt, in bondage. And, having called them together, He led them out through the Red Sea, saving them. And, as the made their way through the desert wilderness, God fed and sustained His people by providing manna for them to eat. (The theme of manna has appeared in the past two Sundays’ passages, and it appears here again in today’s passage, as well.)

Now, with today’s passage, we find Jesus bringing all the threads together….He tries again, as He had done earlier, to bring His audience out of their literalist mindset (so prominent in Judaism 2,000 years ago) into a more comprehensive understanding of God, of how God calls His people into being, and of how God feeds and sustains His people.

As we turn to our text for today, we need to set the stage more accurately and completely than our lectionary allows us to do:

In verse 52, the Jews, having heard Jesus say, “And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh,” respond by asking, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Unfortunately, that verse – which sets up the context for the gospel reading for today – is missing from the lectionary.

Taken literally – as those Jews did when they heard these words – the truth of what Jesus said is ugly and repulsive: eating a persons actual flesh and drinking his blood? Indeed, as we will see in next week’s part of John, chapter six, the revulsion that a literal understanding of what Jesus said elicits. (Stay tuned!)

So, if the literal meaning of what Jesus said about “eating His flesh and drinking His blood” isn’t the thrust of what Jesus was getting at, then what is the truth of what He said? Put another way, what is He talking about?

Theologians and Bible scholars have been divided in their answers….

Some (most, actually) understand all of chapter six of John’s gospel account to be concerned with the Eucharist, the Communion. They see in the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves a type, a foreshadowing of the institution of the Communion, which centers around the division and distribution of bread and the giving of wine. (We will consider the matter of the wine in just a minute.) These scholars see in Jesus’ statements about the giving of His flesh a direct connection to the Eucharist.

Others content that there’s no connection to the Eucharist, the Communion, at all.

The two positions seem to center around the theologian or Bible scholar’s ecclesiastical background (in truth, this is a bit of an exaggeration, but not a large one): those scholars and theologians who come from a more sacramental background (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, e/g.) see the connection to the Communion, the Eucharist.

Those who come from a more Free Church background (Baptist, e.g.) do not see the connection, generally speaking.

I will be frank in saying that I see the Eucharistic connection. I see it, in fact, very strongly.

Allow me to explain.

There are two large threads in John’s gospel account, including:

Water/wine/blood: Jesus’ first miracle and His last miracle have to do with these three elements, which are all tied together….Jesus’ first miracle in John’s account is the changing of the water into wine at the wedding in Cana. His last miracle (and His most glorious, in John’s estimation) is His death on the cross, at which time John (and the only gospel writer to do so) tells us that blood and water flowed forth from Jesus’ side as it was pierced by the spear. In between, in chapter four, Jesus tells the woman at the well in Samaria that “Whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst again.” (John 4: 13) A little earlier, Jesus had told the woman that He was offering her “living water”. (John 4: 10) So, we have a large thread which runs throughout the Fourth Gospel, a thread which ties together water/wine/blood.

Bread: Jesus uses very, very similar language (“the water that I shall give/the bread that I shall give….) to describe the gift He is offering, saying, “The bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.” (John 6: 51). And, just as we saw in chapter four, a little earlier here in chapter six, Jesus says that He is the “living bread.” (John 6: 51)

Now, notice the similarities:

Living water/living bread: In both passages, Jesus uses the term “living”. The use of this word tends to tie the two ideas – water and bread – together.

Future tense in the “giving”: In both instances – as we’ve seen – Jesus says, “And the water/bread which I shall give…”

Eternal life: The gift of “living water” and the provision of “living bread” give life. In fact, the gift of life that each provides is not just physical life, but eternal life. Here, we see the deeper, fuller, more comprehensive truth of what Jesus is saying.

The use of the future tense seems to indicate a reality that has not yet come to pass…if I am correct in my assessment then, it should have indicated a fuller meaning than the literal sense of its meaning, the sense in which the original hearers of these two statements took them.

Recall with me that the woman at the well in Samaria, and the crowd with whom Jesus contended today, both take the meaning of Jesus’ statements literally, and only literally. The woman says to Jesus, “Sir, the well is deep and you have no rope and bucket. Where are you going to get that living water?” (John 4:11). Likewise, the crowd today asks, “How is this man going to give us his flesh to eat?” (John 6: 51)

So, if you are convinced that Jesus is referring, in chapter six, to the Communion, the Eucharist, an event which had not yet come to pass when He spoke these words on the northern shore of the Tiberian Sea, then why is the connection to the Eucharist made so indirectly?

Consider with me the difficulties in making the connection (which may be why many Bible scholars and theologians struggle with any attempt to link the living water/living bread to the institution of the Communion. We look more closely at John’s gospel account to see why the difficulties linger:

The Last Supper: In John, chapter 13, we read the account of the Last Supper. But John relates to us the account of Jesus’ washing of the disciples’ feet. Nowhere in John’s account is there any mention at all of the institution of the Lord’s Supper itself. (There is one mention of the eating of bread, and there is a mention that this supper took place just before the Passover feast, that is all.)

No account of the words of institution: If there is no description – even obliquely – of the Lord’s Supper, then, too, there are no words of institution (i/e. “This is my body, this is my blood”).

Nowhere in the Fourth Gospel do we find any reference at all, directly, to the Lord’s Supper, the Communion, the Eucharist.

Perhaps it is because there is no direct link that some scholars fail to be convinced that there is a link between chapters four and six of John’s writing to the Communion.

But, I think there’s a reason for making a connection between Jesus’ “living water/living bread” references and the means by which the Lord continues to feed us in the Sacrament of the Holy Communion, and it is in the account of the provision of the manna in the wilderness (which has been a consistent thread throughout our reading of chapter six to date).

Consider with me the sustenance that the manna represented to God’s people as they wandered in the wilderness, and the theological importance of the connection between God and His people:

A direct provision: The manna in the wilderness came directly from God. (See Exodus 16) God told Moses what He was going to do by providing the manna. All that Moses did was to relate God’s instructions to the people. But the manna mysteriously appeared, and the people went out, one-by-one, to gather it up. Moses had nothing to do with providing it at all (contrary to the common belief that Jesus points out in the earlier part of chapter six, when He said, “It was not Moses who provided you the bread from heaven.” (John 6: 32)

An individual provision: Each one received the bread, directly from God’s hand.

What should we make of the implications of these two threads as we investigate the connection between the “living water/living bread” that Jesus will give? I make two suggestions:

It’s a direct provision: No intermediary is necessary. God feeds His people, directly, in the Communion, the Eucharist. The priest who presides at our celebrations of the Holy Eucharist isn’t part of the equation, in John’s estimation. It’s the individual believer and God, as the individual enters into the divine life of God, made possible by Jesus’ abiding and presence within the life of the Father.

It’s an individual provision: Each one is fed, individually, personally.

Both of these aspects of the divine, heavenly food are integral parts of John’s understanding of the relationship we have with the Father, through the Son.

Our relationship is direct…no one need act as a go-between.

Our relationship is personal and individual…..we are one with the Father.

One final comment: As we feed on the heavenly food that our Lord Jesus Christ has given us (by virtue of His death on the cross, at which time blood and water poured forth, and at which time His flesh was given in sacrifice for our sins), we become what we eat! Here, the literal, the metaphorical, the spiritual meanings all converge. No one aspect of this truth can grasp the truth of this reality. All are necessary.

AMEN.