Many of the disciples of Jesus who were listening said,
“This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
The people who were struggling with this teaching were his disciples. We might expect the Pharisees and other religious leaders or even the ever antagonist Judeans to have trouble with Jesus teaching about the Eucharist. But what see is that, like in our own day, it was disciples of Jesus himself who murmured and protested.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me
unless it is granted him by my Father.”
There were some that had come to him and followed him as his disciples that hadn't yet come to him in the way that only the Father could grant. What Jesus was describing in this discourse could only be accepted and understood by the power of the Spirit, but these disciples were still operating primarily in the flesh. To them it seemed incompressible and utterly beyond their paradigm. This seems to be the case for many in the Church as well, since we read in survey after survey that faith in the Eucharist seems to be at an historic low. But lest we look complacently or even smugly at the unbelieving crowds, what about us? We who claim to believe that the consecrated bread and wine is truly Jesus himself, do we live like that is true? Or do the priorities of our lives give the lie to our profession of faith? Most probably none of us has responded with our entire hearts the the gift of Jesus to us in the Eucharist. But we cannot simply grit our teeth and believe more or better in order to attain the faith we desire. It can only come as a gift. And it is a gift we can only receive when we honestly acknowledge our own limitations.
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go?
You have the words of eternal life.
We have come to believe
and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
Peter definitely did not understand. But he did not just put on a good face so he could check the survey box that said '[ ] I believe everything Jesus taught about the Eucharist'. Instead he honestly fessed up to the fact that he didn't really understand much better than the crowds. But he trusted in the one from whom the revelation came. He didn't yet understand the teaching, but he trusted the teacher who revealed it. Implicit in this was the assumption that Jesus himself, with his words of eternal life, could help him to understand as he desired when he desired to do so. Peter knew what this experience was like, because it was a similar spiritual revelation by which he came to understand that Jesus was the Son of God. The Father led him to recognize the identity of Jesus beyond what flesh and blood could teach. He believed it could happen again here. And so, in humility, he remained open to that possibility.
But there are some of you who do not believe.”
Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe
and the one who would betray him.
Jesus seemed to be intentionally provocative in his teaching about the Eucharist. It was like a reality check for potential disciples to see if they were really serious about Jesus, one which led many to return to their former way of life. Further, it seems to have been a key issue to provoke his betrayal by Judas. We hear first mention of that betrayal in the Gospel of John in this passage. And we know that it was precisely during the Last Supper that Judas left to perform the deed.
We might wonder, though, was it arbitrary to insist on the Eucharist like this? Could any supernatural doctrine have done just as well? In response to this, we would suggest that there was a reason that Jesus chose to insist so strongly on the Eucharist. That is because it is the Eucharist that makes those who receive it into the body of Christ, because "there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread" (see First Corinthians 10:17). The Eucharist, then, is not merely a ritual that is performed by the Church. It is a Sacrament, that, in a sense, creates the Church, since the Church is nothing other than the body of Christ. This means too that it is not negligible, nor optional. It is a revelation that every disciple is meant to receive in order to become what we are meant to be.
If the Eucharist really does make the Church as we have argued, then the fact of our lack of Eucharist faith means something more than a merely individual issue in the lives of isolated believers. The Church herself is being deprived of her full potential to the degree that we her members don't humble ourselves and allow ourselves to be draw by the Father through the words of eternal life given to us by Christ himself. To be all that we are meant to be as Church we must let his words of eternal life wash over us again and again, not seeking to master them by our intellect but rather allow them to master us. This is not unreasonable because the teacher who gave us this words is absolutely trustworthy. He gave these words in order to prepare those who would remain with him for his greatest gift: that of himself.
There is a great promise in the Eucharist, not merely for our subjective experience of life in the Church, but for the life of the Church herself. If we succeed together in receiving the blessings of this year of Eucharistic revival the Church will doubtlessly experience the blessings that described it in our reading from Acts.
The Church throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria
was at peace.
She was being built up and walked in the fear of the Lord,
and with the consolation of the Holy Spirit she grew in numbers.
No comments:
Post a Comment