John Shearman's Lectionary

THE REIGN OF CHRIST
Proper 29 Ordinary 34
NOVEMBER 22, 2009

The Christian year ends with the celebration of Christ reigning in glory with dominion over all creation.

2 SAMUEL 23:1-7. The author of this hymn of praise, regarded as King David’s last words, saw them as a fitting conclusion to the long narrative of David’s reign. Jews and Christians alike saw it as a prediction of the coming of God’s anointed Messiah in fulfilment of an everlasting covenant with God’s faithful people. The last two verses of this reading also describe the destruction of those who do not believe.

PSALM 132:1-12, (13-18). Yet another of the songs pilgrims may have sung as they approached the temple. this one recalls the vow of David to build a permanent dwelling place for the ark of the covenant symbolizing the presence of God among God’s people. The psalm also contains a promise that David’s descendants would sit on the throne of Israel forever if they keep the covenant.

DANIEL 7:9-10, 13-14. (Alternate) ) The scene in this vision of Daniel is the classic setting for judgment day in several ancient Middle Eastern religious traditions including those of Egypt, Babylon and Persia. The description also had great influence in the early Christian visions of divine judgment at the end of time. The same scene is still used frequently in both popular and homiletic presentations of what will occur on judgment day.

PSALM 93. (Alternate) As in several other psalms (24; 47; 68; 96-99) this one has the characteristics sung at the New Year celebrating the enthronement of Yahweh as sovereign over the whole earth and its people. Kingship was the common political system of the times, so it was natural that divinity should be described in this image.

REVELATION 1:4b-8. The Book of Revelation fits the description of eschatology, a form of literature containing of predictions about the fulfilment of God’s purpose at the end of history. This introductory passage cites the expectation of the early church that the return of Christ would bring this about.

JOHN 18:33-37. Jesus had been accused by his opponents of claiming to be king of the Jews, a treasonable offense in the Roman empire. This exchange between Jesus and Pilate tells us what the early church believed about the true nature of Jesus’ sovereignty. It was spiritual, not political; but it certainly had and still has political implications.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS

2 SAMUEL 23:1-7. The author of this hymn of praise, regarded as King David’s last words, saw them as a fitting conclusion to the long narrative of David’s reign. Vs. 1 clarifies the tradition of David as the man whom God had specially chosen and exalted to be Israel’s greatest king. The tone is more than hero-worship or hagiography. It has a prophetic and messianic flair to it. Jews and Christians alike saw it as a prediction of the coming of God’s anointed Messiah, in fulfilment of an everlasting covenant with God’s faithful people.

The prophetic element finds expression in vs. 2 where the spirit speaks through David in the same way that prophets spoke for Yahweh. The subsequent message reiterates the prophetic theme of justice (vs. 3) and elicits a striking simile of the world seen in the freshness of sunrise in spring (vs. 4).

The reference in vs. 5 to David’s house, i.e. his descendants who ruled Israel after him, suggests that this hymn was written at a later date than the end of his own life (c. 950 BCE). It conveys the conviction that the Davidic dynasty was given the divine mandate to carry forward the covenant relationship with Yahweh. The question in vs. 5c might be interpreted as questioning whether or not David’s heirs were succeeding in their duties. Not to do so would be tantamount to the apostasy and polytheism for which later monarchs were infamous, resulting in the end of Israel as an independent nation in 586 BCE. The last two verses of the reading describe the destruction of those who do not believe. This judgment became the religious explanation for the nation’s disastrous history by the great pre-exilic prophets and the post-exilic chroniclers.

One of the major difficulties in exegeting this passage is the corruption of the Hebrew text. Some scholars believe this is due to the antiquity of the poem. It bears some similarity to a poem in Numbers 24, thought to be from the J-document source in the 10th century BCE. If so, an early date not long after David’s death for this composition is not an improbability. Other scholars contrast it with the so-called “Testament of Jacob” in Gen. 49 and the “Blessing of Moses” in Deut. 33. The former is from the post-exilic P-document, but the latter is thought to have originated in the 10th century BCE.

PSALM 132:1-12, (13-18). Here is yet another of the songs pilgrims may have sung as they approached the temple. This one recalls the vow of David to build a permanent dwelling place for the ark of the covenant symbolizing the presence of God among God’s people. Unlike several of the other psalms of ascent, this one was created intentionally as a processional hymn commemorating David’s bringing the ark to Jerusalem. There are antiphonal parts for a soloist and a chorus. It has been speculated, with good reason, that its origin lay in the anniversary of the reigning king’s accession together with the celebration of Yahweh’s enthronement. This celebration is believed to have been held annually at the New Year in pre-exilic times. The psalm most likely came from the latter part of that period, but not from David’s own reign.

“The hardships” in vs. 1 refer to the loss of the ark and the difficulties David had in recovering it and bringing it to Zion as told in 1 Samuel 4-6. There is, however, no record of his vow (vss. 2-5). That may be an imaginative addition to the tradition for theological purposes, a common practice of both OT and NT authors.

Vss. 6-7 re-enact David’s search for the ark sung by the choir and summon the people to participate with them in bringing the ark to its appropriate place in the temple. A sense of awe in the holy presence symbolized by the ark comes to the fore in vss. 8-9 as the priests advance to carry the ark into the temple and lead the people in worship before it. As the ark entered the temple, the monarch
offered a sacrifice with prayer for Yahweh’s favor (vs. 10). The remaining verses of the shorter reading consist of an oracle which responds to the prayer giving Yahweh’s promise of the continuance of David’s dynasty (vss. 11-12). A second oracle (vss. 13-18) promises Yahweh’s continued presence in the temple and his providential care for both the priesthood and the monarchs who will continue David’s dynasty. The repeated mention of “the anointed one” lent this psalm to a messianic interpretation, although the term originally was a pious euphemism for the monarch.

DANIEL 7:9-10, 13-14. (Alternate) The scene in this vision of Daniel is the classic setting for judgment day in several ancient Middle Eastern religious traditions including those of Egypt, Babylon and Persia. The description also had great influence in the early Christian visions of divine judgment at the end of time. The same scene is still used frequently in both popular and homiletic presentations of what will occur on judgment day.

“The Ancient One” (i.e Yahweh) takes the seat of judgment in the heavenly court with a supporting cast of assessors. The books containing the lists of deeds, good and evil, is opened for the assessors to examine. There are several other OT and many intertestamental references to this scrutiny of human actions. (See Ps. 56:8; Isa. 65:6; Mal. 3:16; Jubilees 30:22; Enoch 81:4; 89:61-64; 98:7-8; 104:7.)

Suddenly the vision of Daniel changes. A new figure appears representing the beginning of a new era inhuman form. He comes from heaven, the place of orderliness, peace and purity replacing the old order of turmoil, chaos and evil.
This new person is given divine authority, power and eternal sovereignty which will never pass away.

It is not difficult to see why Jewish and Christian messanism and apocalypticism adopted this understanding of divine judgment that would completely displace the evil order of human affairs as it was experienced in actual history.

PSALM 93. (Alternate) As in several other psalms ( 24; 47; 68; 96-99) this one has the characteristics sung at the New Year celebrating the enthronement of Yahweh as sovereign over the whole earth and its people. Kingship was the common political system of the times, so it was natural that divinity should be described in this image.

This concept originated long before the development of monotheism in the myths of creation common throughout the ancient Middle East. Subsequently Israel’s god Yahweh was seen to be supreme among the gods of all other of the nations (i.e. henotheism) and the only one to whom the Israelites owed obedience.

This psalm describes how water in the form of floods from heavy rainstorms, recalling the primeval deep as in Gen. 1:1-2, assured that the providence of Yahweh would continue throughout the coming year. This assurance derived from Yahweh’s holiness even as his holiness would remain forever.

REVELATION 1:4b-8. The Book of Revelation can only be classified as eschatology, a form of literature containing predictions about the fulfilment of God’s purpose at the end of history. Some people make the mistake of reading this book literally or allegorically, then trying to guess how it fits into the current affairs they hear about on the daily news. One wonders where and how one could find reference to the current confusion about how democracy works or doesn’t work in different countries. Perhaps this is the time to prepare a sermon on how to interpret apocalyptic and eschatological literature with its strange symbolism and imaginative visions that so fill the pages of Revelation.

One of the best resources I have found for understanding what John was trying so say is Professor George B. Caird’s commentary in the Black’s New Testament Commentaries (The Revelation of St. John the Divine. Adam & Charles Black, 1966). William Barclay’s Daily Bible Study on Revelation is also excellent, as is exegesis and exposition by Martin Rist and Lynn Harold Hough in The Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 12.

This reading contains a lot more than the greeting and address of the seven letters to follow in chs. 2-3. Seven is the traditional symbol for wholeness or completeness. So, in this instance, it does not only designate the specific churches addressed, but the church as a whole for whom John wrote. In other words, the book has a universal audience, all who believe that Jesus Christ is Lord. According to Caird, “the seven spirits who are before the throne” represents the Spirit of God actively engaged with the churches in all its fullness and power. He also sees this as a reference to Zechariah 4 where the prophet has a vision of Israel represented by a candelabra with seven lamps. Rist also felt that the phrase referred to several OT passages which spoke of the seven archangels of Jewish speculation and to Persian astral theology where the sun, moon and five visible planets were thought to have control over human affairs.

There may also have been a hidden challenge to the imperial religion of Rome in this phrase. Coins from the early reign of Domitian showed the emperor’s heir who died in childhood as an infant Zeus playing with the stars to compensate for the dominion he would never inherit. For John, there could be no other sovereign than the crucified, risen and ascended Christ. So immediately he calls forth the scene before the throne of God (vs. 5). The titles he gives to Christ proclaim his sovereignty to encourage those who are even now struggling with the challenge to be faithful witnesses as they faced persecution for not paying obeisance to the emperor.

The first witness to the saving, redeeming love of God was Jesus Christ himself. Faithful unto death, he was raised from the dead and now is seated at the right hand of God as the reigning sovereign of heaven and earth. To him even the emperor owes allegiance for he is “ruler of the kings of the earth.” The term “firstborn of the dead” refers not only to the resurrection, but to the spiritual experience of every believer who enters into Christ’s death and resurrection through the act of baptism. Compare also the words of Jesus to Nicodemus about being born again of the Spirit in John 3: 5-6.

A double reference to the sacrifice of Christ and the sacrament of holy communion leads into the next sentence of John’s address to the churches. This same sentence resonates with the Fourth Gospel in speaking of the both the sacrament and the glorification of Christ by his death and resurrection. John also knew the OT (probably in the LXX version) and voiced the tradition of the apostolic church that the church was the continuation of Israel as “a kingdom (and/of) priests serving God” (vs. 6 cf. Exod. 19:6) What is more, John believed and returned to the thought several times that those whom Christ had released from their sins would reign with him. It remains a question whether they would exercise this dominion in this life or in life beyond death (cf. 2:26; 3:21; 5:10; 7:13-15; 20:6).

In vs. 7, John combined two apocalyptic references from Daniel 7:13 and Zechariah 12:10 to create a vivid picture of the Second Coming of Christ when even those who crucified him will submit to him. But is their wailing when they see his wounds a true repentance and acclamation of him as Lord and God as was the case with Thomas (cf. John 20:28)? John, the author of Revelation, has no doubt . He proclaims Jesus “the beginning and the end” i.e the great “I am,” the One in whom we are perpetually confronted by the living, ever-present and all powerful God. In the OT, those terms are caught up in the Hebrew name Yahweh Sebaoth, translated in English versions as “the Lord of hosts.”

One of the Greek translations for that name in the LXX was Pantokrator, “the Almighty.” For John the word meant something else than the Hebrew interpretation that Yahweh’s Messiah would lead a great army into victorious battle over Israel’s enemies. Christ’s omnipotence does not exist in unlimited coercive military power, but in the authority of self-giving love that cannot be defeated. This surely has something to say about all the current manipulations in the pursuit of political power a s well as the seemingly endless wars for dominance in geopolitical spheres of influence.

JOHN 18:33-37. Through the centuries Jesus’ trial before Pilate has engendered incredible flights of imaginative fancy. Despite all the research and preaching based on this event as John narrated it, we have no clear, definitive indication of what actually happened. We have no more than this pericope tells us. Jesus had been accused by his opponents of claiming to be king of the Jews, a treasonable offense in the Roman empire. The automatic penalty was death. Pilate had very little personal reason to examine the prisoner before him. After all the others he had ordered executed, one more dead Jew would mean little or nothing to his career. His governorship lasted for another six years. Why then did John tell of this incident told in this way?

This exchange between Jesus and Pilate helps us understand what the early church believed about the true nature of Jesus’ sovereignty. John designed this part of the passion story to reiterate something he had Jesus say earlier. He wanted to reaffirm Jesus as “the way, the truth and the life.” (Cf. John 14:6) He also wanted to clarify the true nature of the kingdom of God as Jesus had revealed it, although the phrase actually occurs in only one other passage in John. (3:3 & 5)

This interchange revolved around the meaning of the word “kingdom.” (Greek = basileia). The word occurs no less than six times, twice as many as “truth” (Greek = aletheia) on which so much expository and homiletic attention has been focused. As John narrated it, Jesus and Pilate talked right past each other, but that appears to have been quite intentional on John’s part. The meaning of the word “kingdom” was the key to what each of the two men said. Each had a totally different interpretation of it.

For Pilate, “kingdom” had a purely political reference. As Roman governor, he recognized Herod Antipas as one of two puppet kings, also known as tetrarchs, of the Jews. Philip, half brother of Antipas, was the other. Antipas had limited authority in Galilee; Philip in Transjordan. Luke added a complication to the trial of Jesus before Pilate passed sentence on him by having Pilate send Jesus to Herod (Luke 23:6-12). At most, Pilate must have been curious about this Galilean usurper of Herod’s jurisdiction, little though it was under Roman imperial sovereignty. For Jesus, the meaning of “kingdom” was quite another matter.

As Jesus exercised it, true sovereignty was spiritual, not political. Had it been political, he told Pilate, his followers would be fighting in the streets to keep him from being handed over to the Jews. (We may note as an aside that this is yet another hook on which to hang the accusation that John’s Gospel is anti-Semitic. Actually, the nature of Jesus’ sovereignty prevents that from being credible except in its literal sense. The central drama of John’s Gospel includes this conflict between Jesus and the Jews.) Jesus had been brought before Pilate on a purely political charge. Jesus did not deny his kingship; he interpreted it on a level on which people of all nations and races could respond to it.

Pilate was as puzzled as we are about what that meant. The sovereignty of Jesus rests on the love of God he came to reveal. The anticipated response to that revelation of divine sovereignty is to make love dominant in all human relationships in obedience to the commandment to love as God loves us. (Cf. John 15:12; 1 John 4:7-12) This humble truth was as far beyond Pilate’s understanding as it still is for a great many of the six billion and more of us inhabiting this planet today. That may be an entirely spiritual sovereignty; but it certainly had and still has political implications. It is our calling as believers to implement this God’s sovereign love in the myriad affairs of personal, national and international life.

-30-

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
TENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST
PROPER 14 ORDINARY 19
AUGUST 9, 2009.

2 SAMUEL 18:5-9, 15, 31-33. Without doubt this is one of the most moving stories from the whole of David’s reign. Essentially, it told about God’s love for Israel in a very personal parable. A palace revolution set Absolam, one of David’s sons, against his father ending in David’s flight and a bloody battle for power. Absolam suffered an accident and was slain by David’s ambitious general, Joab. When told the tragic news, David wept bitterly for his rebellious son, as God weeps for all whom God loves.

PSALM 130. As a prayer of penitence this psalm has few equals. It reflects of an actual situation evoking a desperate cry for God’s forgiveness. The need to be reconciled to God has universal application in the patient hope with which the psalm ends.

I KINGS 19:4-8. (Alternate) This is only a brief incident in a life-changing experience of the prophet Elijah. Threatened by Jezebel, he ran for his life. He headed out into the wilderness, a dry and barren place where he fell asleep under a broom tree, one of the few that will grow in such arid conditions. Strengthened for a longer journey by food miraculously provided, he trekked all the way to Horeb (Sinai), the mountain where Yahweh and Israel, led by Moses, had made covenant.

PSALM 34:1-8. (Alternate) This psalm presents one of the clearest statements of God’s redemptive purpose to be found in the Old Testament.

EPHESIANS 4:25-5:2. Either Paul himself, or one of his disciples who wrote this letter, exhorted his audience to live in a gentle and kindly way rather than angrily venting their frustrations and injustices. Their model was to be God’s loving forgiveness for them so fully expressed in Jesus Christ who died for them.

JOHN 6:35, 41-51. So different from the other gospels, John adds this discourse to the story of Jesus feeding of the five thousand. It is filled with John’s reflections on who Jesus really is and the meaning of his being the bread of life.

Jesus’ claim to be the complete revelation of God puzzled his Jewish contemporaries. They protested that they knew full well who he was because they knew his parents. Jesus went on to explain that he was not only the successor to the prophets, but the one who makes perfectly plain all that can be known about God and gives eternal, spiritual life to all who believed.

John’s Gospel was written possibly as long as sixty years after the resurrection for the third generation of Christians. He gave the early church’s most profound understanding of what Jesus really means to every generation.

A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

2 SAMUEL 18:5-9, 15, 31-33. The story of Absolam, David’s third son, forms a subplot to the life of David, in particular as a consequence of his adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah. An earlier part of the narrative gave some justification for Absolam’s rebellion. Believing that his father had lost his ability to provide adequate justice, Absolam took matters into his own hands. He arranged the death of Ammon, David’s oldest son, for raping his sister, Tamar (1 Sam. 13:1-29). A palace revolution set Absolam against his father won a considerable following in Israel. No longer sure of the loyalty of his troops, David fled from Jerusalem, raised three battalions, returned to guerilla warfare and engaged Absolam’s forces in a bloody battle for power.

David’s forces won the battle, causing Absolam to flee. But Absolam suffered a silly accident by being caught by the forked branch of a tree as his mule ran through a forest. David’s ambitious general, Joab, found and slew Absolam as he hung there totally vulnerable. When told the tragic news, David wept bitterly for his rebellious son, as God weeps for all whom God loves.

Without doubt this is one of the most moving stories from the whole cycle of narratives about David’s reign. It expresses profoundly human sentiments and contains genuine theological relevance. In a very personal parable it told of David’s love and grief for his both his sons, Ammon and Absolam, both of whom had repulsed him. The story may also be seen as a metaphor of God’s love for recalcitrant Israel. Because of this double intent, it became sacred scripture. Read in an extremely dramatic way, it can bring a deep sense of its pathos to an attentive audience.

PSALM 130. As a prayer of penitence this psalm has few equals. It reflects of an actual situation evoking a desperate cry for God’s forgiveness. The need to be reconciled to God has universal application in the patient hope with which the psalm ends.
Yet at the same time this deep sense of trust in God’s mercy and forgiveness rested on the assurance of Yahweh’s steadfast love. After all, the whole of Israel faith-history of Yahweh’s redemptive love lay behind this fervent prayer.

The psalm was included in a collection known as the “Songs of Ascent,” believed to have been sung by pilgrims as they approached Jerusalem for one of the great festivals. This one appears to fit the mood of those coming for Yom Kippur, the Feast of Atonement. On that holiest of occasions, all individual and national sins were repented and received merciful forgiveness. All the people and the nation received atonement with Yahweh through the designated sacrifices and the entrance of the high priest into the Holy of Holies. The fact that no mention is made of atoning sacrifices in this psalm has caused some scholars to assign it to a late, post-exilic date when Israel’s religious tradition had become more dependent on a spiritual relationship with Yahweh much more like that of the New Testament.

Vs. 6 contains a vivid image of watchmen on the eastern walls of Jerusalem watching for dawn to break over the Mount of Olives. From this, one can surmise that the poem may well have been composed by an individual engaged in a long night vigil contemplating two spiritual realities. Or, if he was a pilgrim, he may even have been close to the city itself as he spent the night too moved by his deep feelings to get any rest. In his wakefulness, he longed for morning to come when he could enter the city for the great festival. At the same time he was deeply conscious of his personal sin and had great hopes for the peace of repentance and forgiveness. Repentant Christians as well as Jews have turned to this psalm for the reassuring hope that it brings tot the troubled conscience.

I KINGS 19:4-8. (Alternate) This is only a brief episode in a life-changing experience of the prophet Elijah. Having won a decisive victory, Elijah had been threatened by Jezebel. So he ran for his life. He headed out into the wilderness, a dry and barren place where he fell asleep under a broom tree, one of the few that will grow in such arid conditions. Hunger and fatigue by an angel’s intervention in his plight he received food miraculously provided for a longer journey. So strengthened he trekked all the way to Horeb (Sinai), the mountain where Yahweh and Israel, led by Moses, had made covenant.

Angels as intermediaries between God and the prophets did not appear in Hebrew religious thought until after the Babylonian exile (639 BCE). The Septuagint (LXX, in Greek from 4th century BCE) translated this phenomenon as “someone,” likely interpreting the incident as a theophany and the “angel” as a manifestation of God in human form.

The passage depicts the prophet as humanly at the end of his own strength but miraculously receiving divine strength to return to the mount of God where Israel’s religious history began. In the northern tradition known as E (for Elohim) and in later Deuteronomic narrative (D), Horeb was the name given to the sacred mountain, the dwelling place of the God of Israel where the covenant was established. The alternative J tradition from the Southern Kingdom of Judea used the name Sinai for the holy mountain.

In the mid-20th century, British historian Arnold J. Toynbee described twenty-one different civilizations which had risen and fallen during the sweep of human history. One of his significant insights was to posit a time of retreat for renewal as a necessary step in the life cycle of any civilization or culture, then to return as a creative minority to establish a whole new approach to challenges to be faced. Out of the ruins of the old, the new was created. One finds a similar experience in the return of Elijah to Horeb. This becomes clear in the subsequent verses (19:9-18) where the prophet’s epiphany is described in detail.

PSALM 34:1-8. (Alternate) This psalm presents one of the clearest statements of God’s redemptive purpose to be found in the Old Testament. In the Hebrew text it has an acrostic form, each line beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The psalm also is in the wisdom style and so dates from the late Persian or early Greek period. Some scholars believe it may also have been associated with the lament of Ps. 25 as a hymn of thanksgiving.

The main purpose of the psalm is to celebrate with gratitude the saving power of Yahweh. It expresses great confidence and trust in Yahweh’s special care for the righteous.

While the superscription mistakenly attributes the psalm to an incident in David’s flight from his rebellious son Abimilech, no direct reference to that or any other event in David’s reign can be found. Such Davidic references were given to about half of the psalms, probably related to a special collection attributed to David. These titles were added during the compilation process somewhere between the fourth and second centuries BCE.

Viewed from a wider perspective, the psalm points to the constant mercy and love with which Yahweh watched over and delivered Israel from innumerable disasters. At the same time it draws more attention to the individual believer who trusts in Yahweh than to the nation as a whole. This too has been the attitude of devout Christians through many generations.

EPHESIANS 4:25-5:2. As this continuing analysis of Ephesians has been saying, either Paul himself, wrote this letter, or more probably one of his disciples composed it from his knowledge of Paul’s teaching, possibly after using it as a baptismal sermon. In this brief excerpt he exhorted his audience to live in a gentle and kindly way rather than angrily venting their frustrations and complaining about injustices they may have suffered. Their model was to be God’s loving forgiveness for them so fully expressed in Jesus Christ who died for them.

We need to keep at the forefront of our minds that the NT, and especially the letters, were written for congregations scattered far and wide across the eastern Roman empire. However obliquely, they referred to real situations within those faith communities. We have few resources to decipher exactly what those circumstances may have been when these letters were composed. It would appear from the context of this passage that there was a considerable amount of bickering and quarreling going on in this congregation. Either that, or the letter was addressed to faith communities in general who were in great conflict over the issue of whether Jews and Gentile could fellowship together. As someone put it in a comment on last week’s lesson, the issue was peace, not unity, although the unity of Christ’s body, the church, is named as one of the main themes of this letter.

Apparently anger and deceit within the fellowship had become serious concerns for “Paul” (vss. 25-27). People also seem to have been taking advantage of one another. Some may have been only partially reformed thieves (vs. 28). When people are riled up about issues, they often criticize and condemn one another mercilessly. That may be what Paul had in mind about “evil talk” in vs. 29. His antidote to that kind of talk is worth noting. An elderly concert musician and teacher once said, “Like good music, life needs to have plenty of grace notes. That’s what gives it colour and flavour.”

Did the anonymous author also have in mind Paul’s “fruits of the Spirit” in vs. 30? He certainly made direct reference to the Spirit as the seal of our future redemption, a phrase that occurs in the Pauline corpus many times. Then he returned to his earlier concern about serious communication issues that had arisen within the church for which there was only one solution: to speak in kindly, gentle words with gracious forgiveness modeled on God’s forgiving grace in Jesus Christ.

That, of course, would require considerable change of heart and perhaps some personal sacrifice of pride, especially for those who had been hurt by harshly spoken words. Could the Corinthians with whom Paul had such difficulty have been in the author’s mind here? As Frederick B. Craddock said in a sermon to one of Canada’s most prestigious congregations and a large radio audience, “Only those who have been hurt can be forgiving because they have been wounded and violated.” That is exactly what God did – and does – continually and consistently.

JOHN 6:35, 41-51. So different from the other gospels, John added this discourse to the story of Jesus feeding of the five thousand as an interpretation of something much more relevant to his own time and audience. The discourse consists of John’s reflections on who Jesus really is and the meaning of his being “the bread of life.”

If as many scholars have concluded, John was writing for the church in Ephesus in the last decade of the 1st century, what was he saying to them in this metaphor and its elaboration in the discourse? Within the decade before John wrote, the final distinction between the Jewish and the Christian faith traditions had become clear. Having been expelled from all Jewish synagogues, Christians no longer could be considered as a sect of Judaism. This expulsion meant that Jews who believed that Jesus was the Messiah were alienated from Israel and even their own families. At the same time, Christian communities now had a majority of Gentiles in their ranks. The teaching of the apostles defined more and more the limits of this tradition.

This prompted Christian communities to create radically transformed liturgies from their Jewish antecedents to express their peculiar Christian beliefs. Gospels recording Jesus’ sayings and deeds, the story of his passion, death and resurrection, and especially letters attributed to the apostle Paul, circulated more and more widely among churches. Into this milieu John’s Gospel introduced these reflections about the eucharistic celebration which marked every Christian gathering for worship.

In this passage, Jesus’ claim to be the complete revelation of God greatly puzzled his Jewish contemporaries. They protested that they knew full well who he was because they knew his parents. Mistakenly, they had understood him in an entirely literal way. Jesus had spoken in characteristic metaphors.

Bread had been particularly important in the Jewish religious tradition. Not only was it the staff of life, it held the promise of life itself. The Deuteronomists regarded the gift of eating bread without scarcity in the Promised Land as the promise of life in freedom and prosperity (Deut. 8:9). The sacrificial system included an offering of cereal used in the making of bread. Tabernacle and temple both required a permanent display of bread representing the presence of Yahweh (Exod. 25:30; 1 Chron. 28:16). The Passover festival of unleavened bread formed the central religious rite in remembrance of the Exodus.

Like the manna that fed the Israelites in the wilderness, Jesus identified himself with this ancient tradition as the “bread from heaven.” In doing so, he at once acknowledged the significance of this divine gift of bread and reinterpreted its meaning. He explained that he was not only the successor to the prophets, of whom Moses was foremost, but actually represented God in every way. He was the one who makes perfectly plain all that can be known of God and gives God’s eternal, spiritual life to all who believe.

Thus John gave the early church its most profound understanding of what Jesus really meant to his own and still means to every generation. Whenever we participate in the breaking of bread, in the sacred eucharist or in the humblest of meals, we have fellowship with him and with God whom he reveals to us through the working of the Spirit. As the traditional grace at table prays: “Be present at our table, Lord, be here and everywhere adored. These mercies bless and grant that we may feast in Paradise with thee.”

-30-