| ||
|
| ||
|
|
This post is adapted from a sermon that I gave at Brookline Church of Christ this past Sunday, August 9. The lectionary text was John 6:35-51:
The last line, where Jesus’ flesh is given as bread “for the life of the world,” highlights the rocky relationship in John’s Gospel between Jesus and the world that will be the topic of this post. To help clarify the discussion, I want to start out with a sketch of John’s view of the cosmos. It’s helpful if you imagine it visually: John’s Cosmos Like lots of stories, John’s has good guys and bad guys. Most of the dark world rejects Jesus and kills him. But some of the people in the world see the truth when they see Christ, and they have faith. These people remain in Christ even as Christ returns to the Father, leaving the Counselor behind. The promise is that Christ will prepare a place for us, then return to the world a second time and raise us up on the last day to take us with him to the Father. John on the World
This is very good news for the world. God loved the world. Not just certain individuals, but the world. Jesus didn’t come to judge or condemn the world, but to save the world. Yet God’s love for the world doesn’t preclude condemnation for people in the world. For example, John 12:47-48:
Jesus is saying that his office isn’t to judge, at least not during his first coming. Rather, the truth is something fixed, revealed by Christ, and people effectively judge themselves by whether they accept it. So the message of good news for the world includes also a message of judgment. Jesus came to save the world, but people in the world who reject him are still condemned. Then later in the Gospel, Jesus has harsher things to say about the world (NRSV):
Anti-Worldly? Even people who affirm that God created a good world can be drawn into an attitude that flesh is basically evil. For example, we could assume that human lives aren’t very important, because our souls are the only part that will survive. Or that we don’t have to take care of the world, because it’ll be burned up when Christ returns. Or perhaps most likely, we may simply denigrate the world and the bodies God has given us, which are an extraordinary gift. It’s possible, by trying to be more “spiritual,” for us to ignore whatever is physical to the point of ingratitude toward God. Affirmation of the world When Jesus, the Word, offered his flesh up to death, he became the bread of life: in his teaching, in the crucifixion, and in the Lord’s Supper. As the lectionary reading tells us, Jesus said that “the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” (6:51). And as he will tell us later in the chapter, his flesh is real food, and his blood is real drink. So even if the earth isn’t permanent, while it’s here Christ becomes a part of this world for our sake. One of the inspirations for this sermon is a book by a Greek Orthodox priest called For the Life of the World. The author says that the Greek Orthodox church understands all of creation as a sacrament by which God gives us his grace. What that means is that the life that Christ gives us is a life we live in this world. Because of that, we don’t need to be saved from the world itself––not from our bodies, not from the creation around us. This is God’s world, first and foremost, and it’s a gift given to us. Our life will continue eternally with God, but on this earth our life still embraces creation. Saved from the world Most everyone agree that there are false voices in the world––politicians, marketers, preachers, theologians, philosophers––we just tend to disagree on which voices are false. 1 John has a guideline for deterining which is which, a passage I alluded to earlier: “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God” (1 John 4:2). We don’t just accept this uncritically, of course. Some people confess Christ and spout lies, and non-Christians often say things that are true and that should command Christians’ attention. And we also have to admit that the even the faithful followers of Christ we love and admire––and of course we ourselves––have our own falsehood mixed in with the truth. But when we’re considering what the truth is, John does give us a very clear standard to start with, and that’s Jesus Christ. We’re too much a part of this world to be able to save ourselves from it, so we can’t just turn to our own ideas, or whatever we can derive from reason. Christ is the one who came into this dark world and spoke light. We also have to avoid following just the idea of Christ, or a purely spiritual Christ, which is what the group who left John’s church seems to have taught. Instead, we follow the actual risen Jesus Christ, the word who became flesh and walked among us. And that Christ, who saves us from the world, also leaves us here to live in our flesh in this world. And he remains here with us in the flesh––the flesh that he gave for the life of the world, which is real food, and which Christians share at communion every Sunday. It is at the communion table where the body of Christ (the church) encounters the body of Christ (the bread). There is a sort of nexus between heaven and earth, where Christ’s flesh is present among us here in the world, even as we gather at the foot of God’s throne with all the saints of heaven. John’s Gospel doesn’t tell us everything we need for our Christian lives––it is famously short on moral teachings, for example––but the book is acutely clear on another point: when we’re looking for truth, Jesus is our starting point. The bread of life that nourishes us is truth, come from heaven down to this world for us. And the place we start is each week at the table of Communion, where Christ gives to us his flesh for the life of the world. The communion table is the center of our Christian worship, because it is something the God gives to us––lest we get confused and think that the songs and prayers we offer to God are the most important things that happen on Sundays. It is this worship that drives our lives as Christians. The communion table is where we meet him in the flesh, to give us life for our time in this world. |
August 18th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Interesting read, scott! I will probably have to reread it a few times before I would have anything intelligent to offer. ;)
August 18th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Well, one thing I’d like to talk about is how different Christians understand and experience communion. Since I go to Mass every week with Beth, I’ve had plenty of time to think about what it means for Christ to be present in the bread and wine of communion.
Catholics, of course, are famous for insisting that the bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Christ. And of course, a lot of Church of Christ people are equally adamant that it’s just a memorial, and that the bread and wine *don’t* change into anything. I guess the grounds for this is that if the bread were going to turn into Christ’s flesh, the Bible would have been clearer about it.
My response is to let God reserve the right to be unclear and mysterious if God wants to––and the Gospel of John is a great example of revelation that is often hard to nail down.
I don’t know if the Catholic teaching on communion is right, but I think it’s on the right track. I certainly haven’t found anything in the Bible that would *deny* that we eat Jesus’ actual body and blood in communion (with “actual” being tricky to define). John 6, in any event, talks of Jesus body as “true food,” which is an odd thing for the Gospel to insist on if nothing mystical happens at communion. I can’t help suspect a lot of protestants are mostly reacting against what the Catholics believe, and I always find that a bad way to do theology.
But aside from debating what happens to the bread (and I know we could start a big debate here), I think Christians are called to approach communion to embrace the mystery of what happens at the meal, and it seems to have something to do with Jesus’ flesh, beyond a simple metaphor. That’s what I tried to push this sermon toward.
August 18th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
I dunno, I guess it’s hard for me to benefit from this one because it’s hedged in on several sides by doctrinal assumptions I’m not willing to make.
Also, I’m deeply suspicious of the gospel of John. Maybe that’s the problem. =)
August 19th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Seems to me that Jesus was stringing together little bits of information at a time so the people could understand it.
He feeds the 5000 and the people missed the point. Right off the bat he tells them that they need to work “for food that endures to eternal life”.
So they stand around scratching their heads while thinking about what’s for dinner that night that would keep them alive forever.
Jesus tells them again. “I am the bread of life.
They miss it again. Eventually Jesus repeats himself…again. Now the Jews really start to freak out, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
Seems to me that the people Jesus was speaking to, just didn’t get it. They were so stuck on thinking with their stomachs that they were not making the connection.
How could they make the connection that he meant his flesh his body, his blood would all be a sacrifice for sin?
To me, this entire passage seems to be more about faith than communion. The people got frustrated and went away after waiting for their food handouts. The disciples got frustrated and Jesus calls them on it. Verse 62…”What if you see the Son of Man ascend”…
If they have to see it to believe, then where’s the faith?
August 20th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Scott, I like where you are going with this sermon. I think you are right to emphasize the mystery of what happens at the meal. I think it is a mistake to try and explain exactly what happens at communion. I don’t see any benefit in trying to pigeon hole the meal as simply a memorial or as an actual miracle of transubstantiation (is that the right word?). Let God do what God wants to do with the meal and be okay with the ambiguity.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:12 am
For a continuation of this discussion, see my next post: Confusion and Explanation in John 6.