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.”
Everyone who has heard or read the Gospel of John remembers this dramatic passage. Peter, in his official capacity, spoke for the Church of all time and for every past, present, and future disciple in the Church.
We should reflect upon what his declaration means. A very large crowd of eager disciples heard the Lord's insistent teaching. They clearly understood his either/or demand.
“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
Either you eat and drink, or you leave. Jesus will not permit a cafeteria-style discipleship. You cannot take the teachings you like, leave the rest, and belong to the Lord. The Church's endless struggle with heresies, and its innumerable anathemas bear witness to the razor's edge challenge.
But what exactly is Jesus's demand? Is it satisfied by accepting the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation? With tabernacles and sanctuary lamps, genuflections, daily Masses, and Benedictions, the Catholic and Orthodox churches have insisted upon the doctrine that these elements are truly the Lord's flesh and blood. We don't pretend to explain it, nor are we interested in any scientific investigations with atomic microscopy or DNA analysis. We accept the doctrine because Jesus said it.
And yet there is more; the razor doesn't stop cutting when one has assented to an explanation like transubstantiation. Must we believe in a Church which purports to represent this divine man for all time? Can't I just take the Bible with its precious words and read in the solitude of my room? Why should I go to Church to receive this communion? Doesn't the Church offer spiritual communion to those who prefer their isolation? People stink! They only attend the Church to show off their clothes! And they bring their screaming brats with them. I'd rather stay home.
Must we believe that salvation comes through belief in a human being? Everyone who has ever experienced betrayal -- which is everyone -- hesitates to trust another human being. In bitter disappointment they have said, "I will never trust anyone again! Why should I take the chance? I can do without them."
Must we believe that God became a human being and that belief in that particular human being is absolutely necessary? Jesus lived in the first century, a long time ago in more ways than one. He would not recognize the same planet were he to return today! What did he know or teach that might be relevant to me today, in an age of computers, social media, and international trade.
What about all the people who never heard of Jesus? Are they going to hell? Is that fair?
Can't the all powerful, all good God, save anyone he wants in any way he wants, with or without Jesus?
Questions multiply as hesitant disciples find reasons to disbelieve the Lord's demand. But the answer remains the same: "...unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."
We celebrated Easter only three weeks ago, and we're now deep in the Easter season. Pentecost is four weeks away. We're still lauding, cheering, hurrahing, and acclaiming the Lord's victory over sin and death. We have time to ponder the sharp, two-edged sword Jesus uses to hack away the dead branches within the vine.
Jesus's question, "Will you also leave?" reminds us again that our God is a jealous God.
I call heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live, by loving the LORD, your God, obeying his voice, and holding fast to him. For that will mean life for you, a long life for you to live on the land which the LORD swore to your ancestors, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give to them. (Deuteronomy 30: 19)
No comments:
Post a Comment
I love to write. This blog helps me to meditate on the Word of God, and I hope to make some contribution to our contemplations of God's Mighty Works.
Ordinarily, I write these reflections two or three weeks in advance of their publication. I do not intend to comment on current events.
I understand many people prefer gender-neutral references to "God." I don't disagree with them but find that language impersonal, unappealing and tasteless. When I refer to "God" I think of the One whom Jesus called "Abba" and "Father", and I would not attempt to improve on Jesus' language.
You're welcome to add a thought or raise a question.