The Sánchez Archives CORPUS CHRISTI YEAR A

By
Patricia Datchuck Sánchez

BODY OF CHRIST, HEAD AND MEMBERS

DEUTERONOMY 8:2-3, 14-16
1 CORINTHIANS 10:16-17
JOHN 6:51-58

Before he actually imparted the gift of his real and abiding presence in the form of bread and wine, the disciples of Jesus had been prepared for understanding the significance of his gift and its consequences for their lives. Preserved in their tradition was the account of a provident God who had shown his care for his people by sustaining them with manna in the wilderness (first reading). The life-giving manna became a sacrament of the love of a provident God, a sacrament, the meaning of which they revisited, time and again, when doubts and difficulties clouded their ability to perceive God’s continuing concern (Nehemiah 9:20, Psalm 78:24-25, Psalm 105:40, Wisdom 16:20-21).

During his ministry and in an action reminiscent of the gift of manna in the desert, Jesus offered bread to the hungry crowds who had come out to hear him. An event recounted no less than six times in the four gospels, the multiplication of the loaves for the many reached back in remembrance of Elisha who had performed a similar sign as evidence that he was sent by God to do God’s work among his people (2 Kings 4:42-44). The loaves event also pointed ahead to Jesus’ sacramental gift of himself in the Eucharist and to the sacrificial gift of himself on the Cross. By the bread of his teaching and the broken bread of his very body, Jesus imparted life and salvation to a hungry world (gospel). Today’s feast celebrates both the sacramental and sacrificial aspects of the Body of Christ. But there is another aspect of today’s feast which necessarily commands our attention, viz. the communal reality of the Body of Christ which is the church.

Prior to his departure from them, Jesus had begun helping his followers to recognize their mutual bond and responsibility for one another as members of his body. Recall his words to the disciples when they asked him to dismiss the crowds so that they could go and buy themselves something to eat. “Give them some food yourselves” (Matthew 14:16 and parallels). Those whom he would nourish with loaves in the deserted place, with the sacramental gift of himself and with the sacrificial offering of his life, were thereby charged to similarly provide for one another. Paul acknowledged this communal responsibility when he called for a sharing among all who partake together of the one loaf and the one cup (second reading).

During the celebration of Corpus Christ, believers who express their faith in the Body of Christ which is Jesus are also called to affirm and accept the Body of Christ which is the people of God. Therefore:

- when this world’s street people hunger for the peace and happiness of their own home. . .

- when the poor and disadvantaged hunger for an opportunity to better themselves and their standard of living . . .

- when victims of A.I.D.S hunger for the respect and compassion which is their due. . .

- when those who have been treated unjustly hunger for a fair hearing. . .

- when the lonely, abused and neglected cry out in hunger for someone to care for them. . .

- when victims of ethnic cleansing and other forms of discrimination hunger for the attention of the apathetic. . .

- when estranged friends or relatives hunger to be included once again in family gatherings. . .

- when the sick and the dying hunger for the comfort of companionship. . .

Then, the words of Jesus, who came among us to satisfy our every hunger, must prompt the members of his Body to action. . . “Give them some food yourselves!”

DEUTERONOMY 8:2-3, 14-16

In his essay “Tradition and the Individual Talent” (The Sacred Word, 1920) T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) remarked, “The historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence.” For his part, the author of Deuteronomy attempted to impart a sense of history to his contemporaries in an effort to help them to learn the lessons it held. Twice in today’s first reading and several times throughout his writings, the author(s) of Deuteronomy awakened the historical sense of his contemporaries with a call to Remembrance! Remembering, or more properly, making present once again (from the Hebrew verb zakar) the saving events of the past kept Israel grounded in those moments which helped to define it as a nation, and as a people covenanted with God. Their shared historical memory concerning the exodus, wilderness period, settlement of Canaan, etc. also put the Israelites in touch once again with their countless experiences of divine guidance and providence. The intended goal of this process of remembering was to keep Israel faithful to the God who had called them into being. “For such remembering is a stimulus to obedience. Remembering what God has done allows every generation to experience the reality and fidelity of God. Forgetting God leads inevitably to disobedience.” (Leslie Hoppe, “Deuteronomy”, The Collegeville Bible Commentary, The Liturgical Press, Collegeville: 1988).

Most scholars agree with Wilhelm de Wette’s belief that the law book “discovered” during the period of religious reform under king Josiah (ca. 621 B.C.E.) formed the basis of what later became the book of Deuteronomy. As its Greek name indicates, the book represented a second (deutero) law (nomos), or more accurately, a recension of the Mosaic law adapted to the changing circumstances of a later period in Israel’s history. In addition to reshaping the law, the Deuteronomist called his readers to remember the message of the great prophets, thereby demanding “a level of moral performance compatible with self-revelation of Israel’s God and Israel’s high calling (e.g. 4:32-40).” Joseph Blenkinsopp, “Deuteronomy”, The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs: 1990).

In today’s first reading, the author of Deuteronomy calls his readers to remember the gift of manna and water which God provided in the wilderness. Manna was described in the book of Exodus as “a fine, white, flake-like thing” (16:14). Each person was to gather one omer (approximately two quarts) of manna each day and two omers on the day before the Sabbath (16:16, 22). By limiting the amount which could be gathered, Israel was to learn to trust in God’s daily and continued attention to its needs. The manna could be boiled or ground into a meal and baked into cakes (Numbers 11:8). F.S. Bodenheimer (“The Manna of Sinai”, The Biblical Archaeologist, # 10, 1947) suggested that the manna was actually the honeydew secretion of two types of insects which feed on the sap of the tamarisk plant. Rich in three basic sugars and pectin, the manna was ample nourishment for the desert travelers. But more important than its possible scientific origins, the manna and water were theologically important for Israel. As a sacrament of his constant presence and care, the manna and water were gifts intended to reveal the goodness of their giver and to strengthen the growing relationship between Israel and Yahweh. He who was capable of nourishing their bodies in the wilderness was able to meet their spiritual needs as well. In an effort to raise their consciousness, the Deuteronomist invited his readers to look beyond their physical needs and to find satisfaction for all their spiritual hungers in the Word of God (vs. 3).

For contemporary believers, the remembrance of the manna can be understood as a type or prefigurement of other such gifts of nourishment, e.g. the loaves for the many; the bread of Jesus’ word or his teaching and the Eucharist Jesus identified as his very self.

1 CORINTHIANS 10:16-17

So many factors militated against the unity of the Corinthian church. With the lure of the life they had left behind as near as their doorstep, attrition was always a possibility. Conflict within the community also threatened its harmony. Various groups met in a number of different homes; some favored certain host-presiders and touted the eloquence of one preacher over another (1 Corinthians 1:10-17). Some claimed to be privy to an esoteric wisdom which set them, head and shoulders, above others and exempted them from accepted moral standards (2:1-14). Certain members of the church twisted Paul’s teaching on Christian freedom and engaged in licentious and immoral behaviors (6:12-20). Others, whose faith in Christ was not yet fully integrated with a committed life-style cast a blind eye on a blatantly incestuous union (15:1-13) while some Corinthian believers continued to sue one another in civil courts before pagan, Roman judges (6:1-11).

Liberal minded Corinthians, for whom eating food which had first been sacrificed to idols posed no threat to conscience, clashed with the more sensitive members of the community who were appalled at the idea (8:1-13). Some believers undermined community harmony by questioning the authenticity of Paul’s apostleship and the truth of his gospel )9:1-27). Others boasted of charisms, which they believed to outweigh the importance of other gifts; they believed themselves to be more valued and superior members of the community, deserving of unique attention (12:1-31).

Some exercised a selectivity with regard to the good news, disputing the necessity of the cross and denying the reality of the resurrection. When this community of disparate persons and ideas gathered to share a common meal and to celebrate the Lord’s Supper, their disputes spilled over into the liturgy. What should have been a remembrance of their oneness in Christ became a travesty.

In an effort to restore the unity which should characterize the followers of Christ, Paul reminded the Corinthians that the origin and cause of their communion was their sharing in the body and blood of Christ. The two rhetorical questions which comprise this short pericope attest to the fact that Paul took for granted his readers’ acceptance that the cup and the bread were identified with Christ. The form of the rhetorical question, “is not. . .?” indicates that an affirmative answer is presumed. But Paul had to clarify the fact that the effect of the believers’ participation in the one cup and the one loaf is union with Christ and with one another. The name Paul gave to this effect is koinonia, a Greek work translated as sharing in the NAB, as communion in the JB and as participation in the RSV. His point is unmistakable; by their eucharistic sharing, believers are drawn into union with Christ the head of the body and into communion with the body of Christ, the church.

In his commentary on this text, Jerome Murphy O’Connor explained, “the physical gesture of eating and drinking at the Christian sacred meal has the effect of bringing into being a new Body which is the physical presence of Christ in the world. . . . Since all share in the one drink which is Christ and in the one bread which is Christ, Christ (to put it very crudely) becomes a possession which all hold in common, and are thereby forged into unity.” (“Corinthians”, New Testament Message, Vol. 10, Michael Glazier, Inc., Wilmington: 1979).

When the community of believers gathers for Eucharist, the church professes in sign and sacrament what it has been called to be, viz. one body, one spirit, in Christ. When each member of the assembly goes forth to face the rest of the week, that profession must become a lived reality, viz. one body, one spirit in Christ.

JOHN 6:51-58

In contrast to the Synoptic gospels which relate their narratives of the Eucharist in the context of Jesus’ Last Supper with his disciples, the fourth evangelist has presented the bulk of his eucharistic theology earlier in his gospel. John’s sixth chapter begins with an account of the multiplication of the loaves for the many (John 6:1-14). Like the other evangelists, John’s narrative was informed with eucharistic language. By telling his readers that Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks (or blessed them) and gave them to the people, who ate until they had had their fill, the evangelist portrayed this event as a type of the Eucharist.

Following the loaves event is a lengthy discourse on the bread of life. The discourse proper (vs. 35-58) is preceded by an introduction (vs. 22-34) and followed by the mixed reaction of the disciples to Jesus’ teaching. By mentioning that it was near Passover (6:4) and that the location for this discourse was the synagogue in Capernaum (6:59) the evangelist has added special poignancy to his narrative. If indeed, Jesus had been leading the synagogue service (as the term implies), his discourse would have been prefaced by the appropriate lectionary readings for the Passover season. Scholars of ancient Hebrew ritual believe that those scriptural selection would have included accounts of the exodus, including the narratives concerning the manna (Exodus 16, Numbers 11, Deuteronomy 8). In the discourse, John portrays Jesus offering a gift greater than the manna, viz. the bread of life, his own flesh and blood for the life of the world (6:49-51). Later in the gospel, John would characterize Jesus on the cross as the divine replacement for the Passover lamb (19:29, 33, 36). The fact that the evangelist sandwiched his narrative of Jesus’ walking on the water (6:16-21) between the multiplication of the loaves and the bread of life discourse serves only to underscore the exodus allusion in John 6. The fourth evangelist subtle insinuations preach a powerful message; Jesus, by the gift of himself in the living bread and on the cross has made available to believers the ultimate passover or exodus experience from death to life.

In the first section of the bread of life discourse (vs. 35-50), the bread which Jesus offered appears to be sapiential in character. In other words, the references to bread refer to Jesus’ teaching or the revelation of the word and wisdom of God in him. To be nourished by this bread is to listen to Jesus as the source of truth and to live by faith according to his words.

But the verses which comprise today’s gospel (vs. 51-58) should be understood not as sapiential but as sacramental or eucharistic. John’s choice of stark and realistic words defies any attempt to attach a merely symbolic meaning to the bread of life which Jesus offered. The term flesh and blood (vs. 53) is a Hebrew idiom which means the whole person. As Raymond E. Brown (The Gospel of John, Anchor Bible, Vol. 29A, Doubleday, New York: 1966)

has noted, in order to have any positive meaning whatsoever, flesh and blood must refer to the Eucharist. Eating human flesh and drinking blood were absolutely repugnant actions, prohibited by law (Psalm 27:2, Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 3:17). For Jesus to invite believers to partake of his flesh and blood meant that he invited them to enter into communion with him by eating the bread and drinking the wine with which professed to be identified. The verbs (vss. 51,53,54,56) and to feed 9vs. 58) or phagien and trogein in Greek are graphic terms which are more properly rendered as gnawing or munching. John’s realism is unmistakable; Jesus is offering the eucharistic bread, the flesh and blood of his very life, to be consumed as real food.

From the reaction of some of the disciples (“this saying is hard; who can accept it?”, vs. 60; “as a result of this many of his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him”, vs. 66) it appear that his contemporaries were not of the opinion that Jesus was using symbolic language. Hard saying or not, the bread of life which is the Eucharistic body and blood of Jesus commands our attention today and challenges us to a renewed faith in his real presence.

[NOTE TO USERS: This archive is available for use without charge, but it remains the property of the author and under copyright with Celebrations Publications. Users are permitted to print individual Sunday commentaries for pastoral use, but are prohibited from downloading or copying files or printing any portion of this for sale or distribution.]