|
If any of us happened to be invited as a dinner guest at Jesus’ house,
we’d likely not feel very comfortable when sitting down for the
meal. The reason has to do not with the fact that Jesus didn’t
countenance hypocrisy and left the Pharisees feeling pretty
uncomfortable and arguing among themselves, although we might feel
uncomfortable to the degree that we may act like the Pharisees. No, the reason has to
do with his culture’s customs, especially as these related to eating meals
as a guest in another person’s home.
In our culture, when we hear the phrase “the most intimate of acts,”
most of us immediately think of an act involving two lovers, ideally a husband
and wife. In the ancient Middle East, however, that phrase conjured
up a different image, namely, people sharing a meal.
Well, that’s all fine and good. It’s
an interesting
tidbit of cultural history, isn’t it?
For most of us, “sharing a meal” involves sitting down at the table
and using clean utensils to
“chow down”
the
food placed before us on a plate. But, for most people in
the world today—and for people living in the ancient Middle East—the
phrase “sharing a meal” conjured up the image of bowls of food
placed in the middle of a table which the guests encircling the
host. It’s
sort of like Da Vinci’s famous depiction of the Last Supper, but
without the knives, forks, spoons, and napkins.
Well, that’s all fine and good, too. It’s another interesting tidbit of cultural
history, no?
In order to share a meal in the ancient Middle East, one not only had to sit
close enough to be able to reach the food, but one also had to be
able to dip
into the bowl containing the food. All of this worked together
to create a particular intimacy uniting
the host with each guest as well as among the host and all of the
guests.
Then, while dipping into the bowl with one’s hand may have been
permissible at home, it was not permissible to do so as a guest in
someone else’s home. Instead, the invited guests waited for
the host to take his place at the table and to break the loaf of
bread and share it with each guest. Then, the guests could dip
their bread into the bowl and begin chowing down.
This ritual action communicated that each guest was not just welcome
in the host’s
house
but was also considered part of the household. It created “one body”
comprised of “many parts.” This ritual action was also how people in the
ancient Middle East “sealed the deal” when they were writing contracts, negotiating treaties,
and forming alliances. They “broke bread.”
Now, that’s more than fine and good. It’s not just an
interesting tidbit of cultural
history, but provides images that offer some insight into Jesus’
teaching in
today’s
gospel.
St. Paul conveys this insight in today’s epistle when he
writes about “the bread that we break.” But Jesus reiterates this
insight four times in today’s gospel when, after saying the
blessing, he broke the bread and gave it to each of his disciples,
saying: “Take this, all of you, and eat of it; for this is my Body
which will be given up for you.” Jesus also cautioned his
disciples that unless
they ate of the bread, they could not have his life within
them.
But, this image of Jesus giving his Body and his disciples consuming
it wasn’t all that would make us—as it did Jesus’ guests,
including the Pharisees—feel uncomfortable about dining at
Jesus’ home. No, Jesus’
use of the word “drink”—and what that word
meant to people living in the ancient Middle East—would
provoke feelings of great discomfort.
Yes, to “drink” implied consuming a fluid. But, for the Jews—in
contrast to other religions and cultures in the ancient Middle
East—drinking the blood of any animal was forbidden. Nor could
Jews use blood in cooking or consume it as part of a religious ritual.
However, a slaughtered animal’s
blood—the “sacrifical lamb,” for example—was
used for a ritual sprinkling of the Jewish people in the
Holy of Holies.
Why?
The Jews believed that whatever gave life—whatever it was that
animated creatures—was contained in the blood. To drink blood—to
drink that which contained the essence of life—would be to state “I
can take in and possess life without God.” But, the Jewish
religion taught that only God
can give life and, without God, nothing and no one is alive.
Thus, when Jesus said “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and
drink His blood, you do not have life in within you,” his disciples
had to be stunned. They certainly had to wonder, if not
quarrel among themselves asking, “How
can you give us your flesh to eat?” and “How can you give us your
blood to drink?” Some of his disciples surely considered the
statement offensive, if not ridiculous or sacrilegious. Others had
to experience disgust upon hearing the statement. From the
testimony of the gospels, we know for certain that the Pharisees
responded in these ways to what sounded like nothing other than
cannibalism.
Jesus’ teaching, however, is unambiguous: Jesus breaks bread—he
“seals the deal”—with his disciples by offering them his real flesh
and gives them life by offering his real blood. “Unless
you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you do not
have life within you.”
Certainly the disciples and the Jews—and perhaps you and me—knew
that they had life within them, even if they did not eat the flesh
of the Son of Man and drink his blood. But, that’s to miss the
point. The “life” about which Jesus was speaking was God’s life.
Unless we come as invited guests to Jesus’ table, unless Jesus breaks bread with us,
and unless we drink of the cup of his blood, we may be alive in our
bodies, but we are dead in spirit because although we may not be
physically hungry, we will still hunger for all of that which only God
can provide.
In today’s first reading, Moses reminded the Israelites to remember
always who fed them in the desert. It was not Moses but God who fed
them “bread from heaven,” thus “sealing the deal” and making the
Israelites “God’s Chosen People.”
In a similar way, Jesus told his disciples to “Do this in memory of
me.” The “this” is to accept Jesus’ invitation to come and “break bread”—to
become part of and to “seal the deal” in the most intimate of
acts—and to “drink from the cup”—allowing God’s life to fill them.
This is the perfect spiritual food giving Jesus’ disciples a
complete experience of God.
Notice what Jesus is teaching his disciples and why the Pharisees
may have been so offended:
·
Good works don’t provide a complete experience of God.
·
Virtuous living doesn’t provide an experience of God.
·
Prayer doesn’t provide a complete experience of God.
·
Reading the Bible doesn’t provide a complete experience of God.
All of these things—good as they are—leave human beings hungering
for something more substantial. They are, as it were,
“frosting on the cake.” The nourishment is the cake itself.
“Do this in memory of me” reminds Jesus’ disciples of the invitation
to come to Jesus’ home, to partake of Jesus’ body and blood, and
thus, to enter into the most intimate of acts whereby his
disciples have life within and leave hungering for nothing more.
|
HOMILY
