Sermon for John 6:51-58

Sermon for John 6:51-58 August 17, 2006

Grace Evangelical Lutheran Church

The first thing I do when I’m preparing a sermon is to read the Bible passages for the day, over and over. I probably read them a dozen or more times before I start writing. I want to let the words go into my mind and let the Holy Spirit do his work before I read commentaries or editor’s footnotes. In considering today’s Gospel lesson and sermon, I think that routine is especially helpful because if we’re not careful, we can jump to some incorrect conclusions about what this passage is all about.

John 6:51-58 continues the account of Jesus’ declaring himself to be “the bread of life.” We’ve been in this chapter for four weeks now. And, if you’ve been paying attention to those weeks’ sermons, right about now you might be thinking, “Why are we still talking about Jesus as the bread of life? There are lots of other topics in the Bible.”

There are, of course, but one reason why the editors of the Revised Common Lectionary (which is the source of our selected Bible readings each Sunday) focus so strongly on this chapter is because of the way this passage is usually interpreted. The usual understanding of the verses we’ve read for today is that they are this writer’s way of describing Jesus’ establishment of what we call “Holy Communion.”

In the other Gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—the writers describe Jesus at his last meal before his crucifixion, offering bread and wine to his disciples as a way of explaining to them what his death the next day will mean for them (Matthew 26:17-29; Mark 14:12-25; Luke 22:7-23). After Jesus gives thanks for and blesses the bread and wine, he says what are called “the words of institution” that you hear Pastor Powell and me say when we celebrate Communion in worship: “This is my body,” “This is my blood”; “Do this in remembrance of me.”

In the years immediately following Jesus’ return to heaven. repeating those words and sharing those meal elements became a central part of Christians worship. We know that because it is referred to not only from references to it within the New Testament writings of Paul and others (e.g., 1 Corinthians 11), but also from writings that we still have other documents that were written by Christians within the first few years after Jesus’ lived on earth. The ritual we call “Communion” was so important to their worship that the Roman Emperor Nero (and others) accused them of cannibalism, because they insisted on eating and drinking what they referred to as their Lord’s body and blood. As a result, many Christians were killed (and willingly died) protecting that ritual they believed their Lord had commanded them to do.

And so gradually the Church began to teach that taking part in “communion”—or what some Christians call “the mass”—became one of the two absolute requirements for salvation—the other being baptism. That’s what the whole Church taught for a long time and some groups in the Church still teach. But that’s not what we teach. And here’s why: because you know what happens when you tell people the absolute requirements—“the bottom line.” That’s right—that’s what they do. And nothing else.

For hundreds of years and even today, people have asked the question, “What do I have to do to be saved?” And, when they hear “the requirements,” “the rules,” “the law”—that’s what they do. They elevate the Law above the Gospel and worship human works rather than divine gifts.

So it’s very tempting for some Bible commentators to interpret today’s Gospel reading as one more account of Jesus’ establishing a ritual by which people can hang onto their faith. That teaching is so prevalent and so tempting that, for some people who call themselves “Christian,” as long as you got “wet” once and you occasionally “eat & drink,” that’s enough. That’s all that a person has to do. Get baptized, take communion—your dues are paid; you’re “in.”

As if participating in ceremonies—of any kind—was the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Let me show you why that can’t be true: If you have your Bible open to John 6, flip back a couple of pages to the fourth chapter of John, where Jesus is having a conversation with a woman at a well. Starting at verse 7: “When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, ‘Will you give me a drink?’ … The Samaritan woman said to him, ‘You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?’ (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, ‘If you knew the gift of god and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.’ ‘Sir,’ the woman said, ‘you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?’ Jesus answered, ‘Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.’ The woman said to him, ‘Sir, give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.’ He told here, ‘Go, call your husband and come back.’ … “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me, ³⁸and let the one who believes in me drink” (John 6:7-7:37).

In chapter 6, it’s bread; in chapter 4, it’s water. So, was Jesus, in these verses, instituting a requirement that we have to drink water to be Christian? Of course not. Jesus didn’t come to earth to lay down rules so that you and I could escape “the fires of hell” by the skin of our teeth.

After he washes their feet (in John chapter 11), Jesus tells his disciples, “Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you…Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.” Again, is Jesus saying that if we just get down on all fours and wash someone’s feet, we’ll be okay. We’ll get into heaven that way?

What do you think?

If Jesus’ life on earth had been about telling us the absolute minimum we have to do to “get by,” we could just take a drink of water, wash a few feet, eat a tiny bite of something that’s supposed to be bread, drink a tiny bit of juice or wine—and we’d be out of here. Mission accomplished, law obeyed—life everlasting?

No.

When Jesus says, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you,” he is not commanding that we come to “mass” once a week (as some Christians believe), nor is he commanding that any ceremony is a requirement for eternal life. He is telling us that unless we allow Real Life to enter into us, we are dead.

Look at verse 57 (chapter 6): “Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.” God is The One who spoke life into existence. God—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—is life itself. If we keep resisting Jesus and trying to get by with as little “religion” as possible, we are starving ourselves of life. But when we accept Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf and allow him to make our hearts a home for his Holy Spirit, Life himself lives in us, forever. Spiritually speaking, it is absolutely true, “You are What you eat.”

So, what are you “eating” these days?

You may have heard people call “Communion” “The Eucharist.” “Eucharist” is a word that means “thanksgiving.” In fact, it is related to the word “grace.” So, I invite you to conclude this sermon with me by bowing your heads and praying with me the very same prayer of thanksgiving that Early Christians prayed when they fed on the body and blood of Christ:

“We thank You, holy Father, for Your holy name [and Your holy being] which You cause to dwell in our hearts, and for the knowledge and faith and immortality that You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant. To You be the glory for ever, Master almighty. You created all things for Your name's sake; You gave food and drink to all people to enjoy, that they might give thanks to You; but to us You freely gave spiritual food and drink and life eternal through Your Servant. Before all things we thank You that You are mighty. To You be the glory for ever. Remember, Lord, Your Church, to deliver it from all evil and to make it perfect in Your love. Gather it from the four winds, sanctified for Your kingdom, which You have prepared for it; for Yours is the power and the glory for ever. Let grace come, and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the God-Son of David! If any one is holy, let him [worship]; if any one is not so, let him repent. Come, Lord Jesus. Amen” (The Didache, chapter 10).

Source materials for this sermon:

The Didache (ca. A.D. 50-120) , one of very first existing documents of Early Church, highlights how important this ceremony was to Early Christian worship: “Chapter 9. The Eucharist. Now concerning the Eucharist, give thanks this way. First, concerning the cup: We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David Thy servant, which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. And concerning the broken bread: We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever. But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs."

In the writings of a man named Justin (Martyr), a Christian who was killed for his faith in A.D. 165, (as well as in other writings of the time—by Christians and those who opposed them, e.g., The Octavius of Minucius Felix, ca. A.D. 230), we learn of charges that Christians were cannibals. The most well-known persecutor of Christians was the ungodly Roman emperor Nero, who probably attacked them to deflect public criticism against himself. Nero (whose first edict against Christians was handed down in A.D. 64) fueled rumors about their private (seemingly secret) meetings, going so far as to say that the Lord's Supper was cannibalism.

(Roman Catholic source): “The word Mass (missa) first established itself as the general designation for the Eucharistic Sacrifice in the West after the time of Pope Gregory the Great (d. 604), the early Church having used the expression the "breaking of bread" (fractio panis) or "liturgy" (Acts 13:2, leitourgountes); the Greek Church has employed the latter name for almost sixteen centuries. There were current in the early days of Christianity other terms: "The Lord's Supper" (coena dominica), the "Sacrifice" (prosphora, oblatio), “the gathering together" (synaxis, congregatio), "the Mysteries", and (since Augustine), "the Sacrament of the Altar". With the name "Love Feast" (agape) the idea of the sacrifice of the Mass was not necessarily connected. Etymologically, the word missa is neither fom a Hebrew word, nor from the Greek mysis, but is simply derived from missio. The reference was however not to a Divine "mission", but simply to a "dismissal" (dimissio) as was also customary in the Greek rite, and as is still echoed in the phrase Ite missa est. This solemn form of leave-taking was not introduced by the Church as something new, but was adopted from the ordinary language of the day, as is shown by Bishop Avitus of Vienne as late as A.D. 500 (Ep. 1 in P.L., LIX, 199): In churches and in the emperor's or the prefect's courts, Missa est is said when the people are released from attendance. In the sense of "dismissal", or rather "close of prayer", missa is used in the celebrated "Peregrinatio Silvae" at least seventy times (Corpus scriptor. eccles. latinor., XXXVIII, 366 sq.) and Rule of St. Benedict places after Hours, Vespers, Compline, the regular formula: Et missae fiant (prayers are ended). Popular speech gradually applied the ritual of dismissal, as it was expressed in both the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful, by synecdoche to the entire Eucharistic Sacrifice, the whole being named after the part. The first certain trace of such an application is found in Ambrose (Ep. xx, 4, in P. L. XVI, 995) (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10006a.htm)