Anyone who reads these verses carefully cannot help but notice the strong and explicit Eucharistic tone. The
question then arises: could Jesus have spoken such words in the middle of his ministry?
Prior to the Last Supper, how could anyone—crowd or disciples—understand or appreciate Eucharistic
interpretations? The verses as they appear in the Gospel, therefore, were likely not spoken in this form by
Jesus.
Yet, everyone who reads the Gospel of John knows that while he devotes five chapters (Jn 13 ff) to the Last Supper, his narrative
does not include the institution of the Eucharist. For this and other reasons, scholars believe that the
multiplication of loaves and the discourse in chapter 6 are John’s equivalent of an institution
narrative.
The objection “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (Jn 6:52) is serious and would likely have
arisen in Jesus’ lifetime. The problem was no less real in the time of the evangelist, sixty years
later. Literal drinking of blood was prohibited in Judaism and perhaps also in early Christianity (sec Gen 9:4; Lev 17:10, 12, 14; cf. Acts 15:29).
Yet “eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood” became a common way for Christians around
the time of John’s Gospel to describe participation in the Eucharist. Ignatius of Antioch said, “I
desire ‘the bread of God’ which is the flesh of Jesus Christ ... and for drink I desire his
blood.”
The Johannine scholar Charles H. Talbert believes that such language serves to describe intimacy, the close
relationship of Jesus to those who believe in him, or who place their commitment and loyalty in him.
Thus, the Father has life in himself (Jn
5:26), and so too does the Son (ibid.), and so too do believers who share an intimate relationship with
Jesus by sharing in the sacrament of the Eucharist.
Talbert continues and highlights the distinctive contribution John’s thinking makes to Christian
theology. In John’s view, the Eucharist is not so much a memorial of Jesus’ death (see 1 Cor 11:23-25) nor a continuation
of mealtimes with Jesus during his life and after his resurrection (Lk 24:13-35).
Rather, John views the Eucharist as a liturgical or cultic extension of Jesus’ incarnation.
This is why, according to Talbert, John placed Jesus’ Eucharistic words at this moment, the middle of
his public ministry, immediately after his lengthy “homily” on the nourishment he provides in
revealing the Father.
This illustrates the Church’s guidelines which note: “Let the exegete seek out the meaning
intended by the Evangelist in narrating a saying or a deed in a certain way or in placing it in a certain
context. For the truth of the story is not at all affected by the fact that the Evangelists relate the words
and deeds of the Lord in a different order, and express his sayings not literally but differently”
(Historical Truth of the Gospels, no. 9).
John’s Gospel is a favorite of many believers, but few ever plumb the depths of his masterpiece. It
takes careful reading, intense study, and prayerful reflection to tune correctly into John’s wavelength.
The clear sound that emerges from such effort is nothing less than heavenly.
Liturgical Press has published fourteen books by Pilch exploring the cultural world of the Bible.
Go to http://www.litpress.org/ to find out more.
The Cultural World of Jesus, Sunday by Sunday, Cycle B
John J. Pilch. The Liturgical Press. 1996. pp. 121-123.
from Religious Clip Art for the Liturgical Year (A, B, and C).
This art may be reproduced only by parishes who purchase the collection in book or CD-ROM form. For more information go http://www.ltp.org