RBWords

     A person coming to the Gospel of John for the first time after reading the other three gospels might be forgiven if he or she asked, "Are we talking about the same person?  Or telling the same story?"  The differences are considerable but, yes, the same story is being told but with very different emphases and styles.  The reader could be forgiven for taking hold of anything familiar and believing that here the Gospel of John joins hands with Mark, Matthew and Luke, as, for instance, in today's passage about the multiplication of the loaves and fishes!  This story appears twice in Mark and Matthew and once in Luke.  However, when one reads further in the Gospel of John, one discovers that this "sign" becomes a kind of "platform" for a discourse to follow soon - what scripture scholars call "The Bread of Life" discourse.

     The dramatic device of "misunderstanding" is used on a big scale here.  The crowd initially misinterprets the sign in a political way, which Jesus defuses by leaving the scene.  Later the crowd finds him again and he once more deals with their misunderstanding of what "bread" really means by showing that he is a new manna very different from what Moses gave their ancestors.  This is a different emphasis from that of the other three gospels which seem to echo the early liturgical practice of the community.  Here it is the personal relationship with Jesus, rather than the gathering of the community, which is emphasized through "eating the body and drinking the blood."  At the end of the discourse we learn that Jesus' words are so disturbing that many followers leave him.  Simon Peter speaks for the faith of those who remain:  "Lord, to whom shall we go?  You have the words of eternal life."  

     It is life that is celebrated here.  What do we mean when we say we "go to communion?"  Is our understanding challenged when we read this "sign" and go on to read the discourse that "explains" it?  We may have to take time and give it a lot of thought!  AMEN