Episode 90: Year B – 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time
In this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word, we focus on one detail from the Gospel reading, taken from John 6:41-51, continuing the theme of the Eucharist. That one detail is Jesus’ comparison of the bread of life that he will give, which is the Eucharist, and the Manna in the wilderness. This revelation of the Eucharist as the New Manna, so I argue, supports the belief that the Eucharist cannot be merely a symbol of Jesus’ body and blood, but must be Jesus’ body and blood.
Readings: Click Here
Looking for Sunday Catholic Word Merchandise? Look no further! Click Here
Hey everyone,
Welcome to The Sunday Catholic Word, a podcast where we reflect on the upcoming Sunday Mass readings and pick out the details that are relevant for explaining and defending our Catholic faith.
I’m Karlo Broussard, staff apologist and speaker for Catholic Answers, and the host for this podcast.
In this episode, we’re going to focus on one detail from the Gospel reading, taken from John 6:41-51, continuing the theme of the Eucharist. That one detail is Jesus’ comparison of the bread of life that he will give, which is the Eucharist, and the Manna in the wilderness. This revelation of the Eucharist as the New Manna, so I argue, supports the belief that the Eucharist cannot be merely a symbol of Jesus’ body and blood, but must be Jesus’ body and blood.
Here’s the Gospel passage in full:
The Jews murmured about Jesus because he said,
“I am the bread that came down from heaven, ”
and they said,
“Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph?
Do we not know his father and mother?
Then how can he say,
‘I have come down from heaven’?”
Jesus answered and said to them,
“Stop murmuring among yourselves.
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draw him,
and I will raise him on the last day.
It is written in the prophets:
They shall all be taught by God.
Everyone who listens to my Father and learns from him comes to me.
Not that anyone has seen the Father
except the one who is from God;
he has seen the Father.
Amen, amen, I say to you,
whoever believes has eternal life.
I am the bread of life.
Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;
this is the bread that comes down from heaven
so that one may eat it and not die.
I am the living bread that came down from heaven;
whoever eats this bread will live forever;
and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
As I mentioned, the detail that I want to focus on is Jesus’ reference to himself as “the bread of life” in comparison to the bread from heaven in the Old Testament.
Notice the future tense: “the bread which I shall give.” Most biblical scholars agree that Jesus here is referencing what he will do at the Last Supper in giving us the Eucharist. Therefore, Jesus is drawing a parallel between the Eucharist and the Old Manna, thereby revealing the Eucharist to be the New Manna.
And it’s this revelation, so I contend, along with others, that serves as evidence for a literal interpretation of Jesus’ words at the Last Supper, when he says, “Take and eat, this is my body . . . take and drink, this is my blood.” I make this argument in my book Meeting the Protestant Response.
Consider that the bread God gave in the wilderness was not ordinary bread. It was miraculous bread:
- It appeared every day when the morning “dew” would burn off (Exod. 16:13).
- It never lasted more than a day, except on the Sabbath. When the Israelites didn’t obey the instruction to leave none until the next day, it “bred worms and became foul” (Exod. 16:19-20).
- But when the Israelites held it over in accordance with the Lord’s command—that is, to assure that they did no work on the Sabbath—it did not breed worms and become foul (Exod. 16:22-26).
- It appeared every day for forty years, and stopped only upon the Israelites entering the promised land (Exod. 16:35; Josh. 5:10-12).
- A jar with an omer’s worth was kept in the Israelites’ sanctuary “throughout the generations” (Exod. 16:31-34).
As Bible scholar Brant Pitre argues in his book Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist, to say the Eucharist at the Last Supper, the new manna, is merely a symbol, we’d have to conclude that the old manna in the wilderness was superior to the new, since miraculous bread is clearly greater than ordinary bread (Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist, Chap. 4).
But that’s a no-go in biblical theology. The New Testament fulfillment is always greater than the Old Testament type. To use the language of the author of Hebrews in 10:1, Old Testament types are “shadows” of New Testament fulfillments. And, of course, the shadow is inferior to the thing that it is a shadow of.
Therefore, since the Old Testament Manna was a shadow of the New Manna, the Eucharist, it must be inferior to the New Manna. But this means the New Manna must be miraculous in some sense, which wouldn’t be the case if it were merely a symbol of Jesus’ body and blood.
So, the revelation of the Eucharist as the New Manna provides us reason to interpret Jesus’ words of institution at the Last Supper with a realistic understanding.
Now, a Protestant may object here, “The above argument assumes that Jesus’ teaching in John 6 is connected to Jesus’ words at the Last Supper. But that’s an assumption that we don’t have to accept. In fact, two different Greek words are used: sarx for flesh in John 6 and sōma or “body” at the Last Supper.” Eric Svendsen makes this argument in his book Evangelical Answers.
One problem with this argument is that sarx and sōma are used interchangeably in the New Testament. Consider Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 6:16, for example:
Do you not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body [Greek, sōma] with her? For, as it is written, “The two shall become one [flesh] [Greek, sarka—dictionary form sarx].”
Notice that Paul uses sarx for the Bible’s talk of union of flesh and identifies it with the one body (sōma) that results from a man joining himself to a prostitute.
Another example is 2 Corinthians 4:10-11. Paul writes:
Always carrying in the body [Greek, sōmati] the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies [Greek, sōmati]. For while we live we are always being given up to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our mortal flesh [Greek, sarki]. So death is at work in us, but life in you.
If we were to follow the logic of the objection, we’d conclude that Paul here is saying the life of Jesus is manifested in two different things. But clearly, that’s not the case. Whether Paul speaks of bodies (sōma) or flesh (sarx), he’s referring to the same thing—“the earthen vessel.” Paul is teaching the Corinthians how Christians view their physical sufferings for the Faith.
Other examples where Paul uses sarx and sōma interchangeably are Romans 7:24-25 and 8:13; Ephesians 5:28-30; and Colossians 2:23.
This makes sense because bodies are made of flesh. So, if there is no indication that body is being used in some sense as not to include flesh, we’re justified in reading body as entailing flesh. Since Jesus doesn’t say anything at the Last Supper to preclude our understanding of body as flesh, we can take body to mean flesh, and thereby affirm the connection between John 6 and the Last Supper.
Second, the image of drinking Jesus’ blood is used in both narratives. And both narratives are the only places in the New Testament where Jesus speaks of drinking his blood. The fewer times an image or cluster of words is used, especially when it’s found prior to its current use, the more likely it is that there is literary dependence.
Given that the Last Supper is the only place in the New Testament where Jesus speaks of drinking his blood other than in John 6, and Jesus’ command to drink his blood in John 6 occurs prior in Jesus’ ministry to the command given at the Last Supper, we’re justified in reading the words of institution at the Last Supper in light what Jesus says in John 6. To say there’s no connection between the words of institution at the Last Supper and Jesus’ command to eat his flesh and drink his blood in John 6 would be akin to saying John doesn’t have the creation story in mind when he writes in John 1:1, “In the beginning.”
Moreover, in John 6, Jesus doesn’t give us any indication that he intends his audience to eat his flesh and drink his blood right then and there. Rather, he speaks as if it’s something to be done at some later time, which fits with our interpretation that the Last Supper is that moment.
For example, he speaks in the future tense in John 6:51: “the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.” The other times when he gives instructions about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, it’s hypothetical and general in nature:
- “if anyone eats this bread, he will live forever” (v. 51a)
- “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood” (v. 53)
- “he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me” (v. 56)
- “he who eats me will live because of me” (v. 57)
- “he who eats this bread [his flesh] will live forever” (v. 58)
Contrast this with the Last Supper, where Jesus says, “Take, eat; this is my body” (Matt. 26:26). Jesus promised in John 6 to give the disciples his flesh and blood to eat and drink, but at the Last Supper, he commands it to be done. Given what we said above about these being the only two instances where Jesus speaks of drinking his blood, we’re justified in saying the promise in John 6 is fulfilled at the Last Supper.
Third, biblical scholars recognize that it’s John’s intent to supplement with his Gospel what’s found in the synoptics by adding depth. For example, Mark and Matthew record Jesus’ instruction concerning baptism. Matthew’s record reads: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). Mark’s report reads: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16).
John doesn’t record the great commission, which includes the instruction for the apostles to baptize, but he does add depth to our understanding of what baptism is: the rebirth by water and spirit (John 3:3-5). Where the others simply give the command that the apostles baptize, John gives the theology behind what they are to do.
As he did for the sacrament of baptism, John adds depth to our understanding of the sacrament of the Eucharist. He’s revealing to us that the Eucharist at the Last Supper is the new bread from heaven, and thus the new manna. He’s teaching us that the Eucharist not only forgives our sins, but gives us eternal life. He’s providing us confirmation that Jesus did intend for us to take his words at the Last Supper literally—hence his record of Jesus’ use of flesh, which underscores the literalness of the language Jesus used. Therefore, John intends to inform his readers that just as Jesus’ instruction to eat his flesh and drink his blood in John 6 was literal, so too are his words at the Last Supper.
So, what Jesus says about the bread of life and his flesh in John 6 is indeed connected to the Last Supper. Therefore, the Eucharist is the New Manna. And if the New Manna, then not merely a symbol.
Conclusion
Well, my friends, that does it for this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word. The Gospel for this upcoming 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B, provides us with some great details for Eucharistic apologetics:
- We have the revelation of the Eucharist as the New Manna, which in turn provides reason to think that the Eucharist at the Last Supper is not merely a symbol, and
- The assumption that what Jesus says in John 6 is connected to the Eucharist at the Last Supper is well founded.
As always, thank you for subscribing to the podcast. And please be sure to tell your friends about it and invite them to subscribe as well at sundaycatholicword.com. You might also want to check out the other great podcasts in our Catholic Answers podcast network: Cy Kellet’s Catholic Answers Focus, Trent Horn’s The Counsel of Trent, Joe Heschmeyer’s Shameless Popery, and Jimmy Akin’s A Daily Defense, all of which can be found at catholic.com.
One last thing: if you’re interested in getting some cool mugs and stickers with my logo, “Mr. Sunday podcast,” go to shop.catholic.com.
I hope you have a blessed 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B. Until next time, God Bless!