Saint Paul’s Letters: Reflections on Ecclesiology and the Eucharist at a
Protestant and Catholic Dialogue in the ‘Year of Saint Paul’
Most Rev. Joseph F. Naumann, Archbishop of Kansas City in Kansas
(Given at Eastside Church of the Cross, Louisburg, Kansas on August 1, 2008)
[The below text from Archbishop Joseph Naumann’s address was edited by Matthew Tsakanikas for a more
immediate posting and in preparation for the next evening’s topic. Also, at this same website an MP3 recording of
the actual talk is available as well as Pastor Stephen Rives address which preceded it.]
Introductory Remarks
I am happy to have been invited to join you and present along with Pastor Stephen Rives some
reflections on ecclesiology and the Eucharist in Saint Paul’s Letters. It is a delight to celebrate
this year of Saint Paul with so many fellow Christians and persons of good will. I am grateful to
Pastor Stephen Rives, Matthew Tsakanikas and Father Larry Albertson who have organized
these evenings of ecumenical reflection on the great Apostle Paul, his writings and their
implications on what Christians have believed and understood for 2,000 years. True ecumenical
dialogue is not a watering-down of what we believe to the lowest common denominator, but
sharing respectfully the full richness of our understanding of the Gospel of Jesus and what it
means to be His disciple, listening to each other with respect, celebrating our many points of
unity as well as acknowledging with honesty where we differ. Such dialogues should always
inspire us to pray with greater fervor that each of us will do everything possible to realize the
prayer of Jesus to the Father for His disciples “…that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in
me and I in you, that they also may be in us that the world may believe that you sent me” (John
17:21). It should sadden us that our failure to be one impairs our ability to proclaim effectively
the Gospel of Jesus in our world.
Paul’s letters are a great consolation in the struggles we all face to faithfully follow Christ and he
serves us as a model of what it means to take-up our cross and persevere in following the Lord.
I pray that as Saint Paul always prayed for the churches on earth, that from heaven he will this
night continue to keep all of us in his prayers and obtain for all of us gathered an increase in the
same Holy Spirit which he so frequently called down upon the faithful so that we may all again
be one.
Not too long ago in a press interview Pastor Rives queried, “Can it be true that our common
confession that Jesus is Lord, and our belief in the same Trinity, and our being filled with the
same Holy Spirit, is insufficient for real fellowship?” I am overjoyed that his answer was: “May
it never be so!” Events like this or like the ‘Men of Valor’ conference increase my hope that old
polemical debates and animosities will continue to give way to speaking the truth in love “until
we all attain to “the unity of faith and knowledge” (Eph 4:13) in the one Lord Jesus Christ. I
would like to express my commitment to you that I will never allow it to be that this our
common heritage is insufficient for real fellowship. For this reason I have come to share my
faith with you and hear the faith of Pastor Rives and all of you gathered here this evening. I
hope through these dialogues to be mutually enriched and form bonds of friendship with so many
Christians with whom I do not frequently get the chance to share and proclaim the mystery
1
hidden from prior ages: “the mystery of Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col 1:27). I thank
each one of you for your love for Jesus and your desire to imitate the zeal of the Apostle Paul in
living your life of discipleship.
Continuing foundation for evening’s closing question and answer
Tonight I want to attempt to share with you the Catholic Church’s understanding of what it
means to be a bishop of Christ’s mystical body, the Church. In accord with this evening’s theme
and format, I will focus on what it means to be a bishop at the service of the great mystery of
love and Trinitarian communion which Catholics call the celebration of the Eucharist. Pastor
Rives has mentioned some of the historical development of the extraction of the presentation of
Christ’s one-time sacrifice from within the setting of the Last Supper. He has discussed as well
what Saint Paul describes as the communion which we share and that there can not always be
such a fellowship if one refuses to maintain communion with Christ in union with the rest of the
mystical body. I would like to thank him for his reflections on the mind of Saint Paul.
Pastor Rives’ critique on the cult of personality and radical individualism is an excellent
foundation for me to launch my reflections this evening. I would like to begin by continuing to
address a proper understanding of personhood and individuality in contrast with radical
individualism. From there I can build the foundation for communion within the Church based on
Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus and to the Corinthians. Finally, I will conclude upon the
great mystery which brings about the mystery of the Church…participation in the body and
blood of Christ, where the Bride of Christ becomes one body with the risen Lord in Saint Paul’s
letter to the Ephesians. In discussing this nuptial mystery in Ephesians I will draw upon Paul’s
connection between the Lamb and the Bridegroom much as the Book of Revelation combines the
figures in the Wedding Feast of the Lamb.
Afterwards, we will take a brief break and Pastor Rives and I will address questions which drawout further theological reflections on the foundations we have both laid for this evening’s theme
of ecclesiology (study of the Church) and the Eucharist.
Radical Individualism, Personhood, and Communion
Jesus, the Word made flesh, reveals to us authentic humanness (authentic personhood)…in
opposition to radical individualism. He reveals that to be a person means to live in communion
with others in a unity of love. This jump from the Incarnation of God towards new definitions of
unity and communion is rather radical in itself and deserves exploration, because the Incarnation
was itself a radical revelation. Penetrating the depths of the Incarnation is an exploration of that
mystery hidden from prior ages and only revealed in Christ. It is the mystery of God as a
communion of love, a mystery which Saint Paul declares to be the source “from whom every
family in heaven and on earth has been named” (Eph 3:15).
The Word (the Logos) is the eternal Son of God because he was always with the Father: “In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (Jn1:1). The
early Church Fathers in defense of the Church’s doctrine of the Trinity use to say that God was
not always Father if the Word was not always the Son. Many Catholics, let alone Protestants,
2
may be happily surprised to learn that we have the common heritage of writings of the very first
bishops who received the laying of hands from Paul and the Twelve Apostles. We call these
early bishops and authors, whose writings were not included in the New Testament, the
Apostolic or Church Fathers. They are a historical witness to the mind and teachings of the
earliest Christians who maintained full union with the apostles.
Now my reason for bringing-up the defense of the eternal existence of the Son by the Church
Fathers is to show that from the beginning, the early Church connected personhood and ‘being in
relationship’ as absolutely essential characteristics which defined the identities of the persons of
the Trinity. The Father is only Father because he always had a Son. Stated more bluntly, and
more to the point, if there was not always the Son…then the Father could not have been the
Father. The two persons are dependent upon each other for their identities to be revealed to
understand that the only distinctions in God are relationships and not power; that God remains
one because there is no distinction in power. That without the Son, God cannot be the Father, is
a very obvious statement, but the reflection has very serious implications for radical
individualism and not just Trinitarian theology.
The concept of “the individual” becomes displaced when the individual does not want to define
himself in relationship to other people. A human cannot speak of the “I” or “me” without
reference to the “thou” or “you”. Without the “thou” or “you” there can not be the “I” or “me”.
Being a person is about being in relationship to another; about being in communion with another.
Being a person then is most truly revealed in Jesus Christ who we know as the only begotten Son
of the Father, who is God from God, as light comes from light, true God from true God;
begotten, not made; one in being with the Father. Simply put, he is the eternal God, one in
power with the Father, who is identified through the only distinction which does not affect
equality in power… a distinction of relationships. Simply put, he is the Son, not the Father.
This revelation and distinction of the Son, makes possible that others can be brought into
relationship with the Father and in knowing the Father in spirit and truth, can enter into the
relationship that only belongs to the Son and which only the Son can bestow. Jesus told us “No
one knows the Son but the Father and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to
whom the Son chooses to reveal Him” (Matthew 11:27). You and I can be identified with the
Son of God as we grow in relationship to the Father through the power of the Holy Spirit. The
Gospel of John tells us: “To all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave the power
to become children of God” (Jn 1:12). Knowing the Father gives eternal life and for this very
reason in his First Letter, John tells us Jesus is the “eternal life” which became flesh to give us
fellowship with the Father. Saint Paul in Ephesians tells us, “Through him we both have access
in on Spirit to the Father” (2:18).
In further contrast to radical individualism, Jesus reveals to us that the relationship of
dependence upon another, as he is dependent upon the Father, is not an obstacle to authentic
freedom. Only God is eternal life and eternal life is the ultimate freedom. Jesus is the Life. We
can receive this true freedom through the gift of faith which brings us into the Son’s life-giving
relationship with the Father. Faith (God’s work in us) enables us to believe in Jesus and what he
has revealed so that we can give ourselves over to the Father as Jesus does in his relationship as
the Son. In the Incarnation we see the eternal Son in action in his humanity as Paul describes in
3
Philippians: “though he was in the form of God he did not deem equality with God something to
be clung too, but instead he emptied himself…obedient unto death” (Philippians 2:6). The Son
always gives himself to the Father in an endless sacrifice of praise…in an endless Eucharist.
In the greatest of mysteries, the one who is the eternal image of God, the one who Paul says
“reflects the glory of God” (Hebrews 1: 3) so also reflects to us that being like God means giving
of oneself; letting go of ‘clinging’ to power in becoming a gift for others. We are shown that a
person finds himself only in making a gift of himself. That the one who loses himself will find
himself in the ultimate paradox of love. Through his Passion and death, the Incarnation gave us a
glimpse of the Son’s eternal love for the Father in which he always pours-himself-out and so
reflects that God is love; that the perfect union is achieved through love. Our Lord said to Saint
Paul, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor 12:9).
In the apparent weakness of being poured-out for others and accepting the sufferings of Christ
we become a living sacrifice of praise and communion with God.
Nobody is freer than the Son and so Jesus shows us that the response of having received life
from another is to live for others if we wish to be truly free. Radical individualism which exalts
the self -- instead of building communion based on the revelation that God is love (an irrevocable
gift of self to another) -- is opposed to Christianity. In the image of the Trinity, the Church too is
a communion of love which works together for the salvation of all. Jesus did not entrust himself
simply to individual believers. He did not give Himself exclusively to Peter or Paul or any of the
original disciples, but to a community of believers. We cannot be an authentic disciple of Jesus
in isolation from others, but only in communion with the community of believers – His Church.
The Church itself is a participation in Christ -- much as the Son participates in the Father -- and
within that participation is a participation in others. Paul tells us, “And his gifts were that some
should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers….” (Eph 4:1116). We do not baptize ourselves, we do not preach sermons only to ourselves, and we do not
absolve ourselves. The mystical body of Christ of which St. Paul so frequently speaks is a
communion in Christ and a participation in one another; “the Church, which is Jesus body, the
fullness of him who fills all in all” (Eph 1:23).
With all of this in mind we must approach St. Paul’s letters to the bishops Timothy and Titus if
we are to grasp why “apostles” always receive the first listing when “building up the body of
Christ” (Eph 4:12) is mentioned. We will ultimately discover that building-up the body of Christ
is about nourishing the Church which is one body with Christ her head (nuptial language). To
achieve an understanding of Paul’s nuptial language of man and woman as one body as is Christ
and his Church (cf. Eph 5), we will need to pass through Paul’s ‘household’ language in Timothy
and Titus.
Bishop, Household and Family of God
When in First Timothy chapter 3, Paul mentions the “office of Bishop”, Paul must be understood
through the lens that his disciple Luke already gives us in the Book of Acts. In Acts, Peter stands
amongst the apostles and disciples and declares that the vacant office or ‘overseership’ (in
Greek: episkopehn) of Judas must be filled (Acts 1:15-20). Where on earth did Peter ever get the
4
idea that Judas’ ‘overseership’ was an office in the first place? Why does Paul mention the
‘overseership’ or “office” of bishop to Timothy and Titus? How is an office, stewardship, or
ministry to be understood as instituted by Christ? There is insufficient time to address all of
these questions this evening and fully encompass the Catholic understanding, so for now I wish
to only give a brief interpretation to these questions in order to address ultimately that an office
holder must officiate over something which is not official unless it has his blessing. In the brief
amount of time we have, I would like to connect ‘overseership’ with household management as
Saint Paul immediately does in his letters to Timothy and Titus. The connection with household
management and stewardship will enable us to better understand Paul’s letter to the Corinthians
and a more ancient festival: namely, that ancient festival at which the household father was
expected to officiate in the Hebrew tradition…the commemoration of the Passover and the
sacrificial lamb.
In Acts, Peter connected ‘overseership’ to an office instituted by Christ because the language of
the keys which Christ used with Peter in Matthew’s Gospel was the same language used in Isaiah
for a prime minister in the house of David (see Isaiah 22:22 and Matthew 16:19). Jesus the true
Son of David was drawing upon kingdom imagery but transforming it to a kingdom not of this
world in which the royal priesthood ultimately foretold in Exodus (cf. 19:6) would be realized in
the greater priesthood foreshadowed by Melchizedek in his offering of bread and wine (Gen
14:18; Psalm 110; Hebrews 7). Just as important, in the same Gospel, after the keys dialogue
with Peter and the same binding and loosing language to the other apostles (Mt 18:18), just
before he institutes himself as the new Passover lamb, Jesus speaks of the “wise servant, whom
his master has set over his household, to give them their food at the proper time. Blessed is that
servant whom his master when he comes will find so doing” (Mt 24:45-46)”.
The food to which Jesus refers is the same food Jesus speaks of during Passover in the sixth
chapter of John’s Gospel and the reason Saint Paul goes through such great lengths in his First
Letter to the Corinthians to place the Eucharist at the center of worship in Chapters 10 and 11. In
John’s Gospel, Jesus tells the crowds during Passover not to work for the food that perishes but
the food that endures to eternal life “which the Son of Man will give to you” (6:27). What food
was he speaking of? He later gives very enigmatic statements that are sacrificial and speaks of
his own flesh and blood as true food and true drink. This in mind, it is no wonder that Saint
Paul’s disciple Saint Luke is the only evangelist who gives us the detail that Jesus was laid in a
manger when he was born; and what is a manger except a feeding trough for animals? The
savior who said he was the “bread which comes down from heaven” is presented born in
Bethlehem (which translates ‘House of Bread’) and laid in a feeding trough for animals.
During the feast of unleavened bread, the Last Supper -- which coincided with the Jewish
Passover -- takes on greater light. Jesus wishes to transform the commemoration into a new
Exodus which his death and rising will begin for the people of God. John the Baptists’
proclamation that Jesus is the Lamb of God begins to make more sense. Jesus’ words that you
must “eat his flesh” and “drink his blood” begin to make more sense. Jesus will take the bread
and wine of Melchizedek and in a great mystery make them a commemoration in his own body
and blood which are the new veiled entrance ways into the true Holy of Holies, Jesus the true
Temple. In his First Letter to the Corinthians, after all the talk of leaven and unleavened bread,
Saint Paul can now proclaim “Christ our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed, therefore let us
5
partake of the festival” (1 Cor 5:7-8), and point us to the last supper in the 11th chapter of
Corinthians.
Paul’s talk of bishops, presbyters, and households in Timothy and Titus can now take-on its true
contextual meaning as regards an office in the New Testament. The officiating minister, the
bishop (or ‘overseer’), is the one with the authority - communicated through the apostles’ power
of binding and loosing - to continue the forgiveness of sins (cf. Jn 20:22-23) which Jesus
instituted when he said, “Take this, all of you, and drink from it. This is the cup of my blood, the
blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for many for the
forgiveness of sins.” The bishop or presbyter is the wise servant put over his master’s house to
distribute the food at the proper time…the food that endures to eternal life “which the Son of
Man will give you” (Jn 6:27).
The bishop is the father figure to the new covenant people of God, gathering his household for
the true Passover festival as did his ancestral fathers who gathered their families for the sacrifice
of the lamb and the partaking of the lamb in the Mosaic Exodus…a pre-figurement of the true
Passover which is the Eucharist of the Last Supper. (Recall that families at the Passover joined
with other households if their number was too small (Ex 12:4) which is exactly why the bishop is
the overseer of many households making the household of God.) Paul’s whole first letter to the
Corinthians builds to the 11th chapter on the institution of the Eucharist. The first words after the
opening salutation in Corinthians are Eucharistic: “I give thanks [in Greek: eucharisto] to God
always for you”; from there he admonishes to unity in the Church until in the 5 th chapter he
states “Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed; let us partake of the feast” all within the
context of dough and unleavened bread. After several admonishments he resumes talk of
“supernatural food” and a “supernatural drink” in chapter 10 which several verses later he puts in
the context again of a bread that is a “participation in the body of Christ” and a wine that is a
“participation in the blood of Christ”.
The sixth chapter of John and talk of eating flesh and drinking blood is practically spelled-out
anew in Corinthians and all the while in the context of Christ our Passover lamb from chapter
five. Finally, in chapter 11 he spells-out the household meal at which a bishop is the official
presider for entrance into the one time sacrifice of the lamb. Paul begins with the words, “And
when he had given thanks [eucharistehsas], he broke [the bread], and said ‘this is my
body’…For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you show the Lord’s death until he
comes…Whoever eats this bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be
guilty of the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:24-27).
Requirements of a bishop in Timothy and Titus make more sense in light of the letter to the
Corinthians. The bishop is to be married only once, in other words, not of a divided household
as Christ’s admonishment against divorce warned and as Paul’s talk of keeping the household
together as one body stresses. The bishop should not be a drunkard, since he is responsible for
the wine of the new covenant and protecting it from being profaned in an unworthy manner. His
children should be submissive and respectful “for if a man does not know how to manage his
own household, how can he care for God’s Church” (1 Tm 3:5); “which is the household of
God…the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (3:15)?
6
Paul’s letter to Titus gives us further insight because he says the local churches are ‘defective’
(or incomplete) until bishops already in communion with him and the Apostles have appointed
presbyters. He tells Titus: “That is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was
defective and appoint presbyters in every town as I directed you…for a bishop, as God’s
steward, must be blameless” (Titus 1: 5-7;RSV). We see Paul doing the same in Acts when it
tells us how after he won and trained disciples he returned and “appointed presbyters for them in
every church, with prayer and fasting, they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed”
(Acts 14:23). Why was there this great drive that overseers were necessary? Because the point
of establishing the household overseers was to give the local community communion with the
Risen Lord, not only in word, correct teaching and doctrine, but in mystery. The steward
ultimately exists to ensure the food at the proper time “which the Son of Man will give
you”…through the Eucharistic feast which was viewed most importantly in nuptial terms.
It may have seemed like a bit of a detour to move from Trinitarian communion versus radical
individualism, to the bishop as the bond which the new Passover required, but it was a necessary
foundation to put in context how the sacrificial Lamb is simultaneously the Bridegroom and how
the Church is the Bride of Christ at the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. In the prophet Hosea, God
promised a new covenant and said, “I will espouse you to me forever; I will espouse you in
righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love, and in mercy. I will espouse you in faithfulness;
and you shall know the Lord” (Hos 2:19-20). When Jesus instituted himself as the true Lamb at
the Passover supper he instituted that new covenant at the cup of blessing. In St. Paul’s letters to
the Corinthians he draws all of these figures of the lamb, covenant, and espousal together.
Wedding Feast of the Lamb and Spouse of Christ
In his Second Letter to the Corinthians we find additional nuptial imagery which ties to what
Saint Paul calls “a great mystery” in his letter to the Ephesians. (In fact, institution of the
Eucharist in chapter 11 of First Corinthians probably cannot even be understood apart from his
letter to the Ephesians.) In Second Corinthians, Paul begins what has become his 11th chapter
with the statement: “I feel a divine jealousy for you, for I betrothed you to Christ to present you
as a pure bride to her one husband.” From there he describes the first Eve being brought into
spiritual adultery from God through the work of the serpent as he fears perhaps the Corinthians
are falling away from devotion to God their true covenantal spouse.
His talk of being betrothed and presented to Christ might seem displaced in this Second Letter to
the Corinthians if not for the Eucharistic sacrifice he alludes to in chapters 10 and 11 of his First
Letter. Even more to the point, after warning about violating the body and blood of Christ in
First Corinthians 11:27-29 and warning that one could be drinking judgment, he gives a special
warning which recalls an ancient temple ritual regarding tests for adultery. For those who have
profaned or partaken unworthily of the communion in Jesus body and blood, he observes, “That
is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died” (1 Cor 11:30). My point here is not to
prove what Catholics call transubstantiation. (Obviously, the context was sinning against one
another at gatherings and then approaching the means of communion Christ instituted.)
Transubstantiation is another topic which protects the mystery from profanation.
7
My point is to connect Paul’s observation of sickness as related to being under a curse from
having drunken judgment upon oneself. The warning in chapter 11 is a clear allusion to the
punishment of sickness an unfaithful spouse will receive from an ancient Mosaic ritual which
was the test of a quote ‘jealous husband’ (Num 5:14). In chapter five of Numbers, a wife only
gets ill from the ritual drink and the curse of the Levitical priest if she is guilty of adultery.
Paul’s “divine jealousy” in Second Corinthians and his talk of presenting us to Christ as our
husband only makes sense if he simultaneously views the institution which took place within the
Last Supper as a true communion with Christ the bridegroom. The Lamb and the Bridegroom
become inseparable because Jesus used the words “new covenant” only within the Last Supper at
which he revealed himself as the Lamb of God to which John the Baptist mysteriously testified
in the Gospel of John and who John the Baptist also called the true bridegroom (Jn 3:29-30). We
become more certain of this interpretation upon the reading of Paul’s great mystery in the fifth
chapter of his letter to the Ephesians.
In chapter five of Ephesians, beginning in verse twenty-one, Paul begins speaking of Christian
marriage and how to be subject to one another. The model he chooses is the Church’s subjection
to Christ. As you will cover marriage and covenant more in depth next week, I will limit myself
to observations to finish tying ecclesiology and the Eucharist together. These subjects too
closely interpenetrate one another and so it is not possible to talk of one without talking of the
other. Clearly the subjection Paul refers to is not a subjection of the powerful over the weak. It is
a subjection of mutual love, a subjection which radical individualism can never understand,
because radical individualism never grasps that a person can never find himself until he makes a
real gift of himself to another; until he lives for another and so becomes truly free.
Most important to us this evening is where Paul says, “that Christ might present the Church to
himself in splendor…holy and without blemish” (5:27). The same Greek word for “present” is
used here as when Saint Paul said in Second Corinthians, “I espoused you to Christ to present
you as a pure bride” (2 Cor 11:2). The passages and intent are interchangeable. Now comes the
passage in Ephesians that seals the whole deal that the Last Supper is the Wedding Feast of the
Lamb; Paul continues, “For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as
Christ does the Church” (5:29). We must here stammer and ask, “But where does Christ present
the Church to himself and nourish his own flesh? Where do we become one flesh with Christ?”
It is at the presentation of his flesh and blood which Jesus alluded to in Chapter Six of John. It is
why Paul calls it “a great mystery and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church” (Eph 5:32).
First let me clarify how Catholics understand the body and blood of Christ at what we call the
Mass and then I can discuss in brief the connection between Chapter Six of John and Jesus as the
Bridegroom who nourishes his own flesh. Catholics do not believe that Jesus is sacrificed again
at the Mass; we believe his one time sacrifice is made present for us to encounter and enter into
the reality and power of Calvary. Christ suffers bodily no more. He is risen. I can assure you we
do not believe we are consuming a piece of Jesus body; something separated from him…that was
the misunderstanding of those who left him. We believe we are receiving a participation in his
risen life which is inseparable from his now resurrected body and blood. Saint Paul tells us at the
end of First Corinthians that Christ the new Adam has become “a life giving spirit” (15:45) and
so it is the “spirit which gives life; the flesh is of no avail” (cf. Jn 6:63).
8
Yes, we really believe the bread becomes his true flesh and the wine becomes his true blood, but
it is a body and blood that cannot be consumed and digested, but rather only gives us a
momentary participation and communion in his glorious resurrected life which is in heaven and
seated at the right hand of the Father. It is in receiving the Eucharist that we acknowledge and
receive Jesus as our Lord and Savior and rejoice in so close a union. Communion in his body
and blood is a mystery of the Holy Spirit nourishing our weak human flesh with Jesus’ divine
power…a divine power within the flesh of the true Bridegroom uniting himself to his spouse and
becoming one flesh. For marriage is when the two become one flesh! And this is the mystery
Paul is pointing to when he calls it a great mystery between Christ and the Church.
That being said, chapter six of John cannot be understood apart from, the second chapter of the
same Gospel. There at the wedding feast of Cana, the one who John the Baptist one chapter
earlier already fingered as the Lamb of God, Jesus, is turning water into wine. The Lamb is at a
wedding feast and showing he has power over earthly elements. John is the only Gospel writer
who does not include the institution of Jesus body and blood at the Last Supper because he has
already had Jesus give a discourse on eating his flesh and blood and placed Jesus at a wedding
feast turning water into wine…providing for the guests. Not only that, in chapter seven, Jesus
says “if anyone thirst let him come to me and drink” (7:37) and I know of only one drink which
Jesus established for the communication of his Spirit the “supernatural drink” Paul speaks of in
chapters 10 and 11 of First Corinthians.
Conclusions: The Eucharist makes the Church and the Church Makes the Eucharist
Ultimately we come to the most extreme of paradoxes. Jesus came that we “might have life and
have it more abundantly” (Jn 10:10). Certainly his words are what give us life, but his own
words tell us that we receive Jesus “the eternal life” (1 Jn 1:2) by “eating his flesh” and “drinking
his blood” and believing in Him (Jn 6). If the Church is the one body of Christ which derives its
meaning from union with its head, then the paradox is that the Eucharist and Holy Communion
brings to full realization the Church on Earth and the Church on earth in its apostolic ministry
(bishops/presbyters) makes present the Lamb our union. More simply put, the Church makes the
Eucharist and the Eucharist makes the Church.
With all of this in mind, the bishop-guardian has become the gatekeeper to the nuptial mystery.
He is the defender of the rights of Christ with St. Paul’s ‘divine jealousy’; a divine jealousy as
one who has espoused us to Christ as a pure bride at the wedding feast of the Lamb. It was
Adam’s duty in the Garden of Eden to “keep” the garden. The word for ‘keep’ has militaristic
overtones as when a soldier ‘keeps’ guard. Immediately after Saint Paul speaks of ‘divine
jealousy’ and betrothing us to Christ he says, “But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve
by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ” (2
Cor 11:3). This is why the bishop is not only the one who leads the household in the new and
true Passover which is the wedding Feast of the Lamb, but he is the defender of the Faith which
Christ left on earth to his apostles. He must defend his spouse from the serpent so that she may
continue to give herself in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:23) to the true Bridegroom and so not eat
judgment upon herself; and so not become a spiritual adulterer.
9
The bishop as the steward of God’s household, must distribute the food which the Son of Man
promised. Key to Christ’s words concerning the steward appointed to distribute the food is the
phrase “at the proper time” (Mt 24:45). This means admittance to the wedding feast is not for
anyone at anytime. It means as well that a steward must protect this food from those who will not
properly discern it or who have not examined their conscience in conformity with the truth. As a
minister acting within the one true Adam, the bishop must “keep” his community so that in the
words of Saint Paul “You may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is
the Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15).
If in 40 minutes we must attempt to lay a foundation for the relationship between the Church and
the Eucharist, then we must first base it on the mystery of God’s call to us to participate in the
mystery of the Trinity which is a mystery of self-giving and true personal relationships…a
mystery of love. We must become daughters and sons in the Son. We must understand the
bishop as the basis for uniting the households together for admittance to the new Passover. We
must discover that the new Passover is actually where the Bridegroom takes us to himself,
presents us to himself, and continues the bestowal of eternal life. It is a foretaste of the endless
communion we will experience in our transition from earthly life to full an endless communion
in heaven. Through the Eucharist, the Church enables us to love the Father as only the Son can
and does and offer spiritual sacrifice in Christ (cf. 1 Pet 2:5).
I end with a reflection Cardinal Ratzinger, who is now Pope Benedict XVI, made: “The formula
‘the Church is the body of Christ’ thus states that the Eucharist, in which the Lord gives us his
body and makes us one body, forever remains the place where the Church is generated, where
the Lord himself never ceases to found her anew; in the Eucharist the Church is most compactly
herself- in all places, yet one only, just as he is one only” (Called to Communion, p. 37).
10