THE BREAD: A CAUSE OF CONFLICT AND A SIGN OF COMMUNION

SEVENTEENTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME – YEAR B

 

Introduction

The Israelites were caught by panic facing the Canaanites. To instill courage in them, Joshua and Caleb, men of imposing stature, exclaimed: “Do not be afraid, for they will be bread for us!” (Num 14:9). Curious coincidence: the Hebrew root of the word “bread” is composed of the same consonants of the verb “to fight,” as if to indicate that the struggle for food is the stirring cause of wars. Even the disagreements between Israel and the Lord are derived from bread scarcity: “In Egypt, we sat down to eat all the bread” (Ex 16:3).

Only when bread is shared, it ceases to be a source of conflict and strife and becomes a sign of love and fraternity. Eating bread with someone considers the person one’s own intimate, a friend whom one trusts, an ally from whom one does not expect any betrayal (Ps 41:10). The strongest tensions, the deadliest grudges, are produced in the silences at the table, and the most embarrassing discussions are those that break out between diners.

The banquet is, by its nature, an expression of peace and reconciliation (Gen 31:53-54); therefore, God has chosen it as the image of his kingdom. He will lavish a banquet in which “the lowly will eat and be satisfied” (Ps 22:27). Here’s God’s dream: one day to gather all his children, the olive shoots, around his table (Ps 128:3).

 

To internalize the message, we repeat:

“The poor shall eat and be satisfied if I dare to share my goods.“

 

First Reading: 2 Kings 4:42-44

What is Israel’s “poor of the land” dreaming of? There are no great things, only to have their fill of bread and maybe, to be able to eat like the rich ones, three times a day. The abundance of bread was the sign of God’s blessing (Ps 37:25), and its scarcity a punishment for sin (Ezk 4:16-17). The scene narrated in today’s reading is set during a terrible famine. The situation was so desperate that to survive, people ate roots, leaves, and herbs, even poisonous ones (2 Kgs 4:38-41).

The term hunger occurs 134 times in the Old Testament. Because of the lack of rain, the lands of the Middle East were affected by this disaster.

Therefore, in a time of famine, a man of Baal Salisa came to Elisha and offered him twenty loaves of barley (v. 42).

Barley also grows on poor and rough terrain and has less value than the wheat grain (Rev 6:6). Its maturation cycle is shorter than that of other cereals, and so, it is the first to be collected. It is harvested in the spring, around Easter. The wealthy preferred wheat bread; the poorer classes instead were content with cheaper barley. Therefore, it is a poor peasant who, with a gesture of touching generosity, deprives himself of valuable food to hand it to the Prophet. He does not keep to himself the first fruits of his field. He feels the need to share with others the gift received from God. Bread is a gift from God and should be immediately shared with those who do not have it: “The warmhearted man will be blessed since he shares his bread with the poor” (Prov 22:9).

Elisha, in turn, gets involved in this dynamic of the gift done by the man of Baal Salisa. He does not put the bread in the bag to take home but calls his servant to distribute it to a hundred hungry people around him.

The servant’s reaction is skeptical: “How am I to divide these loaves among one hundred men?” (v. 43). Without a miracle, it is not possible to solve the hunger of so many people with so few resources. The Prophet asked him to trust, ensuring, “They shall eat and have some leftover“ (v. 43). The miracle is possible and will happen, but only if we dare to believe in the promise of the Lord and we trust the seemingly absurd and senseless disposition of the Prophet who orders us to distribute, to share, and to put it in common.

The food will be enough for everyone, and there will be leftovers, but no one must grab more than what one needs to be satiated. The one who distrusts the providence of the Lord, or is moved by greed and avarice, will take his brother’s part away to keep, hide or hoard it for himself. However, the next day he will see it, like the manna, rotten and full of worms (Ex 16:20). God does not multiply the bread from scratch. He does not let it fall like rain from the sky and does not take one’s place to solve hunger. He makes his miracles through those who trust in his word.

This is the dynamic that led to the miracle: first, there was the generous gesture of a man of Baal Salisa who offered the fruit of his labor, then Elisha decided to share the gift received. Finally, the miracle happened: “they shall eat and have some leftover according to the word of the Lord” (v. 43).

Today, it is true that only a miracle can solve the problem of hunger in the world, yet it is possible to do it. It’s enough to have the courage, against all human logic, to trust the gospel and, like Peter who was invited to fish at noon, exclaiming: “if you say so …” (Lk 5:5) and act accordingly.

 

Second Reading: Ephesians 4:1-6

This part of the Letter to the Ephesians dedicated to moral exhortations starts with this passage. The unity of the church is the first topic that is introduced. In the first verses (vv. 1-3), some characteristics of the new life of the baptized are listed. They are presented regarding the Apostle Paul, “a prisoner in the Lord” (v. 1). The authenticity of his message is evidenced by his willingness to give his life for the gospel.

The first hallmark of the disciple is “humility,” understood as the choice of the last place, willingness to serve, stooping down to raise the poor. Then come “gentleness, patience and forbearance” (v. 2). A Christian is not quarrelsome and irritable, does not claim to be always right, knows that people have qualities and limitations, virtues and flaws, gifts and pettiness. Following the example of the Master, Paul renounces all forms of aggression and violence and seeks in every way unity, reconciliation, and peace.

In the second part of the passage (vv. 4-6), the theme of unity is further dealt with. There are seven reasons why harmony should reign among Christians: “Let there be one body and one spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God, the Father of all.” It is hard to explain why the emphasis on one Eucharistic bread is forgotten today.

The unity of a community is not the result of sympathy or the impact of the interweaving of self-interest. Like everyone else, Christians have several reasons to be divided and in disagreement. There are differences in race, language, culture, economic conditions, attitudes, character … Sometimes; the same religion is a cause of friction; there are so many professions of faith in the same Christ. The differences, however, must not give rise to envy and create conflicts. Diversities are an asset and are intended to promote mutual aid, cooperation, and complementarity. That’s why, in verses 11-16, the Letter to the Ephesians will describe the Christian community as a body in which every member has a role and a task.

 

Gospel: John 6:1-15

After five consecutive Sunday readings from the Gospel of Mark, we move now to Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John. The story of the multiplication of loaves starts today and continues to the coming weeks, with the famous discourse on the bread of life given by Jesus in the synagogue of Capernaum.

In interpreting this chapter, one can make the mistake of assuming that it is about the Eucharist from beginning to end. It should be avoided in order not to lose the richness of the message of each passage. The theme of the Eucharist goes in the background of the discourse, but explicitly, it is introduced only at the end.

Of all the signs performed by Jesus, not one is told as many times as the multiplication of the loaves. All the evangelists report it at least once, Matthew and Mark even two; it is said six times in all.

How come this sign has been given so much importance in the early church? It is prevalent and sensational; it very much impressed people accustomed to eating only once a day. The chronic hunger of the Israelites can partly explain the popularity, but not the other details in this episode. Some of Jesus’ most extraordinary miracles are told only once. Why so much insistence on the bread?

Today we are offered John’s version of the episode. It is different in many details from the others. We will not dwell on these differences, nor will we strive to establish what happened. We plunge right away into the message, and we will try to highlight it in every important detail of the story.

Let’s note an important observation: the text does not use the word “multiplication;” we use it in the titling, which is not inspired, of the gospel passages. The gospel speaks only of the pooled loaves and fish, the distribution of the same, the result—all of them were given “as much as they wanted”—and the collection, in twelve baskets of the leftover bread, a sign of food which will never run out. That’s all. The central message of the story should not be sought in the multiplication but the sharing.

We are influenced by the craving to multiply all that is material: money, health, years of life, friendships, successes, and when we feel unable to multiply, we call upon God to do it for us. But the desire to multiply is a syndrome of death. It comes from the fear of death and failure; it is a sign of lack of faith.

Jesus, by his action, intends to answer the problem of hunger, material starvation, not spiritual. There is hunger in the world, and we would like him to solve it through multiplications. Jesus, however, follows a different logic, a logic not of negligence but involvement and co-responsibility.

The story begins with a chronological indication: “Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand“ (v. 4). This is not a piece of information but a theological framework that highlights the significance of the episode. John wants the passage to be read in the context of the grand celebration of Israel’s deliverance from slavery in Egypt.

The parallel between the multiplication of the loaves and the event of the exodus is so crucial that the evangelist emphasizes it repeatedly: Jesus, like Moses crossing the sea (v. 1) and, one notes, there is no boat, just like in the Exodus; like Moses, Jesus is accompanied by numerous people and wins the trust of the masses by performing great signs (v. 2). Twice (vv. 3,15), he goes up the mountain and sits down with his disciples, just as Moses was on the mountain and often taught his people. During the Exodus, Moses gave manna, and, like him, Jesus feeds those who follow him. Fourteen times we see that the crowd acclaims him as “the prophet, the one who is to come into the world” (v. 14). There is an explicit reference to this prophecy made by God to Moses, “I shall raise a prophet from their midst, one of their brothers, who will be like you. I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them all that I command” (Deut 18:18).

All these references are intended to present Jesus as the new Moses who begins, with humanity, a new departure, a passage from slavery to freedom, from an unsustainable and inhumane condition to real life. The goal of the journey of Moses was the land of Canaan, that of Jesus is the true promised land, the Kingdom of God, the kingdom in which—as the prophets announced—all will have abundant and free food (Is 25:6).

It is not about paradise, afterlife, but, above all, of the here and now. Of course, the kingdom of God will be fulfilled at the end of time. However, the sign performed by Jesus indicates that the new society, one in which everyone is allowed to live according to the Creator’s plan, where everyone can have sufficient resources to meet basic needs, must begin here and now.

But is it possible to create it? Is it conceivable that the resources of this world would be enough to feed everyone and still have leftovers? The apostles’ doubts expressed with frankness and clarity reflect our concerns. It is written in the Mishna; to meet the daily needs of the poor, 1/12 of a denar is needed. Philip does a quick calculation: with 200 denars, 4800 half portions could be prepared (v. 7). But where to find a lot of money and a lot of bread?

In Luke’s Gospel, the twelve forward another very realistic and acceptable proposal: “Send the crowd away and let them go into the villages and farms around, to find lodging and food” (Lk 9:12). In other words, this is an issue that does not concern the faith. They come to us to pray, meditate, listen to sermons; as for bread, each has to make do as he or she can. The idea, widespread even today, that there are two distinct, separate, and unconnected spheres: the kingdom of God on the one hand and material life on the other.

Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, intervenes: “There is a boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish,” then, as if he realized he had remarked devoid of any common sense, he adds immediately, “But what good are they for so many?” (v. 9). There is little food and an immense crowd. Faced with a situation two hundred times less complicated, Elisha’s servant had the same reaction: “How am I to divide these loaves among so many people?”

Through an ingenious dialogue, Jesus revealed the strategies dictated by the wisdom of men to solve hunger in the world, and the evangelist has cleverly placed it in the mouth of the apostles. The conclusion is reached: there is no solution; the mouths to feed are too many, and resources are insignificant, and spontaneously there arises the skepticism that the creation is not entirely successful. The maximum that can be obtained in this world is a good social assistance organization, but it is inconceivable that misery can be defeated.

It is at this point that Jesus promises his solution: “Make the people sit down” (v. 10). The idea that the kingdom of God is carried out in a sphere separate from reality is thus rejected. The word of Christ is meant to be a social ferment, to transform the whole world and the whole person.

The “table” on which the banquet is laden is original. The crowd is asked to lie down on the green grass of a meadow. “There was plenty of grass there” (v. 10)—the evangelist notes—and this detail, seemingly marginal and superfluous, is significant because it refers explicitly to the words of the psalm: “The Lord is my … shepherd, I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures” (Ps 23:1-2). If Jesus makes his sheep sit “in green pastures,” it means that he presents himself as the shepherd announced by the prophets, that means the banquet of the kingdom of God is inaugurated (Is 25:6), that the new world is born, the world in which no one will fight for food because there will be an abundance for all.

How will this new world be built? Jesus makes his proposal through a gesture: he takes the bread offered, distributes it, and the miracle takes place. It is realized by faith in his word, which is an invitation to sharing and to renounce the temptation to hoard and keep for oneself.

John is the only evangelist who notes that the one who has made available to all the little food he had “was a child” and that his bread was “of barley” (v. 9), the staple food of the poor. The details about the child are unrealistic because, as we know, children are the first to consume the supplies; it is, therefore, unlikely that, among so many people, precisely a child and only one child has kept the snack. The symbolic value of the detail is rather obvious: in the gospel, the child is the model of the disciple; those who want to enter the kingdom of heaven must be like children (Mk 10:15).

The message is clear: the poor child is the disciple called to make available to the brothers and sisters all that he has. This is an excellent proposal; this is the key to the miracle! It is enough that people put aside their selfishness, overcome the greed to possess, “which is the root of every evil” (1 Tim 6:10), they welcome the logic of the Kingdom and make available to the brethren, without reservation, all that they have, and the miracle happens: all are fed and have leftovers.

I mentioned that chapter 6 of John is not, from the beginning, about the Eucharist. The theme of today’s passage is the sharing of goods, and spiritualistic interpretation should be avoided. However, one cannot but note that the story has Eucharistic overtones. In the description of Jesus’ actions—”Jesus then took the loaves, gave thanks and distributed them to those who were seated” (v. 11)—is an obvious reference to the words of the institution of the Eucharist (Mk 14:22).

It is how John recalls to his and our communities that the problem of material food is strictly linked to the celebration of the Eucharist. It would make no sense to break the Eucharistic bread together and not to share the material bread.

 

THE BREAD: A CAUSE OF CONFLICT AND A SIGN OF COMMUNION – DOWNLOAD VERSION