Let me scribble on a few lingering thoughts concerning Johns bread of life discourse that has been the feature of the past couple Sunday readings. The phrase eat my flesh, drink my blood. Shocking, especially to the Jewish followers with their views on blood. Was it directed at them? Was it designed to change their perception? That statement is given at a specific point in Jesus ministry. It is after His Nativity, and before His Resurrection.For them, its meaning has yet to be revealed. They have yet to see his flesh and blood as transubstantiated bread and wine. Only a portion of that great mystery, the mystery of the Christ, has been revealed to them.
The other part of that saying about eating His flesh and drinking His blood is the language used to describe it. Since this writer is illiterate in the ancient languages of the written account, I must rely on what has been passed on to me through sermons of Christ’s priest’s. They describe that eating and drinking in an almost violent way, not politely but ravishing on a meal. It is consuming nourishment as if one has been starved. It is feeding as a necessity. Violent as the crucifixion is violent, and His Body and Blood( for us in the form of bread and wine) are as necessary for life as food is for a physical body.It is a meal, it is real food for survival. It is not a toast done in memory, it is a feeding done as if life depends on it.It is a meal that feeds us sustains us , and nourishes us. The apostles and disciples did not understand that yet in their journey, but they will and they will pass that knowledge down to us.