Blog 12

There are three prominent meal scenes in the Bible, the Feeding of the Five Thousand, the Last Supper, and the Road to Emmaus. These stories all share a similar structure and offer gargantuan contributions to one of the main themes of the Bible. They illustrate the idea that Jesus is our nourishment and that we need him for our everyday sustenance. There are few structural consistencies that convey this idea.

               First, the meals in the Road to Emmaus and the Feeding of the Five Thousand are only ordinary meals, while the meal in the Last Supper is a festive meal celebrating the Passover. Since all three of these meals follow the same structure yet have different meanings, it can be gathered that the breaking of the bread is a very special yet commonplace event. It has the same monumental significance but should be celebrated as often as possible. The two more ordinary meals also make the point that just as we need simple foods to power our everyday life, we need our fill of Jesus daily in order to help us live.

               Also, all the meals follow a similar ritual, Jesus blesses and breaks the bread and provides it to all who are present. They are all centered on bread, a clear reference to the “Bread of Life” as well as the basis for the sacrament of the Eucharist. “Breaking” and “sharing” are key words used in each passage. The meaning of “sharing” is quite straight forward. To put it simply, Jesus’ body is to be shared with everyone. “Breaking” is more symbolic of the fact that the bread we receive at the Eucharist is all from the same substance, everyone receives the same Jesus at Communion.

               These passages are broken down into a few simple messages. The first is that Jesus himself is the Bread of Life. He himself in the form of bread, is necessary for our spiritual sustenance, we need him regularly. This is the basis for weekly and daily masses, we must regularly receive Jesus.  Secondly, Jesus is for everyone, the rich and the poor, the religious and the lay people, black and white, man and woman. God sees no boundaries. Ultimately these passages set the precedent for mass, where the priest acts as Jesus offering up Jesus’ body for the community so that we might have life.

Blog 11

               Facing the possibility of death and residing in a war-torn city, the monks are faced with a difficult decision: Leave their monastery to ensure their safety or stay in the violence ridden town and continue to serve the people who have no choice but to stay. They deliberate often and contemplatively in an attempt to rectify their dilemma.

               Initially Brother Christian states that the monks will not leave their post and remain in the city and ardently argues with the city officials regarding the decision. Upon consulting the other monks he finds that they are not in unanimous agreement with him. One claims that he did not come to the monastery to “commit suicide.” Many of the monks share the common concern for their own well-being. Brother Christian argues that they are in the town to serve the people and their service is needed now more than ever.

               Another monk states that they should not stay at the monastery in the hopes of being martyrs. Martyrdom is not something that should be strived for, or used to gain acceptance into heaven. Brother Christian sees this argument but offers that the monks, while under threat of becoming martyrs are actively trying to avoid it while remaining in the monastery.

               A last monk recalls a time when he went home to celebrate his mother’s birthday and saw all his family and heard all their stories and it made him desire a return to his home life outside of the monastery. This memory was an impetus calling him to leave the monastery, but he also remembered that after the party he realized that he belonged at the monastery in prayer.

               After weeks of contemplation the monks meet a final time and Brother Christian asks once who wants to leave. The monks unanimously decide to stay, each stating that he didn’t feel it right to leave, that there was nothing away from the monastery that was as important, and that their work there was not done.  The brothers finally realized how much the people in the city needed them. Earlier in the movie one towns-person claimed that the people were “birds” and the monastery was the “branch on which they sat.”

               In summary, the monks struggled with protecting their own lives but realized they were called to a greater life. They emphasized the true meaning of life, which is doing what you can to improve the lives of others. Through their actions they were willing to give the ultimate sacrifice and to fulfill the earthly duty of service to others at all costs.

Argument for Alexander and Athanasius

     Bishop Alexander and Athanasius both argue that Jesus was both God and man. While seeming unlikely to be possible at first glance, a deeper look  will find quite substantial evidence for this claim. First, if Jesus were not a man he could not have redeemed man from sin – he would not have assumed our nature. Just as sin entered the world through one man, sin was taken away by one man. This could not be accomplished by a man alone because man does not have the power of God. Therefore if salvation were actually effected through Jesus, it must be the case that he is both God and man.

     Second, man’s identity is expressed in his reference to the divine. The limits of man compares to the limitless God not in opposition but in direct proportion. The better we serve God, the more like the master we become. God and man are not opposites, they are in radical conversation. Jesus completed the will of the Father perfectly and achieved in his way of life, union with God. Therefore he was both God and man.

     Lastly, if Jesus isn’t both God and man he is either only God, only man, or a blend of both. Jesus cannot be only man, he says “I am” referencing his divine nature and performs countless miracles. At the same time he cannot be only God, he eats, sleeps, and breathes like a man. He cannot possibly be a blend because a single divine-man nature is absurd. It only makes sense that Jesus has two natures: divine and human, united in one person. This is called the hypostasis or suppositum prospon.

 

Polycarp

Polycarp’s martyrdom is a clear parallel to the crucifixion of Jesus. The plot, actions, timing, and feelings all mirror the death of our Lord. Days before his death, Polycarp sees a sing – his pillow burning- that signifies he must be killed via fire. Just as Jesus knew how he must suffer so did Polycarp, and he likewise accepted the challenge unfazed. Polycarp is apprehended by the authorities and his traitor, just as Jesus was, while he is in the company of friends. His reaction shows a lot about his demeanor in the situation. He calmly asks for time to pray before he is taken off and his request is granted. He shows that he is ready to willingly accept this fate and he faces it with an atypical calm. He was put to death in front of a crowd of Gentiles and some Jews – a mostly unbelieving crowd. Just as the crowd showed no mercy towards Christ, the crowd showed no mercy towards Polycarp, demanding that the lions be released upon him. As he lays on the pyre about to die, he calls out to God the Father, asking that he may join him in His Kingdom. The men light the pyre and soon see that his body does not burn, but rather gives of a pleasant fragrance. The men are ordered to stab him to ensure his death. After his body is pierced a copious amount of blood flows out, extinguishing the fire. The passage mentions that the people notice the different in his death versus those of the non-believers. All who read this passage can find comfort in Polycarp’s death. Before he is killed, God calls out to him: “Be strong Polycarp and act like a man.” Polycarp also faces his last moments with a solid composure and fearlessness that is almost contagious. Anyone can find closure in the caring and supportive words of God as well as Polycarp’s calmness in the face of death.

               Ignatius stresses the necessity for the believers to be in union together under a Bishop. Ignatius explains that God acts through the Bishop’s mind and that the best way to find harmony is to be in line with the Bishop. This applies to all priests and deacons as well, Christ acts through these leaders and gives them the authority to lead the Church. This contrasts with a lot of hierarchies in today’s businesses, churches, and political entities. There is a single rather unchecked leader. Today’s systems have many leaders that are not the sole authority and can be unseated if they commit and egregious offenses. The Catholics believe that the Bishop has God-given authority. The priorities involved in leading the Church are different, the priorities of a business or government is to please the people. The priorities of a Church is to appease God. Therefore, a Bishop would have to make a lot of decisions that were unfavorable with the people. This is why Ignatius claims that it is up to the people to be in unity with the Bishop, who is God’s authority on earth.

On the morning of the third day, Mary Magdala arrives at the tomb and discovers the stone removed from the entrance. She immediately calls to Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved to alert them. Both come sprinting to the tomb, the other disciple beating Peter to the tomb, but refusing to go inside first. Peter goes in and discovers the tomb empty except for the burial clothes which had covered Jesus’ body. He notes that the cloth for Jesus’ head was separate from the rest. Shortly afterwards, Jesus appears to Mary Magdala because he has not yet ascended into heaven, he is still on earth after rising from the dead. This passage may be the most important in the Gospel of John, which emphasizes Jesus as the Incarnate Word and Glorious Savior of the World. The fact that Jesus has risen from the dead is a strong support for the idea that he is indeed the Glorious Savior of the World. However, the same event can discount Jesus as the Incarnate Word of God. Rising from the dead is not a very human characteristic which would clash with his human nature. The fact that Jesus is both divine and human must still be understood at this point though. The theological message is that Jesus is the powerful savior who came and died for us. After he rises from the dead he comes back to be with all those who had just crucified him, rather than ascending straight to heaven, he took the time in the following days to appear to the people of the world. After taking the world’s sins to the cross he comes back to give comfort to all those who believe.

Differences between Mark and John

     There are many inherent differences between Mark and John. Since the Gospel of John is not one of the synoptic gospels, it is almost assured that there will be many differences. The passion and crucifixion of Jesus in both gospels is a great point to compare and contrast. Both tell the same story but clearly emphasize different aspects. Mark makes mention of Simon of Cyrene being plucked out of the crowd by the Roman Soldiers to help Jesus carry his cross while John makes no mention of the event. This point underlines Mark’s depiction of Jesus as the suffering Son of God, who came to die. Mark makes sure to include small details of the torture and humiliation of which Jesus was a victim. He tells of Jesus being scourged by the soldiers and mocked by the crowd at his cross until he passed away. John leaves out these details all together. John gives an extremely detailed account of the sign that was hung at the head of the cross. The chief priest ask that it says “I am the king of the Jews” but Pilate says that the sign will stay as it is, saying only “The King of the Jews.” John is implying that Jesus didn’t simply say he was the son of God, but is the son of God, which backs up John’s trademark of showing Jesus as the Glorious Savior of the World. He also includes the blood and water flowing from Jesus’s pierced side, a happening that has been interpreted as sign of Jesus humanity and divinity.

Matthew and the Law

Matthew believes that the Jewish Law is a good standard to live by, but insufficient nonetheless. This is illustrated by the differences between the expectation Jesus has for his followers and the Law that was given to Moses. Jesus takes the Jewish Law a step further. He beseeches his disciples not to passively obey the laws, but actively promote charity in the community. He explains that the people have been taught that those who commit murder are liable for judgment and that no one shall commit adultery, yet in his eyes those who simply feel an anger or hatred towards their brother or lust over a woman have already transgressed upon the law. This part of his message is simple, rather than obey the law by not breaking it, obey the law by suppressing the feelings that create evil actions. The last part of his message is also important. He notes that it has been said to love your neighbor, but Jesus calls his disciples to a more lofty expectation. “Pray for those who persecute you,” is what he asks of them. It’s not simply enough to just love those who are kind to you, it is necessary to love all those who were made in God’s image no matter what they do. Matthew clearly respects the Jewish Law, but feels that the world is expected to reach a higher standard of love that has its basis in the Laws given to Moses.

The Messianic Secret

The messianic secret is quite blatant throughout the text. Jesus continually instructs those he cures not to disclose how they were healed. Such examples can be found in Ch. 1: 43-45 when Jesus cures the leper as well as Ch. 7: 36 when Jesus cures the deaf man and commands him not to tell anyone what happened. On multiple occasions, Jesus also instructs his disciples privately as he does in Ch. 7: 17 when he waits for the crowd to leave and bring his disciples into the house before preaching.

Jesus wanted to keep his ministry secret to inspire true faith in the world. He didn’t want people to believe in him solely because he could perform miracles and cure them. A faith based solely on conviction itself will withstand adversity better than a faith built on physical evidence. Jesus was most likely laying the foundation for when he would return to his father and there would be no way to physically prove his power.

What manner of man is a prophet?

A prophet is a realist. He takes on the responsibility of telling the people what they don’t want to hear. Ideas of subjectivism and cultural relativism have reigned supreme in societies since the beginnings of time. People have interpreted God’s will as what suits them, because they don’t want to accept some of the cold hard truths. The abhorrence of the prophets towards the small, seemingly trivial, things is completely justified. They only seem insignificant because society doesn’t want to face the fact that it is still wrong. The job of the prophet is to bring the people back to reality and point out all the wrongs that have become socially acceptable over time. Ultimately, he is a realist that shows that God’s will is what God says it is, not what an individual wants it to be or what society wants it to be.

Amos displays these characteristics well. He bemoans what seems to be small infractions such as drinking in the temple or engaging in promiscuity and offers rather cruel punishments such as death by fire. He also displays a characteristic mentioned by Heschel’s essay, in that he himself is a member of the society which he condemns. This proves the authenticity of the prophet. He doesn’t just point out the faults of others but also admits that his society is also corrupt and deserving of punishment.

There are still prophets today. They are the people who take a conservative standpoint on issues that have grown to be acceptable in today’s society. It can be someone as simple and as blatant as a priest who hammers home the importance of receiving the sacraments in a church where it is seemingly becoming permissible to skip mass and confession, or being married outside of the church parameters. Prophets are all around, they are the people inspired by God to urge the world to stay true to his will.