Thoughts going in, Sunday July 31st

Matthew 14:13 Now when Jesus heard this, he withdrew from there in a boat to a deserted place by himself. But when the crowds heard it, they followed him on foot from the towns. When he went ashore, he saw a great crowd; and he had compassion for them and cured their sick. 15 When it was evening, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a deserted place, and the hour is now late; send the crowds away so that they may go into the villages and buy food for themselves.” 16 Jesus said to them, “They need not go away; you give them something to eat.” 17 They replied, “We have nothing here but five loaves and two fish.” 18 And he said, “Bring them here to me.” 19 Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven, and blessed and broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. 20 And all ate and were filled; and they took up what was left over of the broken pieces, twelve baskets full. 21 And those who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.

This Sunday we move from the parables to one of the "feeding miracle" passages of the Gospels. As one commentator points out, the feeding miracle stories must've been extremely important/valued to the early Christian community, as 6 accounts of feeding miracles occur within the span of the 4 canonical Gospels.

And yet, right off the bat, any sort of specific importance can almost be lost by the fact that a miracle--in general--has occurred. In other words, there's a sort of stodgy approach to the miracles that says, "well, this proves that Jesus really is God in the flesh, for who else could take a couple fish & a few loaves of bread and miraculously feed 5,000?" This is one of those observations that's TRUE, yet leaves one very dissatisfied. Is that the *only purpose of miracles...to prove that Jesus is God in the flesh? Curing a leper, feeding 5,000, changing water to wine, and raising someone from the dead are all *vastly different acts. In addition to proving that Jesus is God in the flesh, surely they also teach us something more. In addition, one can surely go further and say the Evangelist reporting the specific miracle to us must have his reasons for doing so.

So, as for my thoughts...
To begin with, why would we want to limit the focus of this passage to a mere *single miracle? At the beginning Jesus has just learned that John the Baptist has been killed. His desire is to get away for a time of private reflection, prayer, and perhaps even mourning. And what happens? The crowds follow him, invading his space with their problems--their ill in need of curing, etc. Surely the first miracle of the story is that Jesus subjugates his own needs/desires for the moment in order to minister to others. Only a Holy Spirit-empowered radical compassion causes something like this to happen.

The second miracle I see is that the disciples willingly handed over their own meager food supply at a time when they must've known that what they had wasn't even enough to adequately feed themselves. Yes, this shows a dedication to the lordship of Jesus; they were willing to follow his instructions, come what may. Yes, this also even shows faith on their part, as they no doubt thought he must have something in mind. Yet, just that simple act of handing over one's ALL...one's ENTIRE lot...only a Holy Spirit-empowered radical generosity could cause something like this to happen.

And then of course we have the miracle itself.

Some are quick to point out the parallels between this story & the manna feedings in the Old Testament. There are those who like to see Matthew's use of these parallels as indicating that he thought of Jesus as a "new Moses." I think this is on the right track, but somewhat incomplete. Matthew doesn't so much set Jesus up as the 'new Moses,' as he introduces Jesus as the complete manifestation of everything Moses symbolized. Jesus is not Moses come back or even a final version of Moses; Jesus is Emmanuel (Mt 1:23)....YAHWEH with us. Not only does he superabundantly feed his people in the wilderness, but they collect 12 baskets of leftovers--one for each of the 12 tribes of Israel. In other words, Matthew is using this story as evidence of/for the claims that Jesus is King/Messiah. It doesn't just prove he's God in the flesh, it proves he's Messiah...come to his people.

There's more than just this going on, though.
There's also the strong Eucharistic overtones of the story. I'll grant that this is one of those cases that requires "eyes to see," yet surely vs 19's 4-fold action of "taking, blessing, breaking, and giving" would ring a bell with any early Christian. That doesn't mean that the bread & fish were the sacrament of holy communion that day. What it does mean, though, is that we have full license to see sacramental images/parallels all through this story. The disciples/church bring their meager gifts to the Lord; he takes/blesses/breaks/distributes those meager gifts in such a way that they become a bounteous banquet for all present. Isn't that what we say happens in the Eucharist?

There's another point worth mentioning. Commentators rightly point out that the sole emphasis on the **sacrificial-Jesus-on-the-cross aspect of the Eucharist is artificially narrow and does not do full justice to the Eucharistic understanding of the earliest Christians. True, the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist is indisputable. If Christ's body/blood are truly present, then of course he is there as sacrificial victim for the sins of the world. [obviously all of this can be maintained without drifting into the distinctively Roman Catholic view]. Yet, this only gets to part of the story. The other part of the story is that Jesus is truly present as presider at the great Messianic Feast. This celebratory, eschatological-banquet facet of the Eucharist is something that we've tried to reclaim in our day with the addition of such things as "This is the Feast of Victory for our Lord" to the liturgy. One's Eucharistic thinking/belief is fullest when one sees the Eucharist **both as a participation in Christ's sacrifice on the cross **and as a foretaste of the great Messianic gathering to come. And in that sense, the multiplication of the loaves passage in Matthew IS Eucharistic!

Finally...
I see a very practical point worth mentioning. This passage, like many others, proves that with Jesus a little is A LOT. I've used the example so often, but it's fitting. I loved the humility that former Bears fullback Matt Suey used to display. Reporters used to shower compliments on him and say things like "Walter Payton and Matt Suey are...or were....the greatest running back combination ever to play the game." Suey never let such statements go unchallenged. His response was always to correct them and say, "Walter Payton and **ANY other running back would be the greatest ever." His point was that he was nothing, Payton was everything.

So often we as Christians, or as members of a small church think that we're nothing; we're too small to do much that matters in the big picture; God's kingdom can use the mega churches, but there's nothing we can do. To paraphrase Matt Suey, the greatest combination for GOOD in the world is Jesus Christ working in, with, and through **ANY other Christian.

Cheers,

TM