How to be a Handmaid of the Lord,
Like Mary
On December 12, we celebrate the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe and recall, in the Gospel reading at Mass, the story of the Annunciation (Luke 1:26-38). Mary became a pure vessel in which God dwelt during the nine months of pregnancy. Her “yes” to the special vocation of serving the kingdom of God as the mother of the Messiah did not end when her Son died on the cross. She became mother to the whole Church.
God planned her vocation at the beginning of our story in Genesis, when he told the serpent, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers” (Gen. 3:15). She said yes to that vocation when she said to the angel Gabriel and to God, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. Let it be done to me according to Your word” (Luke 1:38).
To get a deeper understanding of what her fiat, her “yes” entailed — and what happens when we say “yes” to God — we need to look at the word “handmaid.” What did she mean by that? According to the dictionary, a “handmaid” is someone whose essential function is to assist. ASSIST! Not: Take charge of. Not: Become the Savior of. Not: Be such a good priest or lay minister or religious brother/sister that people admire you and give you the credit for a job well done.
An assistant is often called the employer’s “right hand” or, more literally, an extension of the employer’s hand.
When I am given an assignment by God, such as “Write a book about … ” or “Give a retreat about … “, my first inclination is to kick into high gear all the organizational and leadership skills in which God has endowed me and trained me. When I see someone wandering into darkness and God nudges me to intervene, my strong sense of caring moves me to action, and if I don’t see results fast enough (by my definition of it), I start assuming that I’m not trying hard enough and must push into higher gear.
None of this is being a handmaid of the Lord. None of this is being an extension of God’s hand. It’s me being me, stretching out my own hand to see how far I can make it reach. Let’s consider how Mary modeled the assistant’s job:
(1) First and foremost, to willingly become someone’s handmaid requires great trust in the person (or God) who is going to be the master. As Pope John Paul the Great wrote in his Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Mater (Mother of the Redeemer) , paragraph 13: “Mary uttered this fiat in faith. In faith she entrusted herself to God without reserve and ‘devoted herself totally as the handmaid of the Lord to the person and work of her Son’ (Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium , para. 56).”
(2) Mary left the consequences of her “yes” in God’s hands. She did not make her “yes” conditional, as in “Okay, Archangel Gabe, but only if you explain to Joseph why I’m pregnant and he’s not the father” or “Just make sure the townsfolk don’t stone me to death or even criticize me for getting pregnant without Joseph.”
(3) She made a complete commitment to align herself with God. He was free to do with her as he willed. She did not second guess him. Nor did she offer her own opinion about where the baby should be born or what should be done with the animals or what kind of visitors they should get. This is what it means to be an extension of God’s hand. We are not the hand. We are not God.
(4) By choosing to say “yes” she opened herself to receive all the help she would ever need from God to fulfill her vocation. It was not Mary who convinced Joseph to go through with the marriage instead of divorcing her; it was God who sent Joseph an angel in a dream.
(5) Her consent came from true humility — the same kind of humility that her Son would have in consenting to the crucifixion. Such willingness lets go of all desire for self-comfort and personal gain. It is a total giving of self, an altruism that comes from knowing that God’s goodness is far greater than our own best efforts.
(6) Being the Lord’s assistant is a partnership with the Holy Spirit, who is the “handmaid” or servant of the other two members of the Blessed Trinity in carrying out all divine operations. The transformation of Mary’s “yes” into an actual pregnancy required the servanthood of the Holy Spirit. Mary cooperated with the Holy Spirit “by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls” ( Lumen Gentium , para. 62). A good handmaid is more than just an obedient servant; faith, hope and love provide the motivation in union with the Holy Spirit.
(7) Giving consent meant not only allowing God to do things to her , but also doing things for God . As his handmaid, she put herself into the position of being done unto. He did not order her around or abuse this position in any way, but he did put her into some very difficult situations. Certainly it was not easy traveling on a donkey to Bethlehem in the last month of pregnancy. Giving birth in a chilly, dirty stable without her mother’s help was probably not the way she had imagined this special moment would be. And fleeing to Egypt instead of returning home with the baby was a very disappointing and challenging time. Yet, she let God do this to her because she had meant it when she said she’d be his handmaid. At the same time, she was doing it all for God out of tremendous love for him.
(8) Mary’s “yes” united her to both the intentions and actions of God. His intentions became her intentions. His actions became her actions. The Father intended to redeem the world through his Son; Mary intended to redeem the world through her Son in accordance with his plan as it unfolded. The Father let his Son die for our sins; Mary let go of her Son as she watched him die, even though she did not yet fully understand the plan. God was in charge, and Mary united herself to whatever he did.
(9) A good handmaid listens closely to what the master wants. Mary had said, “Let it be done to me according to Your WORD.” She was a good listener. “Through faith Mary continued to hear and to ponder that word, in which there became ever clearer, in a way ‘which surpasses knowledge’ (Eph. 3:19), the self-revelation of the living God. Thus in a sense Mary as Mother became the first ‘disciple’ of her Son” ( Redemptoris Mater , para. 20).
(10) Since a handmaid of the Lord is a disciple of Christ, a handmaid is also a true follower. It’s not hard to figure out what God wants of us because Jesus is leading us to do the same things that he did (see John 14:12). In Redemptoris Mater , paragraph 41, we read: “She who at the Annunciation called herself the ‘handmaid of the Lord’ remained throughout her earthly life faithful to what this name expresses. In this she confirmed that she was a true ‘disciple’ of Christ, who strongly emphasized that his mission was one of service: the Son of Man ‘came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many’ (Matt. 20:28).
Today, as Queen of Heaven, Mary still continues to serve as God’s handmaid. As Pope John Paul the Great added in paragraph 41, “The glory of serving does not cease to be her royal exaltation: assumed into heaven, she does not cease her saving service, which expresses her maternal mediation ‘until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect’ ( Lumen Gentium , para. 62).
Like Mary’s service, our ministries do not end when we leave the earth. We would do well to give our full “yes” now to our vocations as handmaids (for the guys: use the word “hand-servants”), because in one way or another, we’ll be doing it in front of God’s face when heaven is our home.
Let us rely on Mary’s ministry of being God’s handmaid whenever we need his helping hand to reach us. And let us allow her to teach us how to do the same for others.
To read the full Encyclical Letter “Redemptoris Mater”, go to: ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/JP2MOTHE.HTM.
How can you be God’s hand touching the lives of those around you? Are you trying to control it and do things your way? Have you avoided doing a good deed that Jesus would have done, something he could do through you now? Listen to what he is asking you to do for him and say, “Lord, let it be done to me according to Your will; I am your handmaid (or hand-servant).”

St. John Henry Newman’s meditations on the Litany of Loreto

Cardinal John Henry Newman by Sir John Everett Millais (1881).

Loreto, Italy, Dec 10, 2019 / 12:28 am (CNA).- Morning Star. Mystical Rose. Tower of Ivory. House of Gold. For centuries, Catholics have recited these titles of Mary in the Litany of Loreto prayer.

One of the Church’s newest saints, St. John Henry Newman, wrote a series of meditations in 1874 elucidating the meaning behind each Marian title in the litany.

For Newman, many of these titles of Mary link back to her integral identity as the Immaculate Conception, born without the stain of original sin. Thus, the British saint connected a dogma declared 20 years prior by Pope Pius IX to a litany prayer approved by Pope Sixtus V in 1587.

“We must recollect that there is a vast difference between the state of a soul such as that of the Blessed Virgin, which has never sinned, and a soul, however holy, which has once had upon it Adam’s sin; for, even after baptism and repentance, it suffers necessarily from the spiritual wounds which are the consequence of that sin,” Newman wrote. “She never committed even a venial sin, and this special privilege is not known to belong to anyone but Mary.”

The Marian title, “Mater Amabilis,” today translated as “Mother most amiable,” is connected to Mary’s sinlessness, Newman explained: “Sin is something odious in its very nature, and grace is something bright, beautiful, attractive.”

“There was a divine music in all she said and did—in her mien, her air, her deportment, that charmed every true heart that came near her. Her innocence, her humility and modesty, her simplicity, sincerity, and truthfulness, her unselfishness, her unaffected interest in everyone who came to her, her purity—it was these qualities which made her so lovable,” Newman wrote.

Mary is particularly loveable “to the children of the Church, not to those outside of it, who know nothing about her,” Newman said.

A convert himself, Newman’s own thoughts on Mary developed from praising the holiness of the Mother of Christ as an Anglican preacher to defending Mary’s role as intercessor in “Certain Difficulties Felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching Considered.”

Newman was a 19th century theologian, poet, Catholic priest and cardinal. Born in 1801, he was before his conversion a well-known and well-respected Oxford academic, Anglican preacher, and public intellectual.

In October, Pope Francis declared Cardinal John Henry Newman a saint. That same month, the pope elevated the Dec. 10 feast of Our Lady of Loreto to the Church’s universal Roman Calendar.

In his Loreto meditations, Newman sheds light on titles of Mary whose meaning may not immediately evident to a modern reader.

Tower of Ivory

While an ivory tower is colloquially understood today as a privileged shelter from the practicalities of the real world, Newman connect’s Mary’s title, “Tower of Ivory,” to her courageous presence at the execution of her son.

“When we say a man ‘towers’ over his fellows, we mean to signify that they look small in comparison of him,” he wrote. “This quality of greatness is instanced in the Blessed Virgin. Though she suffered more keen and intimate anguish at our Lord’s Passion and Crucifixion than any of the Apostles by reason of her being His Mother, yet consider how much more noble she was amid her deep distress than they were.”

“It is expressly noted of her that she stood by the Cross. She did not grovel in the dust, but stood upright to receive the blows, the stabs, which the long Passion of her Son inflicted upon her every moment,” Newman wrote. “In this magnanimity and generosity in suffering she is, as compared with the Apostles, fitly imaged as a Tower.”

Mirror of Justice

Newman explained that the Marian title “Mirror of Justice” needs clarification to fully understand how Mary reflected Christ.

“Here first we must consider what is meant by justice, for the word as used by the Church has not that sense which it bears in ordinary English. By ‘justice’ is not meant the virtue of fairness, equity, uprightness in our dealings; but it is a word denoting all virtues at once, a perfect, virtuous state of soul—righteousness, or moral perfection; so that it answers very nearly to what is meant by sanctity,” Newman wrote.

“Therefore when our Lady is called the ‘Mirror of Justice,’ it is meant to say that she is the Mirror of sanctity, holiness, supernatural goodness,” he continued.

Newman further posited: “Do we ask how she came to reflect His Sanctity? —it was by living with Him. We see every day how like people get to each other who live with those they love … Now, consider that Mary loved her Divine Son with an unutterable love; and consider too she had Him all to herself for thirty years. Do we not see that, as she was full of grace before she conceived Him in her womb, she must have had a vast incomprehensible sanctity when she had lived close to God for thirty years?”

Morning Star

Newman divided the titles of Mary in the Litany of Loreto into four categories: Immaculate Conception, the Annunciation, Our Lady of Sorrows, and the Assumption.

For example, Newman compares the “Morning Star” to Mary’s Assumption into heaven: “Mary, like the stars, abides for ever, as lustrous now as she was on the day of her Assumption; as pure and perfect, when her Son comes to judgment, as she is now.”

“It is Mary’s prerogative to be the Morning Star, which heralds in the sun. She does not shine for herself, or from herself, but she is the reflection of her and our Redeemer, and she glorifies Him. When she appears in the darkness, we know that He is close at hand,” he wrote.

By papal decree, the feast of Our Lady of Loreto will be celebrated for the first time as an optional memorial in the Roman calendar this year on Dec. 10. Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, said in the October decree:

“This celebration will help all people, especially families, youth and religious to imitate the virtues of that perfect disciple of the Gospel, the Virgin Mother, who, in conceiving the Head of the Church also accepted us as her own.”

Tags: Catholic News, Cardinal John Henry Newman, Our Lady of Loreto

How the Church is honoring pilots and the ‘flying’ house of the Virgin Mary

The Holy House of Our Lady in the Shrine of Loreto. Credit: Tatiana Dyuvbanova / Shutterstock.

By Hannah Brockhaus

Loreto, Italy, Dec 8, 2019 / 05:35 am (CNA).- At first glance, pilots and plane passengers have little in common with the Holy House of Mary in Loreto, Italy.

But just as pilots and passengers take flight in airplanes, the Holy House of Loreto also “flew,” according to an often-told story, when it was transported through the air by angels from the Holy Land to the small Italian town of Loreto.

Modern documentation suggests a hint of truth to the pious story, but with a twist. Evidence suggests the house was brought to Italy by the noble Angeli family, who saved the materials of the house from destruction by Muslim invaders in the 13th century. The name Angeli means “angels” in both Greek and Latin.

Three statues of Our Lady of Loreto will soon be “taking flight” during a special Jubilee Year of Loreto, to be celebrated by the Church beginning Dec. 8, the feast of the Immaculate Conception.

As part of the jubilee year, the Marian statues of the “Black Madonna” of Loreto will be making symbolic pilgrimages by plane. One will travel to the main Italian airports, another to military units, and a third to major airports of the five continents, including New York.

“This pilgrimage will represent the Mother’s embrace of the whole world,” the prelate of Loreto, Archbishop Fabio Dal Cin, said at a press conference Dec. 3.

The Jubilee Year of Loreto, which will be celebrated through Dec. 10, 2020, marks the 100th anniversary of Our Lady of Loreto being officially proclaimed the patroness of pilots and air passengers.

This designation was made by Pope Benedict XV in March 1920, after aviators fighting in World War I became devoted to the Virgin Mary under this title for her traditional connection to “flight.”

Pope Francis recently also added the Dec. 10 feast day of Our Lady of Loreto as an optional memorial in the Roman Calendar of the universal Church.

With the theme “Called to fly high,” the Jubilee Year of Loreto will begin with an opening of the Holy Door of the Basilica of the Holy House in Loreto.

By visiting the basilica during the year, Catholics may obtain a plenary indulgence under the usual conditions.

A plenary indulgence requires an individual to be in the state of grace and have complete detachment from sin. The person must also sacramentally confess their sins and receive Communion up to about 20 days before or after the indulgenced act, and pray for the pope’s intentions.

This plenary indulgence, according to Archbishop Dal Cin, may also be extended to chapels in civil and military airports upon request of the local bishop.

Catholics are encouraged to make a pilgrimage to the Holy House of Mary in Loreto during the jubilee year, or to another shrine dedicated to Our Lady of Loreto.

There is also an official hymn, composed by lauded composer Fr. Marco Frisina. During the year, a charitable donation will be made for the purchase of new equipment for the neonatology department of Sacred Family Hospital in Nazareth.

Celebrations throughout the year will also include an air show by Frecce Tricolori, the Italian Air Force’s aerobatic demonstration team.

The jubilee year “does not only concern the world of aviation (workers and passengers), but is addressed to all the devotees of Our Lady of Loreto,” Dal Cin said, “and to those pilgrims who will arrive to the Holy House from all over the world to receive the gift of the plenary indulgence.”

Tags: Catholic News, Holy House of Loreto

DECEMBER 3, 2019
Ten Lessons in Evangelization From St. Francis Xavier
FR. ED BROOM, OMV
efore St. Francis Xavier set out on his great mission, St. Ignatius spoke these final words to him: Go set all on fire! Francis embarked for India, then to Japan and died on the shore overlooking China. His missionary work was completed in only 11 years and he died of exhaustion at 46 years of age.
Like Francis Xavier, all followers of Christ are called to be prophets, evangelizers, and missionaries. Followers of Christ must strive to be encountering Christ as Friend and Lord and then share Jesus with others. It is a contradiction in terms to keep the priceless treasure of Friendship with Jesus to oneself. St. Andrew teaches us this lesson. After being called by Jesus, Andrew filled with joy hurries to tell the Good News (“Gospel”) to his brother Peter.
How did St. Francis Xavier, in such a short time, convert, baptize, and teach the Catholic faith to countless souls? What was his secret to success?

1. Spiritual Exercises
   His conversion came about by completing the Spiritual Exercises under the direction of St. Ignatius of Loyola himself. Ignatius challenged Xavier with the Biblical quotation:
   “What would it profit a man to gain the whole world if he lose his soul in the process?” The Spiritual Exercises, done well, enlighten, convert, and transform souls into fiery apostles.
2. Obedience
   The Holy Father asked Ignatius to send some of his followers from the Order of Jesus to India and the Far East, and Francis Xavier obeyed. Obedience to God, the Pope, and the Church is always a true sign of holiness by which God blesses with abundant graces. “Lord, not my will but yours be done!” (Prayer of Jesus to the Father in the Garden of Olives).
3. Love For Poverty
   Upon arriving in India, Xavier’s heart overflowed with love for the poor of the country. His love knew no bounds. Instead of seeking out comfortable lodgings and ease, Xavier decided to live with the poor, sleep like the poor, eat and drink with the poor, and become poor himself. Jesus’s first Beatitude exemplifies this attitude of heart: “ Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (Mt. 5: 3).
4. Love for God’s Children
   Jesus taught love for children. “Let the children come to me for such is the kingdom of heaven.” Francis Xavier loved the children and they loved him. He taught them their catechism, as well as their prayers. Such was the love the children had for him that barely did he have time to say his prayers or even eat!
5. Apostolic Creativity
   St. Francis Xavier was a genius, especially as a teacher and missionary. As a tool for memorization of the catechism, Xavier made use of song. In simple verse and rhyme, Francis taught the children the basics of catechism.
   Then the children then would return home and sing the catechism, thereby teaching their own parents. Pope John Paul II exhorted followers of Christ to be open to the Holy Spirit as well as apostolic creativity. Jesus said to Nicodemus that the spirit blows where He wills. Like Xavier, let us be open to the direction of the Holy Spirit and follow where He wills!
6. Baptism
   It all starts with the sacrament of Baptism. After instructions, Francis Xavier would baptize by the thousands! He baptized so many that sometimes, at the end of the day, he could no longer hold up his arm.
7. Ordering the Disorder
   This great saint, after finishing his time in one place, would leave well-formed catechists to carry on with the mission of forming the people in the community. Now, more than ever, zealous priests need zealous lay leaders to help to carry on the task of evangelization. “The harvest is rich but the laborers are few.”
8. Inculturation
   While travelling to Japan, St. Francis Xavier had to learn the social mores and customs of another country. In this case, seeing someone dressed in rags caused revulsion to the Emperor. As St. Paul says, “I become all things to all men so as to win as many to Christ as possible.” Xavier donned the most elegant clothes fashionable and gave gifts to the Emperor, thereby winning the Emperor’s friendship and opening up the door to the preaching of the Gospel message.
9. Prayer & Penance
   It is impossible to find a saint who did not take the “two P’s” seriously:
   prayer and penance!
   At the end of his exhausting day, St. Francis Xavier spent hours in front of the Most Blessed Sacrament, praising the Lord, thanking the Lord, and imploring for the sanctification and salvation of the people God placed in his path. The consolation that God sent Francis Xavier during his prayers was so intense that the saint begged the Lord “basta” — “enough” of the consolation, lest he die of its intensity!
   May St. Francis Xavier attain for us the fire of intensity in our prayers!
   How did the saint practice penance? One way: he slept very little, so as to accompany the Lord and offer himself as victim for the salvation of souls.
10. Apostolic Zeal
    A favorite prayer of St. Francis Xavier was, “Give me souls!” Another saint who had a similar motto was Saint John Bosco, whose motto was posted on the wall of his office: “Give me souls and take all the rest away.” St. John of the Cross asserts: “Authentic charity is manifested by apostolic zeal.”
    Indeed, if we truly love God then we should love what God loves—the salvation of immortal souls. In the Office of Readings for the Feast of St. Francis Xavier, in a letter written to St. Ignatius, there is a passionate appeal for more workers to gather in the harvest, specifically reproaching the proud and learned at the universities. The words of Xavier explode with apostolic zeal and intense suffering for the salvation of immortal souls.
    Let us meditate attentively the words of St. Francis Xavier:
    “Many, many people hereabouts are not becoming Christians for one reason: there is nobody to make them Christians. Again and again I have thought of going round the universities of Europe, especially Paris, and everywhere crying out like a madman. Riveting the attention of those with more learning than charity: What a tragedy: how many souls are being shut out of heaven and falling into hell, thanks to you! I wish they would work as hard at this as they do at their books, and so settle their account with God for their learning and the talents entrusted to them.” (Office of Readings, Dec. 3, Feast of St. Francis Xavier)
    Tagged as: evangelization , Francis Xavier , missionaries , saints, St. Francis Xavier

Protestant attacks on the Catholic Church often focus on the Eucharist. This demonstrates that opponents of the Church—mainly Evangelicals and Fundamentalists—recognize one of Catholicism’s core doctrines. What’s more, the attacks show that Fundamentalists are not always literalists. This is seen in their interpretation of the key biblical passage, chapter six of John’s Gospel, in which Christ speaks about the sacrament that will be instituted at the Last Supper. This tract examines the last half of that chapter.

John 6:30 begins a colloquy that took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that “our ancestors ate manna in the desert.” Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. “Give us this bread always,” they said. Jesus replied, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically.

Again and Again

Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: “‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’” (John 6:51–52).

His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56).

No Corrections

Notice that Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, no attempt to correct “misunderstandings,” for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically.

In John 6:60 we read: “Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’” (It is here, in the rejection of the Eucharist, that Judas fell away; look at John 6:64.) “After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him” (John 6:66).

This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically.

But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have “to eat my flesh and drink my blood.” John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper—and it was a promise that could not be more explicit. Or so it would seem to a Catholic. But what do Fundamentalists say?

Merely Figurative?

They say that in John 6 Jesus was not talking about physical food and drink, but about spiritual food and drink. They quote John 6:35: “Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst.’” They claim that coming to him is bread, having faith in him is drink. Thus, eating his flesh and blood merely means believing in Christ.

But there is a problem with that interpretation. As Fr. John A. O’Brien explains, “The phrase ‘to eat the flesh and drink the blood,’ when used figuratively among the Jews, as among the Arabs of today, meant to inflict upon a person some serious injury, especially by calumny or by false accusation. To interpret the phrase figuratively then would be to make our Lord promise life everlasting to the culprit for slandering and hating him, which would reduce the whole passage to utter nonsense” (O’Brien, The Faith of Millions, 215). For an example of this use, see Micah 3:3.

Fundamentalist writers who comment on John 6 also assert that one can show Christ was speaking only metaphorically by comparing verses like John 10:9 (“I am the door”) and John 15:1 (“I am the true vine”). The problem is that there is not a connection to John 6:35, “I am the bread of life.” “I am the door” and “I am the vine” make sense as metaphors because Christ is like a door—we go to heaven through him—and he is also like a vine—we get our spiritual sap through him. But Christ takes John 6:35 far beyond symbolism by saying, “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (John 6:55).

He continues: “As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me” (John 6:57). The Greek word used for “eats” (trogon) is very blunt and has the sense of “chewing” or “gnawing.” This is not the language of metaphor.

Their Main Argument

For Fundamentalist writers, the scriptural argument is capped by an appeal to John 6:63: “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” They say this means that eating real flesh is a waste. But does this make sense?

Are we to understand that Christ had just commanded his disciples to eat his flesh, then said their doing so would be pointless? Is that what “the flesh is of no avail” means? “Eat my flesh, but you’ll find it’s a waste of time”—is that what he was saying? Hardly.

The fact is that Christ’s flesh avails much! If it profits us nothing, so that the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ are of no avail, then “your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished” (1 Cor. 15:17b–18).

In John 6:63 “flesh profits nothing” refers to mankind’s inclination to think using only what their natural human reason would tell them rather than what God would tell them. Thus in John 8:15–16 Jesus tells his opponents: “You judge according to the flesh, I judge no one. Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and he who sent me.” So natural human judgment, unaided by God’s grace, is unreliable; but God’s judgment is always true.

Also in John 6:63, “The words I have spoken to you are spirit” does not mean “What I have just said is symbolic.” The word “spirit” is never used that way in the Bible. The line means that what Christ has said will be understood only through faith; only by the power of the Spirit and the drawing of the Father (cf. John 6:37, 44–45, 65).

Paul Confirms This

Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.

What Did the First Christians Say?

Anti-Catholics also claim the early Church took this chapter symbolically. Is that so? Let’s see what some early Christians thought, keeping in mind that we can learn much about how Scripture should be interpreted by examining the writings of early Christians.

Ignatius of Antioch, who had been a disciple of the apostle John and who wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans about A.D. 110, said, referring to “those who hold heterodox opinions,” that “they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again” (6:2, 7:1).

Forty years later, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, . . . is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66:1–20).

Origen, in a homily written about A.D. 244, attested to belief in the Real Presence. “You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received the Body of the Lord, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish” (Homilies on Exodus 13:3).

Cyril of Jerusalem, in a catechetical lecture presented in the mid-300s, said, “Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that, for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm” (Catechetical Discourses: Mystagogic 4:22:9).

In a fifth-century homily, Theodore of Mopsuestia seemed to be speaking to today’s Evangelicals and Fundamentalists: “When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood,’ for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements], after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit, not according to their nature, but to receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord” (Catechetical Homilies 5:1).

Unanimous Testimony

Whatever else might be said, the early Church took John 6 literally. In fact, there is no record from the early centuries in which the literal interpretation is opposed and only the metaphorical accepted.

---

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004