Supper
Commentary
The evening meal, supper, is often the most important of the daily meals. It is customarily at the supper meal that families try to be together. This is the meal to which we most often invite guests. To celebrate, we usually go out to eat our evening meal. The medical profession advises us to eat our largest meal at midday, but it is the evening meal many of us regard as the day's main meal.
This night is all about significant suppers. Maundy Thursday is actually a hodgepodge of traditions woven together into one special Holy Week service. On the one hand, this night celebrates the institution of the Holy Eucharist in accord with the Synoptic Gospels' accounts of the last week before the crucifixion. "Maundy"comes from the Latin word for commandment. In the ancient prayer before the washing of feet, the word mandatum is used. So, this night also acknowledges our Lord's command, "You also ought to wash one another's feet" (John 13:14). The lectionary connects the "new commandment" of John 13:34 with the mandate. Both the foot washing and the new commandment are found exclusively in the Gospel of John. In such a way, this night blends the traditions of the Synoptics and the Johannine Gospels into one.
What both the events have in common is their setting at a supper on the day before Jesus' crucifixion. The Synoptic Gospels acknowledge such a meal, and all understand it to have been a Passover meal shared by Jesus and his disciples. At an evening meal, both the Jewish and the Christians celebrate significant events in their tradition. For the Jews it is the Passover, and for the Christians the Last Supper which originated on a Passover evening. Our texts for this night invite us around a table and ask us remember what transpired in such a situation centuries ago.
Exodus 12:1-4 (5-10) 11-14
This passage relates the institution of the Passover meal during the time when the Hebrew people were struggling for their freedom from Egyptian slavery. The actual historical origin of Passover is not an issue for us. In Jewish tradition, this passage marks its origin. These verses from Exodus 12 emphasize the Passover meal in two ways. First of all, it provides the story of how the Hebrews warded off the final plague with which God inflicted the Egyptians in the struggle for the people's freedom. The blood of the Passover lamb would mark the houses in which the Hebrews dwelt, and the angel of death would pass over them. Second, this passage also establishes the "perennial" Passover to be celebrated each year by the people of God. (See further Deuteronomy 16:1-8.)
In chapter 11 God warns Moses of the dangers of the last of the plagues, and chapter 12 continues with God's instructions to Moses and Aaron regarding what the Hebrew people are to do to avoid the plague. The prescriptions of the passage move through at least four stages. There is first the "marking" of month and the commandment to select a lamb that meets certain qualifications (vv. 1-5). Second, verses 6-11a relate precisely how the lamb is to be prepared and eaten. Third, the meaning of the occasion in the narrative context of the story of the plagues is clarified in verses 11b-13. Finally, God commands the people to observe this day "as a perpetual ordinance" (vv. 14-20). The longest of the assigned readings ends with verse 14.
The year is to begin with this month during which God brought about the exodus from Egypt. (See further Leviticus 23:27.) The lamb was, of course, a common animal used in sacrifices, even though this one may be chosen from among sheep or goats (v. 5), and its role is not strictly that of a sacrifice. Care is taken to provide for those households that did not need (or could not afford?) a whole lamb.
On the fourteenth of the month, all the households slaughter their lambs at "twilight," on the edge between the end of one day and the beginning of another. Although they all are to do this at the same time, there is no requirement that they gather together in the same place. On the contrary, they are to be in their homes, for the blood of the lamb is used to mark the house as Hebraic. Blood is the symbol of life and in this case represents the very essence of the people's lives. They eat the lamb that very night after it has been roasted.
The insistence on roasting is to ensure that all the animal's blood will have been drained away. Unleavened bread remains in its natural state, uncontaminated by yeast. The symbolic meaning of this bread is found in verses 33-34. It is the food of haste as the people are fleeing Egypt. The bitter herbs may represent the bitterness of their slavery. However, more simply, lamb, bread, and herbs make a full meal. Above all, this event is a meal, an evening meal. The prescriptions go on through verse 11a. It is to be eaten hurriedly (v. 11a), because the people need to be ready to flee once Pharaoh has surrendered.
The final command has to do with the annual observance of this day. It is a time of "remembrance" when the people recall God's rescuing them from the plague of the death of the firstborn and leading them to freedom. A meal becomes a way of reclaiming history, of participating in what occurred centuries ago, and of expressing gratitude through eating.
Why is it that such an occasion as this should be celebrated at a meal? Why is a meal required to distinguish the Hebrew homes from the Egyptian homes? Eating is the means of physical sustenance; survival depends on eating. So, God invites the people to share a meal, remembering how God sustained their lives. Physical nourishment is related to spiritual nourishment. Moreover, the meal also represents a family's common gathering. This Passover meal was to be done in the context of families, to knit them together in a common heritage. For Paul the Lord's Supper has a similar function.
1 Corinthians 11:23-26
Paul describes a meal at which Jesus offered bread and wine as his own body and blood. His description of this meal is situated among his responses to some of the problems the Corinthian Christians are having in their gatherings (11:2-16). That includes some thoughtless behavior when they come together to share the Lord's Supper. In particular it seems that some of them leave the meeting still hungry while others overeat and drink too much (11:17-22). Following his scolding words about this matter ("I do not commend you!" -- v. 22), he repeats the tradition he knows of the institution of the Lord's Supper.
Paul begins the depiction of the institution of the Eucharist by claiming that he received it "from the Lord." Probably he means not literally from Christ or God (whichever Lord means here) but through the church's tradition about Christ. On several occasions Paul explicitly says that he is handing on or has "passed on" to the readers something he has received, presumably through the tradition of the church. (See for instance, 1 Corinthians 15:3-7.) In the passage for this evening, Paul is the beneficiary of a story about Jesus' last meal with his disciples. Why is this important to us? Because in this passage we are dealing with the tradition of the wider church and not just Paul's own views. His account of this event is in many ways similar to those found in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; and Luke 22:15-20).
Unlike the Synoptic Gospels' accounts (Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12; and Luke 22:7), however, Paul does not say that the setting for Jesus' words was a Passover meal, only that it occurred "on the night when he was betrayed" (v. 23). Some perhaps thought it more important that the meal occurred just before his arrest than that it was a Passover meal. His words about the bread are almost exactly those of the Gospel of Luke. The words over the cup in Paul, however, are closer to those of Matthew's and Mark's, but again like Luke he claims Jesus spoke of a "new covenant." The expression "after supper" suggests that the bread was shared at the beginning of the meal; the meal was eaten; and then the cup was passed. This fits the view that the earliest Christians' celebration of the Eucharist was in the context of a full community meal. Blood was used to seal the covenant (that is, the people's agreement to the covenant) with Israel (Exodus 24), so it is natural that the "new covenant" should be sealed with Christ's blood.
Only Paul and Luke include the command, "Do this in remembrance of me." This is important for two reasons. First, it invites the perpetual celebration of the Eucharist, much the way Exodus 12:14 commands the perennial Passover. Second, and also like Passover, the celebration should invoke the memory of Christ and his benefits. Memory closes the gap between the present and past and makes the past present. Like a bridge, memory combined with the celebration of the Lord's Supper carries us back to the foot of the cross, even while we remain in our own present.
Paul's tradition differs from that of the Synoptics most clearly in the last sentence (v. 26) which may be his own words and not those of the tradition. The sentence is a declaration of the meaning of the supper. Celebrating the Eucharist is a proclamation of Jesus' death "until he comes." Paul understood the Lord's Supper as a form of announcing the significance of Jesus' death. So, it stands with preaching in that regard. Moreover, his form of the tradition supposes that there is an eschatological dimension to the supper. The meal looks back in remembrance to "the night he was betrayed," but it also looks to the future "until he comes." This is an eschatological dimension that contemporary practices of Holy Communion do not always retain. (See the verses following the reading for an indication of how seriously Paul took the Eucharist.)
The setting is again a meal. Again it entails remembering. Moreover, in a sense we can say of the Lord's Supper what we said of the Passover meal: a meal becomes a way of reclaiming history, of participation in what occurred centuries ago, and of expressing gratitude through eating. Remembrance of the past is not the only dimension of the meal. The bread and the wine are connected with Jesus' body and blood with the simple word "is." We don't have to know how the identification is real or explain it. We are asked only to obey Christ by communing and by believing that he is really present in the physical elements.
We may have lost something by taking the Lord's Supper out of its context in a community meal and observing it strictly as a liturgical tradition. This holy meal supposes that the community gathers together and eats together. As the Passover knit the family together, the Eucharist knits God's family in the church together. Something almost mysterious happens when we eat a meal with others. The Jewish tradition of Jesus' time knew this. For them, table-fellowship involved an intimacy in which persons shared in one another's life. In this table-fellowship we share one another's lives, even as we share Christ's own life, death, and resurrection.
John 13:1-17, 31b-35
Strangely, the fourth Gospel has no record of the institution of the Lord's Supper, and scholars have puzzled over this fact for centuries. However we might deal with this puzzle, we cannot escape one impression: At the very point in the narrative of the Synoptic Gospels where Jesus institutes the sacrament, the fourth Gospel tells the story of Jesus' washing the feet of his disciples. The reading includes the report of Jesus' act of washing his disciples' feet (vv. 1-11) and a portion of the explanation of the meaning of the act (vv. 12-17). It then jumps to verses 31-35 and the "new commandment."
The passage begins with a careful description of the setting (vv. 1-2b). The time is "before the festival of the Passover" and is not Passover itself (contrast the Synoptics). Nonetheless, the setting near Passover proves to be very important in John's passion story. The narrator wants us to know, too, that Judas has by this time been inspired to betray Jesus (v. 2a). More important, however, is the fact that Jesus has a sense "his hour had come to depart from this world and go to the Father" (v. 1). The essential element in the setting for the foot washing is the imminent cross. What is about to happen is a continuation of Jesus' love for his followers that remains firm even in the face of death.
The whole story stands within the shadow of Judas' betrayal. The narrator announces it in verse 2. At the conclusion of the conversation with Peter, Jesus makes clear that not all the disciples are clean (v. 11). In verses 18-20, he speaks of it again immediately after explaining the meaning of the foot washing, and the actual identification of Judas as the betrayer is told in the story immediately following the foot washing and its meaning. This act of love and service is posed over against betrayal.
Jesus' act of washing his followers' feet takes place after they have completed their meal but remained reclined. Somehow the act is inspired both by Jesus' love of his disciples and his knowledge of who he is (v. 3). As a gesture of hospitality, hosts had their guests' feet washed. (See Luke 7:44.) Of course, servants had the unpleasant task of doing this both to their master's as well as the visitors' dusty and grimy feet. Jesus' act is depicted in abundant detail in verse 4 and 5.
The conversation with Peter, say some, reveals the original meaning of the foot washing. Understandably, Peter resists Jesus' act. Jesus responds only that Peter is not going to comprehend what is taking place, at least right now. Peter declares without reservation that he is not about to allow Jesus to wash his feet. The washing, however, is part of what joins the disciples to Jesus. His servant behavior is absolutely necessary, and Peter either allows Jesus to do this or else gets left out entirely. Poor Peter! He tries again, but still doesn't get it right! He is correct, of course. We do need a bath, not just a foot washing. Yet Jesus says he has already had a bath and declares to the whole group, "You (plural) are clean...." How is it that they are clean? Jesus' words may refer to the Jewish ritual of washing, which would have been done at home. Or, they may suggest that the disciples' affiliation with Jesus has a cleansing effect already. Today's readers are tempted to think that this washing is baptism, but we cannot be certain of that.
Jesus' words to Peter suggest that the foot washing is part of the process of cleansing for the disciples ("One that has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet ..." v. 10a). However, now in verses 12-17, Jesus explains the meaning of the foot washing in terms of a model for service. The logic of Jesus' words in verse 13-16 is backwards of the typical rabbinic reasoning from lesser to greater. (For Jesus' use of reasoning from the lesser to the greater, see Luke 13:15-16 and 14:4-5.) In this case, if the master (the greater) does it, the disciples (the lesser) should do it. Foot washing becomes part of the imitation of the master who gives the followers "an example." It is a bit curious how seldom the contemporary church practices foot washing, in spite of the clarity of Jesus' commandment and the "sacramental-like" features of the act.
The reading jumps to the "new commandment" in verses 31-35. (For a discussion of the meaning of glorification, see the fifth Sunday in Lent.) The affectionate expression, "little children," introduces a theme that will recur in the next three chapters. His time with them is short, and he will be taken from their sight (14:19 and 16:16-19). In the context of that urgency, he gives them a "new commandment." Yet, what's new about the commandment to "love one another"? (See Leviticus 19:18.) We probably should look for the novelty of this commandment, not in its specific content, but in its embodiment in Jesus himself. What is new, then, is the way God models love for us in Christ, and especially in the cross: Love one another in the same way as you have been loved by Christ (v. 34). Less pleasant about this commandment is that it is narrowed to the group of followers ("one another"), as opposed to the mandate in Matthew 5:43-48 (see also Luke 6:27). The reason for this restricted form of the commandment is most likely found in the historical occasion in which this Gospel was written, where there was a great need for Christian solidarity in the face of opposition. Indeed, in the last verse Jesus claims that the mark of love will be the most effective form of witness for the church.
Again in the setting of a meal, Jesus uses physical matter to suggest God's grace and liberating love. In the intimacy of shared food, Jesus shares his love and invites his followers to do the same. We need meals in which our spirits as well as our bodies are nourished: a supper that feeds us with the revelation of God in Christ. The point of all of these suppers in our lessons might be put this way: God and Christ share themselves with us most clearly when we share with one another. It's a supper we need with regularity.
FIRST LESSON FOCUS
By Elizabeth Achtemeier
Exodus 12:1-4 (5-10) 11-14
All three texts that are listed for Maundy Thursday here in Cycle B are the same texts specified by the lectionary for this day also in Cycles A and C. The preacher may therefore want to refer to the previous expositions given for those cycles in back issues of Emphasis. The lectionary exercises our minds and hearts by demanding that we listen ever anew to the Word of God that speaks to us through a biblical passage.
The scene in our text takes place shortly before Israel's redemption from her slavery in Egypt. Moses has repeatedly appeared before Pharaoh Rameses II, pleading with him on behalf of the Lord to let his people go. But Pharaoh has repeatedly refused, despite the fact that the Lord has loosed a series of plagues on the Egyptians. In chapter 10 of Exodus, Pharaoh almost changes his mind. But, says the text, "the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go" (Exodus 10:27), and that is explained in chapter 11: "Pharaoh will not listen to you," God tells Moses, "that my wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 11:9). The full power and glory of God must be shown in the exodus -- God's power over nature and over all other gods (cf. Exodus 12:12), but also God's power over life and death. Thus, the final plague on the Egyptians will be the death of all firstborn children and cattle, to our minds a very harsh judgment, but God does not fool around with those who think to oppose him. In the Egyptians God faces and triumphs over oppression, evil worldly power, and self-aggrandizing pride and idolatry. Let those who have ears to hear, hear.
But, says Exodus, "the Lord makes a distinction between the Egyptians and Israel" (Exodus 11:7), and the first Passover meal is the mark of that distinction. When the families eat the roasted unblemished lamb, they are to take some of the blood and mark their doorposts with it, that the Lord may see the blood and "pass over" them and not slay them. Obviously, the Israelites have done nothing to deserve such gracious deliverance. They don't even know who this God is yet, and they will not learn about him until Moses tells them. They have not yet entered into the covenant with God or heard his commandments. They simply have to trust that Moses' instructions to them are in fact instructions from the Lord. But they are God's chosen people, set apart for God's purpose of saving the world through their descendants.
In the instructions given them, the Israelites are told that forever after they are to eat the Passover meal on the four-teenth day of the month of Abib (March-April), as the memorial of God's redemption of them out of the house of bondage (Exodus 12:14-15). While Passover is always a family feast, after the Deuteronomic reform of the seventh century B.C. in the Old Testament, the Passover meal was to be celebrated in Jerusalem. We therefore find, in the New Testament, Jesus as a good Jew eating the Passover before his crucifixion in Jerusalem with his new "family" of disciples. "Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother," he tells us (Mark 3:35).
So it is that you and I are remembering that Last Supper of our Lord on this Holy Thursday. But we are also eating the Supper with him. We, along with Israel, are now God's special people, set apart to serve his purpose. And what does this supper signify for us who have been engrafted into the root of Israel (cf. Romans 11:17-24)?
As with Israel, this meal is now first of all a memorial -- a remembrance of our deliverance out of slavery. No, we are not slaves in Egypt, but we have been slaves to sin and death, haven't we? And we eat this Supper to remind us that we, like Israel, have been redeemed. A redeemer is one who buys back a family member who has fallen into slavery, and we have been bought back. We are no longer slaves to sin, and we can no longer be permanently held by the chains of death, because Christ has set us free. He has taken upon himself all of human evil there on his cross, and because he is our unblemished, perfectly righteous Passover lamb, he has broken the power of evil. And he has triumphed over the bonds of death by being raised from the grave on the first day of the week. When we partake of this supper, we remember that. As Paul writes in our epistle lesson, "As ofen as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim -- you remember -- the Lord's death until he comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
But more than that, we not only remember the past event of Jesus' Passover meal with his disciples, we also participate in it. You and I are now eating and drinking with the Lord. He is present with us at this supper, and by eating this bread and drinking this cup, we become recipients of the power of this God who saved Israel and who once again can save us -- the God who has power over all of nature, empires, and history.
We constantly need saving, do we not? Yes, Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection were one-time events in history, opening the door forever to our release from bondage and our fellowship with the Father. But do we not often retreat back into the slavery to sin, in all of our wrong choices, our temptations too good to pass up, our propensity to follow our own easy ways and not the ways of the Lord? We seem constantly to fall back into our own private and corporate evils and to forget all about being redeemed. And heaven knows, despite the resurrection, most of us are scared of death -- of its pain, its loneliness, and its terrible dark unknown. So we need deliverance once more, don't we, and here at the supper, we are offered it once again.
What are the instructions to us from our text? They're the same that were given by Moses to Israel. Wait expectantly behind your doors marked with the blood of Jesus Christ on the cross. Keep your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand, and expect the Lord to save you. Reach out eagerly for his forgiveness, which is given at this table, and long for his power to transform you. For he is present, good Christians. He is here at this table. And once more he can make us new.
This night is all about significant suppers. Maundy Thursday is actually a hodgepodge of traditions woven together into one special Holy Week service. On the one hand, this night celebrates the institution of the Holy Eucharist in accord with the Synoptic Gospels' accounts of the last week before the crucifixion. "Maundy"comes from the Latin word for commandment. In the ancient prayer before the washing of feet, the word mandatum is used. So, this night also acknowledges our Lord's command, "You also ought to wash one another's feet" (John 13:14). The lectionary connects the "new commandment" of John 13:34 with the mandate. Both the foot washing and the new commandment are found exclusively in the Gospel of John. In such a way, this night blends the traditions of the Synoptics and the Johannine Gospels into one.
What both the events have in common is their setting at a supper on the day before Jesus' crucifixion. The Synoptic Gospels acknowledge such a meal, and all understand it to have been a Passover meal shared by Jesus and his disciples. At an evening meal, both the Jewish and the Christians celebrate significant events in their tradition. For the Jews it is the Passover, and for the Christians the Last Supper which originated on a Passover evening. Our texts for this night invite us around a table and ask us remember what transpired in such a situation centuries ago.
Exodus 12:1-4 (5-10) 11-14
This passage relates the institution of the Passover meal during the time when the Hebrew people were struggling for their freedom from Egyptian slavery. The actual historical origin of Passover is not an issue for us. In Jewish tradition, this passage marks its origin. These verses from Exodus 12 emphasize the Passover meal in two ways. First of all, it provides the story of how the Hebrews warded off the final plague with which God inflicted the Egyptians in the struggle for the people's freedom. The blood of the Passover lamb would mark the houses in which the Hebrews dwelt, and the angel of death would pass over them. Second, this passage also establishes the "perennial" Passover to be celebrated each year by the people of God. (See further Deuteronomy 16:1-8.)
In chapter 11 God warns Moses of the dangers of the last of the plagues, and chapter 12 continues with God's instructions to Moses and Aaron regarding what the Hebrew people are to do to avoid the plague. The prescriptions of the passage move through at least four stages. There is first the "marking" of month and the commandment to select a lamb that meets certain qualifications (vv. 1-5). Second, verses 6-11a relate precisely how the lamb is to be prepared and eaten. Third, the meaning of the occasion in the narrative context of the story of the plagues is clarified in verses 11b-13. Finally, God commands the people to observe this day "as a perpetual ordinance" (vv. 14-20). The longest of the assigned readings ends with verse 14.
The year is to begin with this month during which God brought about the exodus from Egypt. (See further Leviticus 23:27.) The lamb was, of course, a common animal used in sacrifices, even though this one may be chosen from among sheep or goats (v. 5), and its role is not strictly that of a sacrifice. Care is taken to provide for those households that did not need (or could not afford?) a whole lamb.
On the fourteenth of the month, all the households slaughter their lambs at "twilight," on the edge between the end of one day and the beginning of another. Although they all are to do this at the same time, there is no requirement that they gather together in the same place. On the contrary, they are to be in their homes, for the blood of the lamb is used to mark the house as Hebraic. Blood is the symbol of life and in this case represents the very essence of the people's lives. They eat the lamb that very night after it has been roasted.
The insistence on roasting is to ensure that all the animal's blood will have been drained away. Unleavened bread remains in its natural state, uncontaminated by yeast. The symbolic meaning of this bread is found in verses 33-34. It is the food of haste as the people are fleeing Egypt. The bitter herbs may represent the bitterness of their slavery. However, more simply, lamb, bread, and herbs make a full meal. Above all, this event is a meal, an evening meal. The prescriptions go on through verse 11a. It is to be eaten hurriedly (v. 11a), because the people need to be ready to flee once Pharaoh has surrendered.
The final command has to do with the annual observance of this day. It is a time of "remembrance" when the people recall God's rescuing them from the plague of the death of the firstborn and leading them to freedom. A meal becomes a way of reclaiming history, of participating in what occurred centuries ago, and of expressing gratitude through eating.
Why is it that such an occasion as this should be celebrated at a meal? Why is a meal required to distinguish the Hebrew homes from the Egyptian homes? Eating is the means of physical sustenance; survival depends on eating. So, God invites the people to share a meal, remembering how God sustained their lives. Physical nourishment is related to spiritual nourishment. Moreover, the meal also represents a family's common gathering. This Passover meal was to be done in the context of families, to knit them together in a common heritage. For Paul the Lord's Supper has a similar function.
1 Corinthians 11:23-26
Paul describes a meal at which Jesus offered bread and wine as his own body and blood. His description of this meal is situated among his responses to some of the problems the Corinthian Christians are having in their gatherings (11:2-16). That includes some thoughtless behavior when they come together to share the Lord's Supper. In particular it seems that some of them leave the meeting still hungry while others overeat and drink too much (11:17-22). Following his scolding words about this matter ("I do not commend you!" -- v. 22), he repeats the tradition he knows of the institution of the Lord's Supper.
Paul begins the depiction of the institution of the Eucharist by claiming that he received it "from the Lord." Probably he means not literally from Christ or God (whichever Lord means here) but through the church's tradition about Christ. On several occasions Paul explicitly says that he is handing on or has "passed on" to the readers something he has received, presumably through the tradition of the church. (See for instance, 1 Corinthians 15:3-7.) In the passage for this evening, Paul is the beneficiary of a story about Jesus' last meal with his disciples. Why is this important to us? Because in this passage we are dealing with the tradition of the wider church and not just Paul's own views. His account of this event is in many ways similar to those found in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; and Luke 22:15-20).
Unlike the Synoptic Gospels' accounts (Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12; and Luke 22:7), however, Paul does not say that the setting for Jesus' words was a Passover meal, only that it occurred "on the night when he was betrayed" (v. 23). Some perhaps thought it more important that the meal occurred just before his arrest than that it was a Passover meal. His words about the bread are almost exactly those of the Gospel of Luke. The words over the cup in Paul, however, are closer to those of Matthew's and Mark's, but again like Luke he claims Jesus spoke of a "new covenant." The expression "after supper" suggests that the bread was shared at the beginning of the meal; the meal was eaten; and then the cup was passed. This fits the view that the earliest Christians' celebration of the Eucharist was in the context of a full community meal. Blood was used to seal the covenant (that is, the people's agreement to the covenant) with Israel (Exodus 24), so it is natural that the "new covenant" should be sealed with Christ's blood.
Only Paul and Luke include the command, "Do this in remembrance of me." This is important for two reasons. First, it invites the perpetual celebration of the Eucharist, much the way Exodus 12:14 commands the perennial Passover. Second, and also like Passover, the celebration should invoke the memory of Christ and his benefits. Memory closes the gap between the present and past and makes the past present. Like a bridge, memory combined with the celebration of the Lord's Supper carries us back to the foot of the cross, even while we remain in our own present.
Paul's tradition differs from that of the Synoptics most clearly in the last sentence (v. 26) which may be his own words and not those of the tradition. The sentence is a declaration of the meaning of the supper. Celebrating the Eucharist is a proclamation of Jesus' death "until he comes." Paul understood the Lord's Supper as a form of announcing the significance of Jesus' death. So, it stands with preaching in that regard. Moreover, his form of the tradition supposes that there is an eschatological dimension to the supper. The meal looks back in remembrance to "the night he was betrayed," but it also looks to the future "until he comes." This is an eschatological dimension that contemporary practices of Holy Communion do not always retain. (See the verses following the reading for an indication of how seriously Paul took the Eucharist.)
The setting is again a meal. Again it entails remembering. Moreover, in a sense we can say of the Lord's Supper what we said of the Passover meal: a meal becomes a way of reclaiming history, of participation in what occurred centuries ago, and of expressing gratitude through eating. Remembrance of the past is not the only dimension of the meal. The bread and the wine are connected with Jesus' body and blood with the simple word "is." We don't have to know how the identification is real or explain it. We are asked only to obey Christ by communing and by believing that he is really present in the physical elements.
We may have lost something by taking the Lord's Supper out of its context in a community meal and observing it strictly as a liturgical tradition. This holy meal supposes that the community gathers together and eats together. As the Passover knit the family together, the Eucharist knits God's family in the church together. Something almost mysterious happens when we eat a meal with others. The Jewish tradition of Jesus' time knew this. For them, table-fellowship involved an intimacy in which persons shared in one another's life. In this table-fellowship we share one another's lives, even as we share Christ's own life, death, and resurrection.
John 13:1-17, 31b-35
Strangely, the fourth Gospel has no record of the institution of the Lord's Supper, and scholars have puzzled over this fact for centuries. However we might deal with this puzzle, we cannot escape one impression: At the very point in the narrative of the Synoptic Gospels where Jesus institutes the sacrament, the fourth Gospel tells the story of Jesus' washing the feet of his disciples. The reading includes the report of Jesus' act of washing his disciples' feet (vv. 1-11) and a portion of the explanation of the meaning of the act (vv. 12-17). It then jumps to verses 31-35 and the "new commandment."
The passage begins with a careful description of the setting (vv. 1-2b). The time is "before the festival of the Passover" and is not Passover itself (contrast the Synoptics). Nonetheless, the setting near Passover proves to be very important in John's passion story. The narrator wants us to know, too, that Judas has by this time been inspired to betray Jesus (v. 2a). More important, however, is the fact that Jesus has a sense "his hour had come to depart from this world and go to the Father" (v. 1). The essential element in the setting for the foot washing is the imminent cross. What is about to happen is a continuation of Jesus' love for his followers that remains firm even in the face of death.
The whole story stands within the shadow of Judas' betrayal. The narrator announces it in verse 2. At the conclusion of the conversation with Peter, Jesus makes clear that not all the disciples are clean (v. 11). In verses 18-20, he speaks of it again immediately after explaining the meaning of the foot washing, and the actual identification of Judas as the betrayer is told in the story immediately following the foot washing and its meaning. This act of love and service is posed over against betrayal.
Jesus' act of washing his followers' feet takes place after they have completed their meal but remained reclined. Somehow the act is inspired both by Jesus' love of his disciples and his knowledge of who he is (v. 3). As a gesture of hospitality, hosts had their guests' feet washed. (See Luke 7:44.) Of course, servants had the unpleasant task of doing this both to their master's as well as the visitors' dusty and grimy feet. Jesus' act is depicted in abundant detail in verse 4 and 5.
The conversation with Peter, say some, reveals the original meaning of the foot washing. Understandably, Peter resists Jesus' act. Jesus responds only that Peter is not going to comprehend what is taking place, at least right now. Peter declares without reservation that he is not about to allow Jesus to wash his feet. The washing, however, is part of what joins the disciples to Jesus. His servant behavior is absolutely necessary, and Peter either allows Jesus to do this or else gets left out entirely. Poor Peter! He tries again, but still doesn't get it right! He is correct, of course. We do need a bath, not just a foot washing. Yet Jesus says he has already had a bath and declares to the whole group, "You (plural) are clean...." How is it that they are clean? Jesus' words may refer to the Jewish ritual of washing, which would have been done at home. Or, they may suggest that the disciples' affiliation with Jesus has a cleansing effect already. Today's readers are tempted to think that this washing is baptism, but we cannot be certain of that.
Jesus' words to Peter suggest that the foot washing is part of the process of cleansing for the disciples ("One that has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet ..." v. 10a). However, now in verses 12-17, Jesus explains the meaning of the foot washing in terms of a model for service. The logic of Jesus' words in verse 13-16 is backwards of the typical rabbinic reasoning from lesser to greater. (For Jesus' use of reasoning from the lesser to the greater, see Luke 13:15-16 and 14:4-5.) In this case, if the master (the greater) does it, the disciples (the lesser) should do it. Foot washing becomes part of the imitation of the master who gives the followers "an example." It is a bit curious how seldom the contemporary church practices foot washing, in spite of the clarity of Jesus' commandment and the "sacramental-like" features of the act.
The reading jumps to the "new commandment" in verses 31-35. (For a discussion of the meaning of glorification, see the fifth Sunday in Lent.) The affectionate expression, "little children," introduces a theme that will recur in the next three chapters. His time with them is short, and he will be taken from their sight (14:19 and 16:16-19). In the context of that urgency, he gives them a "new commandment." Yet, what's new about the commandment to "love one another"? (See Leviticus 19:18.) We probably should look for the novelty of this commandment, not in its specific content, but in its embodiment in Jesus himself. What is new, then, is the way God models love for us in Christ, and especially in the cross: Love one another in the same way as you have been loved by Christ (v. 34). Less pleasant about this commandment is that it is narrowed to the group of followers ("one another"), as opposed to the mandate in Matthew 5:43-48 (see also Luke 6:27). The reason for this restricted form of the commandment is most likely found in the historical occasion in which this Gospel was written, where there was a great need for Christian solidarity in the face of opposition. Indeed, in the last verse Jesus claims that the mark of love will be the most effective form of witness for the church.
Again in the setting of a meal, Jesus uses physical matter to suggest God's grace and liberating love. In the intimacy of shared food, Jesus shares his love and invites his followers to do the same. We need meals in which our spirits as well as our bodies are nourished: a supper that feeds us with the revelation of God in Christ. The point of all of these suppers in our lessons might be put this way: God and Christ share themselves with us most clearly when we share with one another. It's a supper we need with regularity.
FIRST LESSON FOCUS
By Elizabeth Achtemeier
Exodus 12:1-4 (5-10) 11-14
All three texts that are listed for Maundy Thursday here in Cycle B are the same texts specified by the lectionary for this day also in Cycles A and C. The preacher may therefore want to refer to the previous expositions given for those cycles in back issues of Emphasis. The lectionary exercises our minds and hearts by demanding that we listen ever anew to the Word of God that speaks to us through a biblical passage.
The scene in our text takes place shortly before Israel's redemption from her slavery in Egypt. Moses has repeatedly appeared before Pharaoh Rameses II, pleading with him on behalf of the Lord to let his people go. But Pharaoh has repeatedly refused, despite the fact that the Lord has loosed a series of plagues on the Egyptians. In chapter 10 of Exodus, Pharaoh almost changes his mind. But, says the text, "the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go" (Exodus 10:27), and that is explained in chapter 11: "Pharaoh will not listen to you," God tells Moses, "that my wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 11:9). The full power and glory of God must be shown in the exodus -- God's power over nature and over all other gods (cf. Exodus 12:12), but also God's power over life and death. Thus, the final plague on the Egyptians will be the death of all firstborn children and cattle, to our minds a very harsh judgment, but God does not fool around with those who think to oppose him. In the Egyptians God faces and triumphs over oppression, evil worldly power, and self-aggrandizing pride and idolatry. Let those who have ears to hear, hear.
But, says Exodus, "the Lord makes a distinction between the Egyptians and Israel" (Exodus 11:7), and the first Passover meal is the mark of that distinction. When the families eat the roasted unblemished lamb, they are to take some of the blood and mark their doorposts with it, that the Lord may see the blood and "pass over" them and not slay them. Obviously, the Israelites have done nothing to deserve such gracious deliverance. They don't even know who this God is yet, and they will not learn about him until Moses tells them. They have not yet entered into the covenant with God or heard his commandments. They simply have to trust that Moses' instructions to them are in fact instructions from the Lord. But they are God's chosen people, set apart for God's purpose of saving the world through their descendants.
In the instructions given them, the Israelites are told that forever after they are to eat the Passover meal on the four-teenth day of the month of Abib (March-April), as the memorial of God's redemption of them out of the house of bondage (Exodus 12:14-15). While Passover is always a family feast, after the Deuteronomic reform of the seventh century B.C. in the Old Testament, the Passover meal was to be celebrated in Jerusalem. We therefore find, in the New Testament, Jesus as a good Jew eating the Passover before his crucifixion in Jerusalem with his new "family" of disciples. "Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother," he tells us (Mark 3:35).
So it is that you and I are remembering that Last Supper of our Lord on this Holy Thursday. But we are also eating the Supper with him. We, along with Israel, are now God's special people, set apart to serve his purpose. And what does this supper signify for us who have been engrafted into the root of Israel (cf. Romans 11:17-24)?
As with Israel, this meal is now first of all a memorial -- a remembrance of our deliverance out of slavery. No, we are not slaves in Egypt, but we have been slaves to sin and death, haven't we? And we eat this Supper to remind us that we, like Israel, have been redeemed. A redeemer is one who buys back a family member who has fallen into slavery, and we have been bought back. We are no longer slaves to sin, and we can no longer be permanently held by the chains of death, because Christ has set us free. He has taken upon himself all of human evil there on his cross, and because he is our unblemished, perfectly righteous Passover lamb, he has broken the power of evil. And he has triumphed over the bonds of death by being raised from the grave on the first day of the week. When we partake of this supper, we remember that. As Paul writes in our epistle lesson, "As ofen as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim -- you remember -- the Lord's death until he comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
But more than that, we not only remember the past event of Jesus' Passover meal with his disciples, we also participate in it. You and I are now eating and drinking with the Lord. He is present with us at this supper, and by eating this bread and drinking this cup, we become recipients of the power of this God who saved Israel and who once again can save us -- the God who has power over all of nature, empires, and history.
We constantly need saving, do we not? Yes, Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection were one-time events in history, opening the door forever to our release from bondage and our fellowship with the Father. But do we not often retreat back into the slavery to sin, in all of our wrong choices, our temptations too good to pass up, our propensity to follow our own easy ways and not the ways of the Lord? We seem constantly to fall back into our own private and corporate evils and to forget all about being redeemed. And heaven knows, despite the resurrection, most of us are scared of death -- of its pain, its loneliness, and its terrible dark unknown. So we need deliverance once more, don't we, and here at the supper, we are offered it once again.
What are the instructions to us from our text? They're the same that were given by Moses to Israel. Wait expectantly behind your doors marked with the blood of Jesus Christ on the cross. Keep your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand, and expect the Lord to save you. Reach out eagerly for his forgiveness, which is given at this table, and long for his power to transform you. For he is present, good Christians. He is here at this table. And once more he can make us new.
