Meditation on John 6: The Bread of Life

Link to this article by referencing this address:

The sixth chapter of the Gospel of St. John is like a sister chapter to chapter two, which relates
the story of the wedding at Cana. Like chapter two, this sixth chapter contains much in the
way of material that is suitable for meditation, and is rich with sacramental symbolism.

The chapter begins with the story of the multiplication of the five loaves, which Our Lord uses
to miraculously feed more than 5,000 people.

After these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is that of Tiberias. And a great
multitude followed him, because they saw the miracles which he did on them that were
diseased. Jesus therefore went up into a mountain: and there he sat with his disciples. Now
the pasch, the festival day of the Jews, was near at hand.

As with so many other narratives in St. John's Gospel, so also this story begins by presenting
us with a Jewish feast as the contextual back-drop. In this case, it is the Feast of Passover,
instituted in Egypt on the night that Israel made their exodus out of that land. The Passover
Lamb was slain, his blood smeared on the doorposts, and his flesh roasted and eaten by the
Israelites. The meal also included unleavened bread, the bread that Our Lord held in His sacred
hands on the night of His betrayal, over which He pronounced the words "this is my body." The
fact that this narrative in St. John takes place with the Passover as its back-drop is meant to
get us already thinking in Eucharistic terms: the Lamb, the Lamb of God, the blood, the
unleavened bread, the Passover that was celebrated by Our Lord on the night He instituted the
Eucharist, and so on.

When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes and seen that a very great multitude cometh to
him, he said to Philip: Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? And this he said to try
him: for he himself knew what he would do. Philip answered him: Two hundred pennyworth of
bread is not sufficient for them that every one may take a little. One of his disciples, Andrew,
the brother of Simon Peter, saith to him: There is a boy here that hath five barley loaves and
two fishes. But what are these among so many? Then Jesus said: Make the men sit down.
Now, there was much grass in the place. The men therefore sat down, in number about five
thousand.

To these details, we may also add the information that we find in the other three gospel
accounts. It should be pointed out that this is the only miracle that Our Lord performs which is
recorded in all four gospels. St. Matthew tells us that "the number of them that did eat, was
five thousand men, besides women and children." (Matt. 14:21) St. Mark adds that "he
commanded them that they should make them all sit down by companies upon the green
grass. And they sat down in ranks, by hundreds and by fifties." (Mark 6:39-40) St. Luke
confirms this, saying "he said to his disciples: Make them sit down by fifties in a company."
(Luke 9:14)

We read on in St. John's Gospel:

And Jesus took the loaves: and when he had given thanks, he distributed to them that were
set down. In like manner also of the fishes, as much as they would. And when they were filled,
he said to his disciples: gather up the fragments that remain, lest they be lost. They gathered
up therefore and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves which
remained over and above to them that had eaten.

Here we find some data that would be fruitful for us to consider in a sacramental light. It is
near the feast of Passover, and Our Lord distributes miraculous bread to more than 5,000
people, seated in groups of 50 and 100. Or did Our Lord actually distribute the bread? St. Luke
tells us, "taking the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven and blessed them:
and he broke and distributed to his disciples, to set before the multitude." Likewise, St. Mark:
"when he had taken the five loaves, and the two fishes: looking up to heaven, he blessed, and
broke the loaves, and gave to his disciples to set before them." St. Matthew spells it out with
special detail: "he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he
blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes."

The sacramental picture given to us here is thoroughly Eucharistic: the miracle bread is
produced by Our Lord, given to the apostles, and taken by the apostles to the various groups
of people seated by 50s and 100s. These groups of people represent local churches, and the
apostles serve them now in a kind of prefiguration of their future roles as bishops - distributing
to them miraculous bread. In light of the Eucharistic overtones here, the synthesis of St.
John's account ("he distributed to them") with the other gospel accounts ("he gave the loaves
to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes") makes complete sense: who is it that
gives us the Holy Eucharist? It comes from the hands of the priest, right? Yes, this is true, but
underlying this truth is the fact that the priest is acting in persona Christi, in the person of
Christ. St. John is correct: Our Lord fed the multitudes with miraculous bread; the other gospel
writers are also correct: the disciples fed the multitudes with the miraculous bread.

Take special note of the verbs that are employed by the gospel writers:

"... he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and
brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples ..." (St. Matthew)

"... when he had taken the five loaves, and the two fishes: looking up to heaven, he
blessed, and broke the loaves, and gave to his disciples ..." (St. Mark)

"... taking the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven and blessed them: and
he broke and distributed to his disciples, to set before the multitude." (St. Luke)

"... Jesus took the loaves: and when he had given thanks, he distributed to them that were
set down." (St. John)

What is the significance of these verbs? They are Eucharistic, according to the other gospel
writers:

"And taking bread, he gave thanks and brake and gave to them, saying: This is my body,
which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me." (Luke 22:19)

"And whilst they were eating, Jesus took bread; and blessing, broke and gave to them and
said: Take ye. This is my body." (Mark 14:22)

"And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his
disciples and said: Take ye and eat. This is my body." (Matt. 26:26)

You may have noticed, if you are particularly astute, that there is one verbal phrase that is
used in the accounts of the miracle, but is not used here in the Eucharistic narratives: looking
up to heaven. What is truly interesting is how the Holy Church has taken these two events,
seen the obvious Eucharistic meaning of the miraculous feeding, and blended the words
together. That the Church sees the feeding of the 5,000 as a prototype of the Eucharist can be
proven by looking at the words of consecration in the Roman Canon:

Qui pridie quam pateretur, accepit panem in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas: et elevatis
oculis in coelum ad te Deum Patrem suum omnipotentem, tibi gratias agens, benedixit,
fregit, deditque discipulis suis ...
Who, the day before He suffered, took bread into His holy and venerable hands, and having
lifted up His eyes to heaven, to Thee, God, His almighty Father, giving thanks to Thee,
blessed it, broke it, and gave it to His disciples ...

Thus the linking of the miraculous feeding to the institution of the Eucharist is no fleeting
fancy; it would seem that the Holy Church has rather subtly made that link for us many
centuries ago.

There are still other things to be gleaned from this account. Note that the multitude eats of
this miraculous bread, "as much as they would." That is to say, "they were filled" with this
bread, and even still, the disciples "filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley
loaves which remained over and above to them that had eaten." They gathered up the
fragments at the command of Our Lord, "lest they be lost." Why such concern over bread
fragments? Our Lord does this for two reasons: first, to teach us the reverence that is due to
the Holy Eucharist, and second, so that we are left with the image of twelve apostles, each
carrying one basket full of miraculous bread - this final image leaves us with the anticipation of
the Eucharist. The twelve apostles, the bishops of the Church, are now equipped with the
means to continue feeding the multitude with miraculous bread.

It should also be noted that something similar happened at Cana. Although the wedding feast
had been going on for several days, still Our Lord provides the wedding party with somewhere
between 120-180 gallons of extra wine - more than enough to meet their needs, with plenty
left over. It is no coincidence that these two miracles, taken together, leave us with an
abundance of left over bread and wine - the very two elements used to confect the Holy
Eucharist.

Leaving this miracle, we immediately are shown another miracle of Our Lord:

Jesus therefore, when he knew that they would come to take him by force and make him king,
fled again into the mountains, himself alone. And when evening was come, his disciples went
down to the sea. And when they had gone up into a ship, they went over the sea to
Capharnaum. And it was now dark: and Jesus was not come unto them. And the sea arose, by
reason of a great wind that blew. When they had rowed therefore about five and twenty or
thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking upon the sea and drawing nigh to the ship. And they
were afraid. But he saith to them: It is I. Be not afraid. They were willing therefore to take him
into the ship. And presently the ship was at the land to which they were going.

Even this brief miracle points us to the Holy Eucharist, albeit in a somewhat more subtle
fashion. The first thing that this miracle shows us is Our Lord's power over natural elements -
He walks upon the water, thus suspending the laws of nature. In a far more hidden manner,
however, this miracle points us to His Passion, and by way of His Passion, it points us to the
Holy Eucharist. Consider the Scriptural symbolism of water:

The sorrows of death surrounded me: and the torrents of iniquity troubled me. The sorrows of
hell encompassed me: and the snares of death prevented me ... Then the fountains of waters
appeared, and the foundations of the world were discovered: At thy rebuke, O Lord, at the
blast of the spirit of thy wrath. He sent from on high, and took me: and received me out of
many waters. (Ps. 17:4-5, 15-16)

Save me, O God: for the waters are come in even unto my soul. I stick fast in the mire of the
deep and there is no sure standing. I am come into the depth of the sea, and a tempest hath
overwhelmed me ... Draw me out of the mire, that I may not stick fast: deliver me from them
that hate me, and out of the deep waters. Let not the tempest of water drown me, nor the
deep water swallow me up: and let not the pit shut her mouth upon me ... And they gave me
gall for my food, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink. (Ps. 68: 2-3, 15-16, 22)
We all die, and like waters that return no more, we fall down into the earth: neither will God
have a soul to perish, but recalleth, meaning that he that is cast off should not altogether
perish. (2 Kings 14:14)

I cried out of my affliction to the Lord, and he heard me: I cried out of the belly of hell, and
thou hast heard my voice. And thou hast cast me forth into the deep, in the heart of the sea,
and a flood hast compassed me: all thy billows, and thy waves have passed over me ... The
waters compassed me about even to the soul: the deep hath closed me round about, the sea
hath covered my head. (Jon. 2:3-4, 6)

Note that water, and deep or chaotic water in particular, is associated with death. In the
quotation above, from Psalm 68, the phrases "depth of the sea," "tempest hath overwhelmed,"
"deep waters," "tempest of water," and "they gave me vinegar to drink" are all linked together.
Obviously, the last of these phrases is a prophecy of the Crucifixion, at which Our Lord was
given vinegar on a hyssop branch for His thirst - this links the Passion to the raging tempest
and deep waters even more strongly.

We read in John 6 that "the sea arose, by reason of a great wind that blew," and thus we have
the imagery of a raging tempest, chaotic waters, and Old Testament metaphors for death.
However, Our Lord steps out onto these waters, and "tramples" upon them, thus showing His
own supremacy and ultimate victory over death. Again, the passage from Psalm 68 provides
us with the link between this miracle and the Passion; the Passion, in turn, is re-presented at
the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass through the Most Holy Eucharist, and thus, we have a subtle link
to the Eucharist even in this miracle of Jesus walking on the water.

It is with these two Eucharistic narratives as a backdrop that we come to one of the most
famous discourses of Our Lord: the Bread of Life. Having been prepared for this discourse by
the feeding of the 5,000, and by the walking on the water, we read:

They said therefore to him: What sign therefore dost thou shew that we may see and may
believe thee? What dost thou work? Our fathers did eat manna in the desert, as it is written:
He gave them bread from heaven to eat. Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say to you;
Moses gave you not bread from heaven, but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
For the bread of God is that which cometh down from heaven and giveth life to the world. They
said therefore unto him: Lord, give us always this bread. And Jesus said to them: I am the
bread of life. He that cometh to me shall not hunger: and he that believeth in me shall never
thirst.

In addition to the Passover imagery already introduced at the beginning of this chapter, now
the imagery of the miraculous manna-bread from heaven is set before us. The Jews remind
Jesus that Moses gave them manna from heaven; Our Lord replies that this manna was but a
fore-shadowing, a type of the true Bread from Heaven, which is none other than Our Lord's
own flesh - as He will make clear in a few verses:

I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the desert: and are dead. This is the
bread which cometh down from heaven: that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the
living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for
ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world. The Jews therefore
strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

The stage has been properly set for the scandal of the Eucharist. Our Lord says that He is
"living bread," the true manna from heaven, the "bread which cometh down from heaven."
Thus far, He speaks in words which are strange and mysterious. Are we to understand them as
metaphors or actual realities? What does He mean by saying that we must eat of this "living
bread," and that this "bread that I will give is my flesh?" When did Our Lord give his flesh, "for
the life of the world?" Was it not on the cross? Surely He did literally die on the cross, not
merely in some symbolic fashion - yet, He equates this very same literal flesh with "the bread
that I will give." Thus the Jews understand Him to be speaking literally, and they react with
bitter arguing. The force of the Greek word machomai is seen elsewhere in St. James' epistle:
"ye fight and war, yet ye have not." (Jas. 4:2)

It will ever stand as a testament to the Catholic truth and a thorn in the side of Protestants
that Our Lord does nothing to correct the Jews' literal understanding of His words. In fact, He
intensifies the scandal by making the literal meaning more forceful:

Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of
man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh
my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat
indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth
in me: and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father: so he that
eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven.
Not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall live for ever.
These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.

Not backing away from the literal understanding of His words, Our Lord adds to the scandal by
now adding the phrase "drink my blood." His words ring out like a jack-hammer as He
commands, not once, not twice, but five times does He say that we must eat His flesh, adding
- as though His words were not clear enough - that "my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is
drink indeed." The Greek word alethos is defined by Strong's as meaning "truly, of a truth, in
reality, most certainly." To get an idea of what this word means, consider it in a few other
Scriptural contexts:

We now believe, not for thy saying: for we ourselves have heard him and know that this is
indeed the Saviour of the world. (John 4:42)

Of that multitude therefore, when they had heard these words of his, some said: This is the
prophet indeed. (John 7:40)

Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed him: If you continue in my word, you shall be my
disciples indeed. (John 8:31)

... the words which thou gavest me, I have given to them. And they have received them and
have known in very deed that I came out from thee: and they have believed that thou didst
send me. (John 17:8)

Therefore we also give thanks to God without ceasing: because that when you had received
from us the word of the hearing of God, you received it not as the word of men, but (as it
truly is) the word of God, who worketh in you, who have believed. (1 Thess. 2:13)

And they that were in the boat came and adored him, saying: Indeed thou art the Son of
God. (Matt. 14:33)

Now the centurion and they that were with him watching Jesus, having seen the earthquake
and the things that were done, were sore afraid, saying: Indeed this was the Son of God.
(Matt. 27:54)

And the centurion who stood over against him, seeing that crying out in this manner he had
given up the ghost. said: Indeed this man was the son of God. (Mark 15:39)

When Our Lord says that His flesh is meat, alethos, He means it just as truly and literally as
the centurion at the foot of the cross, who said that Jesus was the Son of God, alethos - truly,
and not merely symbolically.
Our Lord also closes the door against any attempt at interpreting His words in a symbolic
fashion when He shifts His terms from the literal to the absolutely literal:

verse 52: If any man phage of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give
is my flesh, for the life of the world.

verse 53: The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his
flesh to phagein?

verse 54: Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you phagete the
flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.

verse 55: He that trogon my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will
raise him up in the last day.

verse 56: For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

verse 57: He that trogon my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him.

verse 58: As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father: so he that trogon me,
the same also shall live by me.

verse 59: This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna
and are dead. He that trogon this bread shall live for ever.

The switch from phage (and its variations) to trogon is quite significant. According to
Strong's, these are the possible meanings:

Phago: 1) to eat; 2) to eat (consume) a thing: a) to take food, eat a meal, b) metaph. to
devour, consume

Trogo: 1) to gnaw, crunch, chew raw vegetables or fruits (as nuts, almonds): a) of animals
feeding, b) of men; 2) to eat

So insistent is Our Lord that we must literally eat His flesh, He stops using the former word,
which may be taken either literally or metaphorically (and even then, the metaphorical
meaning is secondary, not primary), and begins to use a word which is quite graphic: gnaw,
crunch, chew. His audience understands Him quite well:

Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard; and who can hear it? But
Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this
scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the
spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are
spirit and life. But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning
who they were that did not believe and who he was that would betray him. And he said:
Therefore did I say to you that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father.
After this, many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him.

Many Protestant authors, desperate to dodge the plain and clear meaning of Our Lord's words,
have clung to this set of verses as their last hope for escaping the Eucharist. Suffice it to say
that if the Jews understood Our Lord to be speaking literally (and they did, as is clear from vs.
53), and if their understanding or misunderstanding is a matter of life or death (and it is, as is
clear from vs. 54), then the Protestant has made Our Lord into a spiritual murderer of the
worst kind. Why? Because the Jews and even some of His disciples "went back and walked no
more with him." They left Him and sealed their own eternal damnation, all because of a
misunderstanding, which - if it was a misunderstanding - Our Lord was morally obliged to
correct.

Obviously, they did not misunderstand Him. They understood perfectly well, they just refused
to accept His teaching. What does Our Lord mean, then, when He asks them what they would
think if they saw the Son of Man ascend into heaven? And what does He mean by saying that
the "flesh profiteth nothing," that "the words I have spoken to you are spirit and life?" We
must keep in mind that the phrase, "the flesh profiteth nothing" cannot be referring to His own
flesh, or else this would cancel out His reference to the Crucifixion earlier: "the bread that I will
give is my flesh, for the life of the world." His meaning here is the same as that of St. Paul:

But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God. For it is
foolishness to him: and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined. But the
spiritual man judgeth all things: and he himself is judged of no man. (1 Cor. 2:14-15)

The words which Our Lord speaks here are difficult for the natural, fleshly mind to
comprehend, or to accept. The disciples say that "this saying is hard, and who can hear it?"
Our Lord tells them, in so many words, that their human understanding alone will not allow
them to accept His teaching - they need the enlightenment of the Spirit, which will be given
when "the Son of man [ascends] up where he was before."

Note the response of the Twelve. Contrary to what we may think at first reading, their
response (given, as usual, through the mouth of St. Peter) is not a confession that they have
understood everything He has said!

Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to
whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known
that thou art the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus answered them: Have not I chosen you twelve?
And one of you is a devil. Now he meant Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon: for this same was
about to betray him, whereas he was one of the twelve.

The sense of St. Peter's response is almost one of confusion, yet confusion that is subordinate
to faith. He does not understand yet, any more than the others, how Our Lord expects them to
eat His flesh and drink His blood - although certainly this became quite clear to them when He
held bread in His hands and said, "eat - this is my body." But even though he does not
understand, He is willing to follow Our Lord anyway, because he does know one thing for
certain: "Thou hast the words of eternal life."

The chapter ends with the mention of Judas' betrayal, and the key words "one of you is a
devil." This same collection of ideas is found in St. John's account of the Last Supper, where
Judas is sent out from the Upper Room to carry out his diabolical plan of betrayal, and where
St. John notes that "Satan entered into him." These final two details in chapter 6 give us
another indication that St. John intends us to read this chapter with the Passover/Upper Room
as our context.

Jacob Michael
© 2003-2006 LumenGentleman Apologetics