6:35 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to
me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be
thirsty.
6:41 Then the Jews began to complain about him because he said, "I
am the bread that came down from heaven."
6:42 They were saying, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose
father and mother we know? How can he now say, 'I have come down
from heaven'?"
6:43 Jesus answered them, "Do not complain among yourselves.
6:44 No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me;
and I will raise that person up on the last day.
6:45 It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by
God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to
me.
6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from
God; he has seen the Father.
6:47 Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life.
6:48 I am the bread of life.
6:49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.
6:50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may
eat of it and not die.
6:51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats
of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for
the life of the world is my flesh."
Comments:
I want to talk about the transforming aspect of the Eucharist this
weekend.....anyone have a good story to share of how Christ's Body
changed people. Thanks for your input. priest in Iowa
Priest in Iowa,
Someone, maybe one of our chaplain colleagues, shared a story some
months back about people in either POW or concentration camps who
would hold back a bit of the stale crusts they received in order to
celebrate the Sacrament together in the barracks. I don't remember
the details, or when it was shared, but that might be something you
could use. However, I get the feeling you're looking for something a
little different.
Michelle
Dear friends,
I have a question. Verse 44 says, "No one can come to me unless
drawn (literally dragged) by the Father who sent me." This is a very
different picture than John 3:16 where most evangelical churches say
belief is open to everyone. This verse brings in divine election
which is a subject that I have trouble understanding. One commentary
resolves the problem by saying divine initiative supports rather
than suppresses human initiative. Another commentator says he can't
explain it [election] at all. He just knows people have a choice;
believe or not.
The problem with election is for me more a human problem than a God
problem. Those I have run across who bleived in some form of divine
election of individuals were much to proud that they were the ones
elected. Their pride betrayed their attitude towards the rest of us
poor sinners who obviously weren't dragged by God.
If someone has a handle on this and could help me out I would
appreciate it. Right now I feel like I am grabbing directly ahold of
the pot which is hot.
Grace and peace, Mike in NC.
Mike in NC,
I don't claim to have a handle on this, but I have heard a story
from another pastor who had a member in his congregation who was
convinced that she was NOT among the elect. She believed God had not
chosen her, or dragged her, or called her, or anything. Yet, she
faithfully served on church committees, assisted the poor, visited
the ill, and did generally everything we wish those who are certain
of their own "election" would do as well.
Michelle
It's not so much a limiter that we are drawn by God, but a statement
of reality that it is God's work of salvation and not our own. There
is not a limit on who is drawn or how. But they are drawn by God.
Intern in NE
Mike in NC, I'm glad you brought up this election prolem. I remember
hearing Edwina Gateley (English nun- she wrote "I Heard a Seed
Growing), say that an image of God that really worked for her came
from Meister Ekhardt - God as a divine magnet and all created beings
as little pieces of iron, being dragged into God's magnetic field. I
like this image in combination with something the author of
Ephesians said in a lection from a couple of weeks ago (1:9b -10):
according to his good pleasure that he set forth in Christ, as a
plan for the fullness of time, to gather up ALL things in him,
things in heaven and things on earth. The emphais here is on the
fullness of time and the gathering (or perhaps dragging) of ALL
things. Perhps election is a timebound experience, not an eternal
one, because in the end All will be one in Christ.
It's not a seamless argument, I know, but it helps me with the
thorny problem of election.
Later in this very reading Jesus says, "And they shall ALL be taught
by God ...Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes
to me." It sounds radically inclusive to me? What do you all think?
Martha in Germany
Dear Friends,
Please keep all the thoughts coming about this election issue. I am
really struggling with this. In my days of dealing with this I have
found people who believe in all these "schools of thought" on the
subject:
ALL are drawn. ALL are drawn some believe. All are drawn some won't
believe. A group is elect and each individual is specified. A group
is elect but the individuals are not specified. The elect know they
are elect. The elect do not know they are elect. The non-elect may
think they are not elect. The non-elect may be elect.
In response to "how can this doctrine be" those that believe it say
its is God's thing and we have no right to even question the matter.
(See www.rca.org in the Canons of Dort). Of course they are the
elect speaking.
Days like this I wonder why I am not back in the world on an
assembly line somewhere! I could avoid the issue all together by
choosing another text but that is the easy way out. So please keep
helping me.
Grace and peace, Mike in NC.
I am interested in the illustration that Michelle was looking for in
the third entry. The one where the soldiers saved bread crust for
communion? Anyone tracking that one down? Kyle in TX
This text is so hard. I think the election problem is not a problem
if we see Christians as chosen, not to be 'saved', but chosen to do
the work of the Kingdom. Then there is no reason to be boastful
about it.
We assume the exclusionary aspect of the texts i.e. when we read
"Whoever eats of this bread will live forever" we assume (maybe even
more strongly) that it also means "Whoever does NOT eat of this
bread will NOT live forever." We turn a promise to those chosen into
a threat to those not chosen which I don't think is warrented. j in
tx
This week's lectionary kinda sucks, because the gospel lesson is
pretty much the same as last week. Kind of hard to do 2 sermons on
the "bread of life" Too bad we can't change the RCL.
Not that I wish to challange your ability to feel as you choose. But
1. To think that this weeks text is "the same" as last week is short
sighted, 2. that you could ever run out of directions to deliever
God's word as related to "the bread of life", and three, if you
don't like it, exert your authority as a leader of the church, duly
called by God and your community, to preach what you think the need
to hear.
To those struggling with the Election,
I think that theologian Karl Barth might be a good one to turn to at
this point. Thougt it has been a while since my seminary days with
Barth, I recall that in his exhaustive doctrine of election he
actually said that Jesus was not elected as the Elect, but was
elected as the Reprobate, i.e. the One who came for those who were
not selected as the Elected, but for those who needed an advocate,
the "reprobates." In a way, one could read Barth's explanation as
Universal salvation...which, in my heart teaches us that all of us
are called, all of us are "accepted" as Tillich put it, and all of
us are "adopted" as Paul the Apostle said, into Christ. Who are we
to say who is or who is not elected, the good news is that we are
all called, that we are all ultimately welcomed "home." We are all
prodical children.
BB in IL
I am going to tie this lection to the story of Adam and Eve. They/we
fell because we prefer to "chew on the apple" (decide for ourselves
what is good or not, apart from God; i.e., those who complain about
Jesus) rather than feed on the Bread of Life. Putting ourselves in
God's place (as the arbiters of good and evil) is the way of sin and
death; Jesus putting himself in our place (on the cross) leads to
eternal life.
OLAS
Why is it so hard for us to recognize the divine in our midst?
Christ just fed these people and they searched for him until they
found him. They wanted more from him even knowing who he was. Yet
when he revealed who he truly was, they don't want to accept it.
We are drawn by God throughout our lives by prevenient grace and yet
when God reveals himself to us, we want no part of it.
If the crowds recognized who Jesus was, think about the
responsibility that would come with that profession.
Yet the disciples made the profession and their lives were never the
same.
Christ is the bread of life and through him, God revealed the divine
to us. Are we willing to risk openess to God's will or will we cling
to what we are comfortable with, the bread from Moses.
Moses fed bread that would bring back hunger. It was a temporary fix
for a bad situation. Yet even in remembering this act, the crowds
give tribute to the man (Moses) and not to God.
The crowds were looking for the messiah, but they really were not
willing to accept the messiah.
We say we want to know the will of God, but what most people really
want is to know what God has to offer them.
So..., why is it so hard to recognize the divine in our midst?, and
yet as John writes in the prologue, to those that recognized him, he
agve power to become children of God!
Grace upon Grace, Michael in Texas
I am coupling this one with OT Passaage and Borrowing some of an
idea from pastor on that board Trading Spaces... Geniveive and Hildi
as your Trading Spaces designers, I'd worry! Do you want Straw and
Moss on your walls? Or Vern and his Fen shwai(Spelling on that one)
personally I like Frank. He does good work. Now, Doug, does wierd
stuff...Page has to keep then all in line... Amy Winn is a better
Carpenter than Ty. ( IMHO) Would you volunter to work in someone
else's space to have youre done too? Then God gave me the idea to
"Let's make a Deal" have two of the Guys come forward-victims, er
volunteers... I have a gift cerificate for Bob Evans Restaurant, hey
you could take the wife out after Church right... or do you want to
Trade for what is in the box??? Could be better than Gift
Certificate... but could be a ZONK! Then tie it with this Gospel ,
Christ, Bread of Life, traded spaces, places...on the cross...
and tie in with David and Absolam...loosing a child...probably some
in our congregations have or came close? (serious Moment)
Whether David really meant he'd rather trade places...or a grief
statement... doesnt matter...GOD did IT! He traded Places, spaces...
and who got best deal??? WE DID Christ Got the Ultimate ZONK like
Monty hall said...We got the Ultimate Prize Eternal Life,
forgiveness, redemption...
Feel free to 'borrow' the make a deal idea...
Clerically Blonde in West Ohio (pink sermon notes in hand)
Good morning, I am a regular reader who posts periodically. I am
finding myself wrestling this morning with the person or persons who
continue to make negative comments, last week about Eric, this week
about RCL's comment about this weeks gospel being similar to last
week. I realize that we all become tired and struggle at times. We
also have a rite to challenge one another. My simple request is that
if you are going to that be mature enough to sign your posting. I
know that we all forget to sign at times but it appears that this
may be a pattern for some people.
PastorC
Dear friends,
Thanks for your postings regarding my question on election. They
have been helpful. I have resolved the issue in my own mind by a
simple word study. The verb to drag here (a very powerful picture in
my mind) is the same verb used in John 12:32 where Christ said if he
were lifted up he would draw (drag) ALL men (women too) to him. I am
throwing myself upon the idea of prevenient grace.
In the end that will only be a small part of the sermon. I am
choosing to draw (drag) the attention of the listeners to the
complaining of the Jews. Complaining does little and causes us to
miss a lot including some chances to feast on the bread.
Grace and peace, Mike in NC.
I'm with Pastor C. This anonymous sniping is exactly the kind of
behavior that causes so much trouble in our churches. Disagree,
friend, but have the courage to sign your work. Pastor Rick in Fl
I want to thank j in tx for his7her words agbout turning promise
into threat. That really got me rolling in a new direction for this
Sunday's sermon. Martha in Germany
RCL, check out next week's lesson from John - more food, or bread,
for thought : ) Martha in Germany
"Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we
know?
This is certainly a two level question. From the totally human side,
they see Jesus as the human born to people they know thus declaring
his humanity but also saying "Hey! Let's get real here, we know his
parents, so how can this guy be who he claims." On the other level,
they fail to remember their history and the prophetic voices. They
forget to see both the human and the Spiritual. Nancy-Wi
This is for Rev. Andy who wanted a joke alluding to a bishop. This
may not be what he wanted, though. It was taken from the internet.
": 4 ladies are having coffee together, discussing how important
their children are. The first one tells her friends, “My son is a
priest. When he walks into a room, everyone calls him ‘Father’.” The
second woman chirps, “Well, my son is a bishop. Whenever he walks
into a room, people say, ‘, ‘Your Grace’.” The third woman says
smugly, “Well, not to put you down, but my son is a cardinal.
Whenever he walks into a room, people say ‘Your Eminence’. The
fourth woman sips her coffee in silence. The first three women giver
her this subtle “Well...?” look. She replies, “My son is a gorgeous,
2-meter tall, hard-bodied male stripper. Whenever he walks into a
room, people say, “My God!...”
Lay Cosmas in Brussels.
Any ideas for back-to-school tie-ins? It's that time again 'round
these parts.
Living Bread - school lunches? hahahahah
Sally
Hi all.
Mike in NC, I hope it's not too late for another suggestion re: "the
elect."
If there is a Lutheran pastor/parish in the area, ask to borrow The
Book of Concord (the Lutheran Confessional documents), and check out
item XI in The Formula of Concord (page 616 in my version). It
offers a quite different, yet (IMHO!) refreshing, perspective on
this difficult issue.
May God bless you (and all of us!) as you (and we) struggle!
Rick in Canada, eh?
“I am the bread of life,” Jesus says. His statement is a tenet of
our faith, a theological statement meant to lay claim to our utter
dependence on the person of Christ, connecting us to God, bringing
us into the fullness of life and out of the finality of death. The
Bread of Life, it is a staple of our existence as people of faith, a
necessity to which we could not hope to live without. As we take in
this Bread, this spirit, we enter a metaphor suggesting that we have
a need to literally consume Jesus, ingesting his essence, allowing
his being to become our own. In this intensely sensuous act, we
become more than we were before, we enter into the dance of
abundance, allowing the Christ to become the energy of our life, the
very core of our motivation, and the heartbeat of how we interpret
the world. We are completely enmeshed in the Bread.
As we consume and are consumed by the Bread, many in our world
struggle for bread. Each and every day, they are never sure there
will be bread. Even here in our own communities, brothers and
sisters of the Bread of Life, are not sure that they will have
enough of the bread that sustains our physical journey. Each and
every day, many of our elderly make decisions – bread or medicine.
Each and every day, thousands of our children are not assured of
having enough bread so that they might healthily participate in
school. Each and every day, many mothers and fathers working for
less than livable wages bear the pain of not enough bread for their
children. Each and every day this is the reality of our world, the
reality of our nation, the reality of the realm of the people of
faith.
And I wonder you know. I wonder why we, who claim the Bread of Life,
sometimes don’t seem terribly concerned about those who struggle for
the bread of life. I wonder why we who are full often act as if we
bear no responsibility for those who are immersed in that struggle,
particularly when Jesus was so specific on how he felt about those
who did not have enough bread. He merely claimed that he was so
closely aligned with their plight that as we reach out to them, it
is him whom we touch. He simply stated that in some remarkable and
dramatic fashion, our acceptance or rejection of him is somehow tied
to our acceptance or rejection of them. I often wish that Jesus had
said something about the worthy poor and the unworthy poor – who to
be concerned about and for whom we should not to give a second
thought. I could then be comfortable when I fail to properly
respond. I could then smugly stand behind the question of
worthiness. But he never does. He simply says that the poor are
blessed, that he has come as their good news, that the hungry are to
fed, and that in some miraculous manner, when we offer the bread of
life, we are connecting with the Bread of Life.
I would submit that the level of our concern for those who have no
bread of life, is probably a pretty good litmus test for our
receptiveness to the one who offers the Bread of Life. If we offer
no bread, perhaps it is because we have no Bread. Will we who
embrace life after death also be willing to embrace life before
death?
"I am the bread of life," he says. On earth as it is in heaven.
Shalom,
Nail-Bender in NC
Hi all (again!).
I would like to repeat a previous entry from "j in tx."
"I think the election problem is not a problem if we see Christians
as chosen, not to be 'saved', but chosen to do the work of the
Kingdom."
This is wonderful! And SO important. It changes the nature of the
whole discussion. The Church is no longer a private club for the
sake of its members, it's a family drawn together for the sake of
others. It's no longer a gathering of "the saved," but a community
of servants. It's no longer "us versus them," it's "us FOR them."
Etc.
This also makes "being saved" a much more immediate, and much more
relevant, encounter. Being saved isn't "about me," it's about
ministry. It's not "going to heaven when we die," it's responding to
the Call of God in the here and now of life. It's not about having
the answers, it's about trusting the promise. It's not about
imposing certainties, it's about embracing the ambiguities.
I know this will spoil the flow, but I have to bring all these nice
ideas into the realm of the concrete. Think this has anything to say
to the discussion happening around the decision made by the
Episcopal Church re: the Ordination to episcopal ministry of the
Rev. Gene Robinson? Or the struggle that my church body (the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada) is going through over how we
address homosexual persons? You bet it does!
Well... That got MY juices going! Thanks for listening!
Rick in Canada, eh?
One more thought on election: The point of election is really to put
(us?) in our place. Since election is not based on our worthiness or
any effort on our part, it is not something to be PROUD of, just
something to be GRATEFUL for, not something to exclude others, but
something to make us humble and thankful.
I'm looking for more thoughts on "Bread of Life." Thanks,
Nail-Bender, for your input.
DGinNYC
Just a thought from a conversation I had with a friend many years
ago regarding this very passage: When I go without eating in the
morning, I can get very cranky. Little things make me very upset,
because I haven't eaten and it affects my mood. If I've eaten, my
whole outlook changes. The same is true about daily prayer and
Scripture reading. When I partake of the Bread of Life, those little
things that bothered me suddenly seem of no consequence. When I am
nourished by the bread and the living water, I am better equipped to
deal with whatever life deals out to me.
Will in NJ
Hi DG in NYC. I am preaching on "bread" this week. I am picking up
the two references to "manna" in Jn 6: 35-31. I am replacing the OT
RCL readings with the manna texts and my theme is "we are never
satisfied." The people of God wandering in the desert continued to
complain even though God sends them miracles; the crowd followed
Jesus asking for more signs--hungry again for bread and miracles as
proof. I am connecting the OT and John texts by suggesting in the
exegesis that the crowd in their question, "How are we to do the
works of God?" is asking Jesus which of the laws are the most
critical. Jesus points beyond the Law to himself. The crowd wants a
sign--at least equal to Moses' miracle of manna in the wilderness.
(After all, Jesus' miracle fed 5,000 for a day; Moses' miracle fed
an entire nation for 40 years.) And, who can blame them -- he is
asking them to change their understanding of how to be a faithful
people! (Sorry, I still have to check my source for this exegesis.)
But Jesus does not repeat the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He
knows that in the long run it wouldn't satisfy them. He points to
belief in him as the bread of life which never perishes. The daily
miracle of manna and the miracle of the loaves and fishes satisfied
the crowds only temporarily. He offers a qualitatively different
kind of sustenance. I am looking for a good story to conclude;
perhaps one that will make the point that the "bread of life"
nourishes the soul with God-given insight that will bring bread to
the hungry of the world. Not band-aid solutions that offer one-time
only meals; but long-term solutions to systemic problems. (I want to
link the spiritual with the worldly realms.) I begin the sermon with
a Japanese folktale that Richard Fairchild used to begin last
Sunday's sermon--however, my sermon goes in a very different
direction. I also found an Afghani folktale called the King's Loaves
that I will paste below. If you would like a copy of my sermon, let
me know. Roberta
THE KING'S LOAVES
Once there were two beggars who went daily to the palace to beg at
the king's gate. Every day the king gave each of them a loaf of
bread. One of the beggars would always thank the king for his
generosity. But the other thanked God for giving the king sufficient
wealth to give charity.
The second beggar's words always hurt the king. So the king decided
to teach him a lesson. The king ordered his baker to bake two
identical loaves, but in one he had him conceal precious jewels.
Then he instructed the baker to give the loaf with the hidden jewels
to the beggar who always thanked the king for his charity.
The next day the baker went to the king's gate and handed the two
loaves to the beggars. He took great care not to confuse the two,
for he feared the king's wrath if he should make a mistake.
When the beggar with the special loaf felt how heavy and hard it
was, he concluded that it was poorly made and asked the other beggar
to exchange loaves with him. The second beggar, always eager to help
a friend, agreed. Then they went their separate ways.
When the second man bit into the loaf, he discovered that it was
filled with jewels. He thanked God for his good fortune, grateful
that he would no longer have to beg for his bread.
The next morning the king was surprised to find only the first
beggar at the palace gate. He had the baker brought before him and
asked him, "Did you mix up the two loaves I had you bake?"
"No, your majesty," answered the baker. "I did exactly as you
commanded."
Then king turned to the beggar and asked, "What did you do with the
loaf you received yesterday?"
The man replied, "It was hard and poorly baked, so I gave it to my
friend in exchange for his."
Then the king understood that all his riches had indeed come from
God, and that only the Holy One can make a poor man rich and a rich
man poor. Not even a king can change the will of heaven.
Hi DG in NYC. I am preaching on "bread" this week. I am picking up
the two references to "manna" in Jn 6: 35-31. I am replacing the OT
RCL readings with the manna texts and my theme is "we are never
satisfied." The people of God wandering in the desert continued to
complain even though God sends them miracles; the crowd followed
Jesus asking for more signs--hungry again for bread and miracles as
proof. I am connecting the OT and John texts by suggesting in the
exegesis that the crowd in their question, "How are we to do the
works of God?" is asking Jesus which of the laws are the most
critical. Jesus points beyond the Law to himself. The crowd wants a
sign--at least equal to Moses' miracle of manna in the wilderness.
(After all, Jesus' miracle fed 5,000 for a day; Moses' miracle fed
an entire nation for 40 years.) And, who can blame them -- he is
asking them to change their understanding of how to be a faithful
people! (Sorry, I still have to check my source for this exegesis.)
But Jesus does not repeat the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He
knows that in the long run it wouldn't satisfy them. He points to
belief in him as the bread of life which never perishes. The daily
miracle of manna and the miracle of the loaves and fishes satisfied
the crowds only temporarily. He offers a qualitatively different
kind of sustenance. I am looking for a good story to conclude;
perhaps one that will make the point that the "bread of life"
nourishes the soul with God-given insight that will bring bread to
the hungry of the world. Not band-aid solutions that offer one-time
only meals; but long-term solutions to systemic problems. (I want to
link the spiritual with the worldly realms.) I begin the sermon with
a Japanese folktale that Richard Fairchild used to begin last
Sunday's sermon--however, my sermon goes in a very different
direction. I also found an Afghani folktale called the King's Loaves
that I will paste below. If you would like a copy of my sermon, let
me know. Roberta
THE KING'S LOAVES
Once there were two beggars who went daily to the palace to beg at
the king's gate. Every day the king gave each of them a loaf of
bread. One of the beggars would always thank the king for his
generosity. But the other thanked God for giving the king sufficient
wealth to give charity.
The second beggar's words always hurt the king. So the king decided
to teach him a lesson. The king ordered his baker to bake two
identical loaves, but in one he had him conceal precious jewels.
Then he instructed the baker to give the loaf with the hidden jewels
to the beggar who always thanked the king for his charity.
The next day the baker went to the king's gate and handed the two
loaves to the beggars. He took great care not to confuse the two,
for he feared the king's wrath if he should make a mistake.
When the beggar with the special loaf felt how heavy and hard it
was, he concluded that it was poorly made and asked the other beggar
to exchange loaves with him. The second beggar, always eager to help
a friend, agreed. Then they went their separate ways.
When the second man bit into the loaf, he discovered that it was
filled with jewels. He thanked God for his good fortune, grateful
that he would no longer have to beg for his bread.
The next morning the king was surprised to find only the first
beggar at the palace gate. He had the baker brought before him and
asked him, "Did you mix up the two loaves I had you bake?"
"No, your majesty," answered the baker. "I did exactly as you
commanded."
Then king turned to the beggar and asked, "What did you do with the
loaf you received yesterday?"
The man replied, "It was hard and poorly baked, so I gave it to my
friend in exchange for his."
Then the king understood that all his riches had indeed come from
God, and that only the Holy One can make a poor man rich and a rich
man poor. Not even a king can change the will of heaven.
Anybody remember the concentration camp story? Nancy-Wi
Nancy: No, but I wish I had it! I am reading William Willimon's
"Sunday Dinner" and chose to go with the bread of life for four
Sundays in a row, using the John text. So far, my congregation has
enjoyed (or, at least it seems) celebrating Communion every Sunday.
I have to admit, though, I am struggling a little bit with this
text. Roberta: Your approach seems to fit with some of what I have
been reading. Would you mind forwarding your message to PastorBuzz@nxs.net
? I really like the King story! Blessings, buzz
To Roberta and whoever else might find the comparison helpful -- I
preached on the bread and the always-hungry crowd last week. I
compared them to my 7 year-old grandson who 10 minutes after
finishing a big supper of two hamburgers (with "the works"), 1 and
1/2 ears of sweet corn and a glass of chocolate milk, was standing
in front of the open refrigerator door looking for something else to
eat!! The boy is constantly grazing for food! Without Jesus, we too,
do a lot of kinda spiritual grazing, but in this passage Jesus
assures us that, "Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and
whoever believes in me will never be thirsty." (verse 35) Good news!
Kathy in SC
Hi, friends:
Some great comments so far this week. I haven't said anything yet
because I'm in Southern California meeting with attorneys and
accountants trying to straighten out the financial affairs of my
widowed dad (83 years old and suffering with emphysema and
rheumatoid arthritis) and my batchelor uncle (81 years old and
suffering with glaucoma, osteroporosis, and severe arthritis). My
dad has sold his home and is moving to a bungalow on my sister's
property in the Antelope Valley. My uncle is in an assisted care
facility, but might end up moving to OH to live with or near my wife
and me. And I will be managing the financial estates of both men.
So ... I've been busy. I return to OH on Friday and will spend all
day Saturday working on my sermon.
In the meantime, if you click on "Sermon Review" in the left window
under 3 August, and then scroll down in the resulting right window
... you'll find my sermon from last week in which my theme was "You
are what you eat" == I talked about the people of God being
Eucharist for the world as the Body of Christ blessed, broken,
distributed and shared. If you are preaching on the transformative
power of the Eucharist, there may be something there you can use.
Blessings, Eric in OH
Thanks Kathy in SC. Buzz, I'm having major computer problems
(started last night). I send you my sermon if I can get it finished
and sent from this computer. Roberta
This is for Mike in NC and all those struggling with the issue of
"election" expressed in verse 44 "No one can come to me unless drawn
(or dragged as Mike suggests)by the Father who sent me": I think
most of us get confused about who is doing the election. Instead of
celebrating the fact that God elects us, we get hung up on our human
response to election. For some folks that gets translated into "I am
special because I was elected and I chose to be a holy person."
(Sounds like dressed up works righteousness to me.) The truth is
election is about God and God's action. GOD HAS ELECTED ALL HUMANITY
FOR ALL TIME. My understanding is that there is nothing we can do
about the fact that God is always, constantly, repetively trying to
reach each and every one of us, each and every day of our lives.
Sure we have a choice to accept, respond and do ministry as a result
of that grace, but our response or lack of doesn't say a thing about
our initial election, our initially being chosen for love by our
God. Isn't this election and Jesus' willingness to put flesh on and
die for our election the essence of the good news? As a United
Methodist I am reminded of John Wesley's theological gift to the
world--prevenient grace, justification and sanctification. Aren't
these graces different ways God works to elect each of us? I'm also
reminded of the process theology thought that God works constantly
"to lure" us into loving relationship with God. Frankly, it doesn't
make a bit of difference to me if God lures or drags or draws me
into love, I just give thanks that God never gives up on me or
anyone else in this world either.
Thanks for reading! Diana at the lakes
There is always a cost to election; a cost for taking in Bread … it
is eternal life, life in the fullest sense, life which always must
be lived beyond oneself. In consuming His flesh, we become the
essence of Bread and offer the same to the other, like him, always
intentionally opening ourselves beyond the boundaries, always
seeking to meet the stranger, the widow, the outcast, and the
prisoner. Eternal life, life in the fullest, always ever expands to
include those who would be drunkards and gluttons. Eternal life,
life in the fullest, always goes to the edges.
And because the call is always to the edges, that place where we
enter the deepest brokenness, we must be first brought to a point of
exclusivity, a sense of being “set-aside” for a purpose, an
acknowledgement where we might understand our own specialness of
being, where we might experience the power of consuming the Bread.
Yet, there is only one reason that those who eat the Bread are
brought to this point of exclusivity: So that they might be fully
inclusive, opening their arms fully to all who would come, entering
and mourning the brokenness of the world so that all might know
life, dieing to self so that others might live.
This is what it means to consume the Bread of Life … to live forever
… to live in this messianic age, in the here and now, in this moment
of Kingdom where time is measured not by ticks of a clock but by the
obedience of disciples, by the joy of the journey. This is Christ.
This is love.
Shalom,
Nail-Bender in NC
Hi mentioned the article on election in the Formula of Concord. I
have Luther's Works on Disk so it was easy to cut and paste. Hope
this helps
Dave in Pa
Affirmative Pure and True Doctrine concerning this Article 2 1. To
start with, the distinction between the foreknowledge and the
eternal election of God is to be diligently noted.(tr-833) 3 2.
God’s foreknowledge in nothing else than that God knows all things
before they happen, as it is written, “?There is a God in heaven who
reveals mysteries, and he has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what
will be in the latter days?” (?Daniel 2:28?). 4 3. This
foreknowledge extends alike over good people and evil people. But it
is not a cause of evil or of sin which compels anyone to do
something wrong; the original source of this is the devil and man’s
wicked and perverse will. Neither is it the cause of man’s
perdition; for this man himself is responsible. God’s foreknowledge
merely controls the evil and imposes a limit on its duration, so
that in spite of its intrinsic wickedness it must minister to the
salvation of his elect. 5 4. Predestination or the eternal election
of God, however, is concerned only with the pious children of God in
whom he is well pleased. It is a cause of their salvation, for he
alone brings it about and ordains everything that belongs to it. Our
salvation is so firmly established upon it that the “?gates of Hades
cannot prevail against?” it (?John 10:28?; ?Matt. 16:18?). 6 5. We
are not to investigate this predestination in the secret counsel of
God, but it is to be looked for in his Word, where he has revealed
it. 7 6. The Word of God, however, leads us to Christ, who is “?the
book of life?”?7? in which all who are to be eternally saved are
inscribed and elected, as it is written, “?He chose us in him before
the foundation of the world?” (?Eph. 1:4?). 8 7. This Christ calls
all sinners to himself and promises them refreshment. He earnestly
desires that all men should come to him and let themselves be
helped.?8? To these he offers himself in his Word, and it is his
will that they hear the Word and do not stop their ears or despise
it. In addition he promises the power and operation of the Holy
Spirit and divine assistance for steadfastness and eternal life. 9
8. Therefore we should not judge this election of ours to eternal
life on the basis either of reason or God’s law. This would either
lead us into a reckless, dissolute, Epicurean life, or drive men to
despair and waken dangerous thoughts in their hearts. As long as men
follow their reason, they can hardly escape such reflections as
this: “?If God has elected me to salvation I cannot be damned, do as
I will.?” Or, “?If I am not elected to eternal life, whatever good I
do is of no avail; everything is in vain in that case.?” 10 9. We
must learn about Christ from the Holy Gospel alone, which clearly
testifies that “?God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he
may have mercy upon all?” (?Rom. 11:32?), and that he does not want
anyone to perish (?Ezek. 33:11?; ?18:23?), but that everyone should
repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (?1 Tim. 2:6?; ?1 John
2:2?).(tr-835) 1110. The doctrine of God’s eternal election is
profitable and comforting to the person who concerns himself with
the revealed will of God and observes the order which St. Paul
follows in the Epistle to the Romans. He there directs men first to
repent, to acknowledge their sins, to believe in Christ, and to obey
God, and only then does he speak of the mystery of God’s eternal
election. 12 11. The passage, “?Many are called, but few are
chosen,?”?9? does not mean that God does not desire to save
everyone. The cause of condemnation is that men either do not hear
the Word of God at all but willfully despise it, harden their ears
and their hearts, and thus bar the ordinary way for the Holy Spirit,
so that he cannot work in them; or, if they do hear the Word, they
cast it to the wind and pay no attention to it. The fault does not
lie in God or his election, but in their own wickedness.?1? 13 12.
The Christian is to concern himself with the doctrine of the eternal
election of God only in so far as it is revealed in the Word of God,
which shows us Christ as the “?book of life.?” Through the
proclamation of the Holy Gospel, Christ opens and reveals this book
for us, as it is written, “?Those he predestined, he also
called.?”?2? In Christ we should seek the eternal election of the
Father, who has decreed in his eternal counsel that he would save no
one except those who acknowledge his Son, Christ, and truly believe
on him. The Christian should banish all other opinions since they do
not proceed from God but are inspired by the evil foe in an attempt
to weaken for us or to rob us entirely of the glorious comfort which
this salutary doctrine gives us, namely, that we know that we have
been elected to eternal life out of pure grace in Christ without any
merit of our own, and that no one can pluck us out of his hand. God
assures us of this gracious election not only in mere words, but
also with his oath, and has sealed it with his holy sacraments, of
which we can remind ourselves and with which we can comfort
ourselves in our greatest temptations and thus extinguish the
flaming darts of the devil. 14 13. Furthermore, we are to put forth
every effort to live according to the will of God and “?to confirm
our call,?” as St. Peter says.?3? Especially are we to abide by the
revealed Word which cannot and will not deceive us. 15 14. This
brief exposition of the doctrine of God’s eternal election gives God
his glory entirely and completely, because he out of pure grace
alone, without any merit of ours, saves us “?according to the
purpose?” of his will.?4? Nor will this doctrine ever give anyone
occasion either to despair or to lead a reckless and godless
life.(tr-837)
Tappert, T. G. (2000, c1959). The book of concord : The confessions
of the evangelical Lutheran church (The Formula of Concord: 1, XI,
1-15). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
It disturbs me that an Augsburg Fortress publication called Sundays
and Seasons continues to be plagiarized in the anonymous
contributions at the top of this discussion and in the discussions
of 1 kings and Ephesians. Plagiarism is theft. Please cite your
source and sign you name.
Jim in IA
Does anyone see a significance to vs. 51b "...and the bread that I
will give for the life of the world is my flesh." to "This is my
body which is given for you.(Lk 22:19b)" Here in these words and in
the Eucharist itself should be the answer to all the questions about
election.
Does anyone see a significance to vs. 51b "...and the bread that I
will give for the life of the world is my flesh." to "This is my
body which is given for you.(Lk 22:19b)" Here in these words and in
the Eucharist itself should be the answer to all the questions about
election.
Peter, PA
After posting the above note, I thought that I should explain my
thoughts more clearly. The text from John is not speaking directly
of the Eucharist, how can when it was not instituted until later?
What Christ is feeding us here is the spiritual food through an
earthly element. We are fed the Word which leads us to our faith. In
a sense Christ is feeding us the "Spiritual Supper" (Martin Luther)
Our present celebration of the Eucharist (the Luke text) is a
testament to that true supper from Christ. By our taking in of the
bread and wine we are strengthened in our faith. I see your concerns
about election as legitimate thoughts, but as a firm sacramental
Lutheran, I feel that Christ has already taken of it.
Peter, PA
Judith of Nazareth Thanks for posting the "no jacket required
story". I will be using it. for those looking for hymns yet, in the
Faith We Sing (new UMC) there is a hymn "Taste and see" I am saving
the Kings Bread it very good too. I am wrapping up early so I can
play friday and saturday, may all your words be bread. Nancy-Wi
Nailbender in NC,
You said, "we become the essence of Bread."
This bothers me a little, because to me, essence means the basic
reality once everything else is removed. The "essence" in this sense
would have to be Jesus Christ, not us. It may be a mere question of
semantics, but might it be more clear to say, "we embody the essence
of Bread," or "we become, in essence, Bread"?
I do apologize if this seems terribly picky, but misunderstandings
happen so easily that even little things sometimes become important.
Thank you,
Michelle
