Tradition: Source of the Written Gospels

Years ago, when I was first reading the Epistle of James, a couple of verses in chapter five jumped out at me. James didn’t give any indication that he was quoting Jesus, but I clearly recalled the same words in Christ’s Sermon on the Mount:

Epistle of James	Gospel of Matthew
But above all, my brethren, do not swear either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath, but let your yes be yes and your no be no, that you may not fall under condemnation. (5:12)	Do not swear at all, either by heaven…or by the earth…Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from the Evil One. (5:34-37)
Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have rusted and their rust will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. (5:2-3)	Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal (6:19)

Huh. Why didn’t James identify his source? Over the years, as I dug deeper into James’ epistle, I saw other places where he appeared to use Jesus’ words without any attribution. (Compare James 1:22 and Matthew 7:24; or James 3:12 with Matthew 7:16 and Luke 6:44.) What was going on here?

A couple of things occurred to me. The first was to realize that James, who was martyred in 62 A.D., probably composed his epistle in the late 40s or very early 50s – likely before Paul penned his first epistle and more than a decade before any of the gospels were written. Ironically, if I didn’t have those later gospels with which to compare James, I would never have known James was quoting the Lord! This leads to a second important realization: James wrote at a time when the Gospel existed purely in oral form, in Tradition.

That is extremely important, because Christianity was constituted, not as a religion of the book, but of the Word made flesh – alive and active in the ministry of the apostles. Jesus did not record his moral teaching or parables, nor write a monograph about the significance of his death and resurrection. Nor did he send forth the apostles with a command to write. Rather, his command was to make disciples of all nations, baptizing and teaching them to observe all that He had commanded (Mt 28:18-20).

When the apostles preached, each drew from the Tradition those words and actions of Jesus that best met their individual audiences’ needs. It wasn’t necessary to stop and identify every time they quoted Jesus’ earthly teaching; because when James and the other apostles preached, it was received by the Church as Christ speaking in and through them (Lk 10:16).

Initially, their preaching focused upon Christ’s redemptive sacrifice and resurrection. But those required an explanation, and that was found in what preceded it – Christ’s life, teaching and miracles. Each apostle had his own recollections of Jesus and manner of recounting them, his own personality and theological emphases. ^[1]

We must keep this apostolic preaching in mind when reading the gospels, since the same principles hold true. Sacred Tradition – the deposit of truth entrusted to the apostles – was the source from which the four evangelists drew Christ’s words and actions in the construction of their narratives. Luke, who was not an eyewitness to Christ’s life, began his gospel by stating, “I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning…just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word” (Lk 1:3,2). Even though the four evangelists were inspired, the Spirit did not spare them the effort required of all authors; and that meant digging into the Tradition Christ had entrusted to the Church.

Each gospel bears the mark of its human author. “Of the many elements [the four evangelists had] at hand they reported some, summarized others, and developed still others in accordance with the needs of the various churches.”^[2]  This accounts for many of the so-called contradictions between the four gospels. The sequence, for instance, in which the evangelists narrate Christ’s life differs in some respects. This is not a challenge to a Catholic’s faith in the inerrancy of Scripture. The Church has always understood that the order in which the evangelists recounted Christ’s words and actions were not meant as a rigid assertion of chronology. Catholics are also not shocked to discover subtle differences in the wording of Christ’s sayings. We are used to reading modern historical texts, but the evangelists were inspired to write according to the conventions of their time. There were no audio recorders in the first century, and the apostles were not stenographers. When the sacred writers drew from the Tradition, they sometimes communicated the sense of Jesus’ words instead of exact quotations:

James 3:12	Matthew 7:16	Luke 6:44
Can a fig tree, my brethren, yield olives, or a grapevine figs?	You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles?	…for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thorns, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush.

The meaning asserted by each of the inspired authors is the same, even if the phrasing differs. Another example: When Jesus sends out the Twelve in Matthew 10:9-10, he tells them to take nothing for the journey, “no gold, nor silver, nor copper in your belts, no bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor a staff; for the laborer deserves his food;” and yet in Mark 6:8-11 we read, “[Jesus] charged them to take nothing for their journey except a staff; no bread, no bag, no money in their belt.” Whether Jesus said to take a staff or not, the memory drawn from the Tradition, and positively asserted by both inspired authors, was that Christ instructed the Twelve to look to God to supply their material needs. There is no true contradiction.

It’s funny how a couple of verses in James can lead to such heady subjects as inspiration and inerrancy and how Scripture is dependent upon Tradition – not just to be correctly interpreted, but to be written! That’s the way it was with God’s Revelation, though; it is all connected.

---

[1] Augustin Bea, The Study of the Synoptic Gospels: New Approaches and Outlooks (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 37.

[2] Pontifical Biblical Commission, The Historicity of the Gospels (1964), http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pbcgospl.htm

Jesus said, "Peace be with you!" (Easter night & Divine Mercy Sunday)

When I pray the Rosary during this first week of Easter, I can never get past the first mystery - Jesus' Resurrection.  Laying in bed and praying last night, I was seized by Jesus' words when He appeared to the disciples that first evening, "Peace be with you!" (Lk.24:36; Jn.20:19).

They are exquisite.  At the end of the day, my head is often buzzing with the things I didn't get done - the things hanging over it that need to be accomplished tomorrow.  And these words of Jesus reminded me that right then, in that moment, the Lord wanted me to let go and rest.  It was time to enjoy Him and then drift off to sleep, "do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own" (Mt. 6:34).

But there was/is a much deeper meaning to Jesus' "Peace be with you!"  The Lord means that we are at peace with God.  Our sins?  On the Cross, He offered the Father all of the love and obedience our sins denied Him.  And now, in Jesus, we are at peace with God.  Our shame has been redeemed.  We can rest in the arms of a Father Who loves us, free of embarrassment over our pasts.  That is the gift that Baptism gave us - peace with God, the peace of children.  

And if we have sinned greatly after Baptism?  The Sacrament of Reconciliation restores that peace.  Listen to Jesus' very next words to the Apostles, "Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.’  And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.  If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven’” (Jn. 20:21-23).

We will hear those verses from John's Gospel again this Sunday, on what the Church calls Divine Mercy Sunday (more on that here). If you need to, visit the Sacrament of Reconciliation this weekend and celebrate Christ's mercy, the true and lasting source of peace.

New Year's Bible Study?

I bet there are some folks out there who made a resolution to do more Bible study in 2017. Because I'm sure that most of you reading this have Facebook accounts, I wanted to let you know about an online Bible study group beginning this Sunday, January 9th. I was notified about the group a couple of weeks back: A 10-week study making use of my The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Seven Core Beliefs of Catholics to delve into this beautifully written, theologically dense book of the New Testament. You can learn more about the study and join right here. I'm really looking forward to reading participants thoughts and offering my two cents now and then. Hope you will consider joining!

A Thought from the Road to Emmaus

I have shared before how the story of Jesus and the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is one of my favorites. It overflows with meaning. After years of meditating upon it, I am still coming to new realizations.

This morning, and I don't know what triggered it, I was struck by the way that the disciples' "eyes were kept from recognizing Him" as Jesus, "beginning with Moses and all the prophets, interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself" (Lk. 24:16, 27). It is a reminder to us of the innumerable times that the Lord addresses us through the members of His Body. We do not register that it is the Lord addressing us; but it is. Let us rejoice anew at the promise Jesus made to His apostles and disciples, "He who hears you hears me" (Lk. 10:16; Mt. 10:4), because He continues to make good on it today through their successors!

Jesus, the Great "Amen"? (A Summation of Our Faith)

James Tissot, Le Pater Noster

In the Book of Revelation, Jesus described himself to the church in Laodicea as, "the Amen, the faithful and true witness" (Rev. 3:14). We use "Amen" at the end of our prayers - when being led in prayer by another to say, "I agree, so be it," or when praying by ourselves to say "let it be done." We might also use it to express agreement with what someone has said.

Jesus used the word "Amen" much differently, though - not at the end of his statements, but at the beginning. In our modern English translations we often find it rendered, "Truly, I say to you...," or when Jesus used a double-amen, "Truly, truly, I say to you..." There are fifty such occurrences in the four gospels, twenty five in the Gospel of John alone. (Fr. Felix Just, S.J., has a wonderful summary.) Fr. Roch Kereszty, O Cist., was the first to bring this to my attention, and I want to quote from him here:

...the "Amen" of Jesus has a "hidden prehistory;" it is the final act of a dialogue between the Father and Jesus. The word of Jesus is of divine authority because it comes from the Father. Yet the Father's divine word is Jesus' own, not that of an "Outsider" as in the case of a prophetic message. Here we have a first hint of Jesus' personal identity: his absolute authority is based on his absolute dependence on his Father. (Jesus Christ: Fundamentals of Christology, 110-11.)

Ultimately, Jesus' "Amen" is a revelation of the Trinity and of the mystery of the Incarnation. Jesus is the one Who, from all eternity, streams forth from the Father. All that the Father is, He gives; all that the Son is, He receives. As the Letter to the Hebrews tells us, Jesus is "the refulgence of [the Father's] glory, the very imprint of his being" (Heb. 1;3); or, as Colossians says, He is "the image of the invisible God" (Col. 1:15). When the Son became incarnate, He revealed the Father in and through His humanity. His words and actions were those of the divine Son, the perfect image, perfect Word, of the Father (Jn. 1:1; Mt. 11:27). Jesus is the Great Amen, the faithful witness to all that the Father is and does (Jn. 5:19; Rev. 3:14) - praise God!

Alright, now lets look at something St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians: "all the promises of God find their Yes in [Christ]. That is why we utter the Amen through him, to the glory of God" (2 Cor. 1:20).  What beauty - what an amazing summation of the Gospel:  Through grace, through our union with the Incarnate Son, we say "Amen" to all that the Father has said. We say "yes," "let it be so," to God's vision of man and woman, His vision of sexuality, of the family, of community, and of the world. Like Jesus, we receive all we are from the Father and offer ourselves completely back to him in loving gratitude. We live the Apostle Paul's call to offer our "bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God," recognizing that this is authentic "spiritual worship" (Rom. 12:1). In Christ, in His Eucharist, we reach the apex of prayer:

Through him, and with him, and in him, O God, almighty Father, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honor is yours, forever and ever.  Amen.

Why has this blog been so dead?

Well, I have been writing; it's just that none of it has made it onto my blog. I recently finished a book manuscript for Angelico Press, tentatively titled The Letter to the Hebrews and the Seven Core Beliefs of Catholics. I am proud to say that it is the "sibling" of a new book by my good friend Kevin Vost, The Porch & The Cross: Ancient Stoic Wisdom for Modern Christians.  Each can be read on its own; but together they seek to show how revelation and philosophy, faith and reason, prepared the world - Jew and Gentile - for Christ's appearance. I am honored to say that both books have been graced with Forewords by Jared Zimmerer and Introductions by Dr. Kenneth Howell. They should be released prior to Advent 2015.

Here is a sneak peek at my study of Hebrews:

James Tissot, It Is Finished

Preface

A People Persecuted – Authorship and Canonicity – The Present Work

1. The Trinity (Hebrews, Chapters 1-3)

In the Beginning – The Son, Superior to All Created Mediators – Another Advocate – The Revelation of Divine Relationships – Sons and Daughters in the Son

2. The Incarnation (Hebrews, Chapters 2-5)

Jesus, Fully Human – Subject to Trials – Achieving His Goal

3. The Word of God (Hebrews, Chapters 4-6)

The Word in Scripture – Inspiration and Inerrancy – The Septuagint – The Deuterocanonicals, or Apocrypha – Authoritative Oral Traditions – Christian Tradition Conveys God’s Revelation – The Fullness of Truth

4. Christ’s Priesthood, Our Salvation (Hebrews, Chapters 7-11)

The Earthly Temple Gives Way to the Heavenly – The Day of Atonement – A Priest in the Order of Melchizedek – The New Covenant – No Longer Under the Torah – The Plan of Salvation

5. The Communion of Saints (Hebrews, Chapters 11-12)

Past Champions of Faith – From Sheol to the Heavenly Jerusalem – Participants in Jesus’s Heavenly Intercession – The Purgative Way – The Reality of Purgatory – Mary in the Communion of Saints

6. The Eucharist (Hebrews, Chapter 13)

Partners in the Altar – The Todah of the Risen One – Christ, Our Passover Lamb – The Apostolic Witness – The Ministerial Priesthood – The Liturgy of Eternity

7. The Authority of the Church’s Leaders (Hebrews, Chapter 13)

A Matter of Revelation – The Master of the Palace – The Elders/Presbyters – Bishops and Deacons – Successors to the Apostles – Infallibility: Its Necessity and Limits

Conclusion

Appendix – Formation of the New Testament’s Canon

I've got to tell you how this project came about because it definitely wasn't planned:
I had started work on a book about devotion to the Immaculate Heart, when a friend at work came to me with a question about the Letter to the Hebrews. After we worked through his question, I shared with him that I had developed a five-part study of Hebrews over a decade ago, and had sometimes thought about revisiting it as a book project. He thought it was a great idea and, when he returned the next week with another question, remarked, "Man, I sure hope you write that book."  

I found myself thinking about that future book project as I laid in bed. I realized that I would want it to focus on seven elements instead of the original five. Hmm...was this something the Lord wanted me to pursue?

Two days later I received this email from Kevin Vost (who knew nothing of what I had been thinking):

There is a little mistake I'd like to share with you - but neither mine, nor yours! In your last email you mentioned St. Thomas, and I seem to recall your special interest in Hebrews. Well, when I ordered the beautiful Latin and English Commentaries on the Letters of Saint Paul, they "accidentally" sent me two copies of St. Thomas's Commentary on Hebrews and did not request it back. I supposed the other was for you, so I've been holding this to give to you if you don't already have a copy.

That sealed the deal for me. Instead of pursuing a book about devotion to the Immaculate Heart, it seemed like my focus should switch to Hebrews. When I shared my thoughts with Kevin, he had the wonderful idea of writing "twin tomes." And so, that is what I found myself doing for the past nine months (instead of regularly posting to my blog).

Of Swaddling Clothes and Grave Wrappings

Today the Church celebrates the feast of St. John, Apostle and Evangelist, the "disciple whom Jesus loved."  Today's Gospel reading came from the end of John's Gospel, from his Resurrection narrative.  It may seem a strange choice for the Christmas season, but while at Mass I recognized a profound symmetry at work.  Let me share a couple of lines with you:

"They both ran, but the other disciple [John] outran Peter and reached the tomb first; and stooping down to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in.  Then Simon Peter came ... and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on [Jesus'] head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself.  Then the other disciple [John], who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed." (John 20:4-8)

For John, seeing Jesus' discarded burial wrappings was a sign; it allowed him to grasp the truth that Jesus had been raised.  This takes us right back to the shepherds at the time of Jesus' birth.  The angel said, "This will be a sign for you; you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger."  For both John and the shepherds the wrappings acted as a sign.  For the shepherds it was Jesus' presence in the bands; but for John, His absence.  And both signs occurred in caves to which the men had been sent - the first was the cave of the Nativity, and the second was the rock-hewn tomb. In the first Jesus had been laid in a manger, most likely also carved from rock; and in the second Jesus' body rose from the rock slab on which it had been lain. I of course am not the first to see this; you can find it woven into the icon of the Nativity at left.  God's sense of symmetry is truly beyond words.

Judas' Greatest Sin Was NOT His Betrayal of Christ

Love receiving emails from Daily Gospel.  I have to share the commentary it paired with the reading from Matthew, focusing on Judas' betrayal.  St. Catherine of Siena (1347-1380 A.D.) recorded these words in her Dialogue, words she believed were spoken to her by God the Father:

Saint Catherine heard God say to her: This is the sin that is never forgiven, now or ever: the refusal, the scorning of my mercy. For this offends me more than all the other sins they have committed. So the despair of Judas displeased me more and was a greater insult to my Son than his betrayal had been. Therefore, such as these are reproved for this false judgment of considering their sin to be greater than my mercy... They are reproved also for their injustice in grieving more for their own plight than for having offended me. 

They are being unjust in this because they are not giving me what is mine, nor taking for themselves what belongs to them. It is their duty to offer love and bitter heartfelt contrition in my presence for the sins they have committed against me. But they have done the opposite. They have lavished such tender love on themselves and felt so sorry about the punishment they expect for their sins! So you see how unjust they are. They will be punished, therefore, on both accounts. They have scorned my mercy, so I turn them over to my justice.

Powerful words to keep in mind as we begin the Novena to Divine Mercy on Good Friday!

I remember hearing Archbishop Fulton Sheen contrast the actions of Judas and Peter.  Both betrayed the Lord.  Both wept for their sins.  But where Peter opened himself to God to receive mercy and forgiveness, Judas turned inward on himself and took his life in despair.  The great tragedy is that, had Judas turned to God as Peter did, we would know him as Saint Judas.

Jesus, the Creator of Mankind

Stworzenie Adama by Tadeusza Kowalskiego

I think that anyone who has attempted to read John's Gospel quickly realizes that he or she is in deep spiritual waters. Granted, it is the Word of God; but John's Gospel reads differently than many other parts of Scripture. We are dealing with an author who uses not only straight forward statements but often play on words and subtle illusion to communicate the truth about Christ.

In his prologue John asserts Jesus's divinity. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1:1,14). But he brings this same truth out in the subtle details he provides in his narrative too, showing Jesus to be the Creator the Jewish people read of in the Book of Genesis.

The first example can be seen in the Gospel for this Fourth Sunday of Lent, when Jesus healed the man born blind.  I'll begin my quotation with Jesus's words to the disciples:

"...While I am in the world, I am the light of the world."
When he had said this, he spat on the ground
and made clay with the saliva,
and smeared the clay on his eyes,
and said to him,
“Go wash in the Pool of Siloam” —which means Sent—.
So he went and washed, and came back able to see. (Jn 9:5-7)

Just as God, in the beginning, had said "Let there be light" (Gen 1:3), so Jesus came to bring light to the world. God formed Man from the dust of the ground (Gen 2:7); and here Jesus shows His divinity in the recreation of Man, making clay from the ground to restore the man's sight. (Washing in the pool is a wonderful image for how Christ recreates us and heals our spiritual blindness  in Baptism).

The second example that jumps to mind is when Jesus appeared to the Apostles on the night of the Resurrection:

Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” (Jn 20:21-23)

The same God who made the man he had formed from dust into a "living being" by "breath[ing] into his nostrils the breath of life" (Gen 2:7), was there that night recreating them as sons in the only begotten Son! 

Do you see what I mean about John's Gospel? It's all of these little nuances that make Scripture so incredibly deep, and why it merits a lifetime of study.

Answers to More Questions about the Eucharist

A month ago, I posted an email question from a former Catholic and my response. He asked me to explain why the Eucharist wasn't an act of idolatry.  (You can read it here).  This morning he sent a follow up email.  His comments are in white, and mine in yellow.  Please keep this seeker in your prayers!

____________________________________

Dear Derek (name has been changed),

Thank you for your email.  I thought my response would be clearer if I responded to each part of your letter in turn.

Dear Shane,

Thank you for your reply.

I still feel you have left my question unanswered. The problem is how can a priest convert a piece of bread into the Body, blood soul and divinity of Our Lord Jesus, the second person in the Trinity. I do believe in Transubstantiation - that one substance is changes into another but one substance i.e. bread is changed into the flesh of Christ but one substance is changed into two body and blood is not acceptable , but I fail to see however how does the soul and divinity come in.

Derek, I think if you go back and read your original question, you will discover that I actually did answer it, as stated.  Here you are raising new questions, more specific questions than you did before – and honestly, that’s quite exciting.  It is by really grappling with Christ’s teachings that we open ourselves to receiving all He has for us!

That you believe in Transubstantiation is wonderful, because it should make what I’m about to say a little easier to understand.  You said that you believe “bread is changed into the flesh of Christ but one substance,” not two, “body and blood.”  Excellent, because that is what the Church teaches.  And here is the next step:

Christ’s Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, are joined together.  Where one is, there the whole Christ becomes present.  So if the bread’s substance is changed to that of Christ’s Body, His Blood, Soul, and Divinity must likewise be present there as well.  And if the substance of the wine is changed into that of His Blood, then His Body, Soul, and Divinity must be present there as well.  This is called concomitance. To say otherwise would be to say that Christ could be divided up.  No, He is a living Person, a Person both divine and human (body, blood, soul).We’re talking about something supernatural, it does not violate reason, but it is something above our powers of thought to completely comprehend.

God is spirit and we must worship him in spirit.

Yes, “in spirit and truth” (Jn.4:23)

In the book of Acts chapter 7:48, 17:24, it states that God does not live in temples built by man.

The Jewish people knew that the Creator of the universe could not be contained in building made of a stone (1 Kg.8:27).  No one knew this better than the God-Man, and yet Jesus reverenced the Temple as “My Father’s house” (Lk.2:49; Jn.2:16). So the transcendent God could make Himself present in a very unique way in a specific part of creation.

As I said in my original email response, with the Incarnation we have entered into a new way of relating to God. The Second Person of the Trinity joined a human nature, a soul and a body, to Himself. It is the human soul and body of God. So wherever that Body is, there the soul and divinity must be present as well.

So, in direct response to your citation of Acts 7:48 and 17:24 – no, the divine essence cannot be “pigeon-holed” in a temple made of stone, much less the entire created universe … and yet in Christ, “the fullness of Deity dwells bodily” (Col. 2:9).  And thus, we could say that God incarnate did live in a house in the village of Nazareth.  He seems to have lived in a house in Capernaum as well –  Derek, you must recognize this.  And God incarnate, Jesus, can also be present in our church buildings today in the Eucharist.

At the last supper when Christ says 'take eat this is my body' did he by his will and power create a mirrored image of himself or an entity apart and distinct from his real self that is from a piece of bread. this bread has now become his creation. First it was bread and now it is God, It is an offence against the 1st commandment.

No, not a mirror image of Himself; but an extension of His One Self. This is a rough analogy, because in the Eucharist we are talking about a supernatural extension; but in the natural sphere you can see how Christ “extended” Himself when He grew from an infant to a man. His infant Body and adult Body were one and the same.

The Host (Communion) exhibits no form of life nor is able to communicate. It is as if God is punished by imprisonment or solitary confinement unable to relate with all who receive him worthy or unworthy. This very thought of a mute God is absurd. We should not use imagination to say he speaks to me in communion.

Derek, take a step back and consider for a moment, what you already believe:  In the paragraph ahead you profess your belief that the Holy Spirit lives inside of you.  Good.  Is He a “mute God,” or do you hear an audible voice?  If you are hearing an audible voice, then you are among a very small minority among Christians.  I think most of us would say that the Holy Spirit does speak to us, but by bringing certain thoughts to our minds or causing us to recognize the significance of things. Is the Holy Spirit a prisoner within you? No, I wouldn’t characterize Him like that.

Consider the words of Christ in John 16:7- it is to your advantage that I go away because if I do not go the Holy Spirit will not come but if I go I will send the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit has the advantage of being with everybody at the same time.

In chapter 16, it explains how Christ will be with us and help us and he will be with us till the end of time.

He even reiterates in a little while - you will see me no more. The absence of his person , body, soul and divinity till the second coming is confirmed here. 

Derek, Jesus is most certainly not “absent” from the disciples.  Please go back and look at John 16 again.  In context, Jesus is talking about the change that will take place with His Passover to the Father; He will not be with them as He had been during the previous three years.  But He will continue to be with them – spiritually (Mt.28:20) and sacramentally in the Eucharist (Lk.24:30-31; note the use of the same four verbs here as at the Last Supper).

I would recommend meditating more deeply on the nature of the Trinity and what Jesus tells us in John, chapters 14-17.  “If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him” (14:23) “I go away and I come to you” (14:28), “when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send you from the Father” (15:26).

We partake of one Loaf not a multiplication of the same loaf.

Yes, that is what we believe: these multiple loaves scattered throughout the world have been supernaturally joined to the One Loaf, Christ.  They can be joined to Him Whose Body is now outside of space and time as we understand it. 

We must remember the soul is not divisible, it cannot be replicated, duplicated in any way, so does the soul of Christ.

You can see the answer to this in what I shared above.

Please show me any scripture which confirms his presence of his body, soul and divinity in communion.

Happily. 1 Corinthians 11, beginning at verse 27:

“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. ²⁸ Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. ²⁹ For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. ³⁰ That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. ³¹ But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged. ³² But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened so that we may not be condemned along with the world.”

The Eucharist is no mere figure or image of Christ. To sin against the Lord’s Body and Blood in such a way that sickness and death are suitable chastisements, the Lord’s Body and Blood must truly be present. You are not convicted of assault because you ripped up a man’s photograph, but because you have wronged his actual person!

Also please let me know the official Catholic position on whether the body is a crucified body or the resurrected body of Christ.

The Church’s position is that it is Christ’s Body, as it exists right now, which is made present.  Because Christ is risen from the dead, it is His resurrected Body made present in the Eucharist.

God has put in place safeguards that we might not do and believe like what Catholics do and believe.

But Derek, what Catholics do and believe is what the Orthodox Church does and believes, and is exactly what all Christians did and believed up until the time of the Reformation. There are safeguards in place to keep us believing and doing the truths Jesus entrusted to the Apostles, but when a person rejects the teaching authority of the successors to the Apostles, the Pope and Bishops, they have rejected that safeguard. Do you really think that God would abandon His Church and allow it to believe in a heretical teaching from the time of the apostles until the Reformation?  Ridiculous.  God is a faithful Father.

I’ve shown you passages in the New Testament testifying to the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, but have you not studied how these were understood in the early Church?  The Catholic Church did not create its faith in the Eucharist centuries later; it is what Christians have believed from the start! When we go back to the earliest Christian writings we have outside of the New Testament, the writings left to us by the men who were actually taught by the Apostles, this is what we find:

Ignatius, the disciple of the Apostle John and Bishop of Antioch, wrote in 110 A.D. that he desired “the Bread of God, which is the Flesh of Jesus Christ, Who was of the seed of David, and for drink, His Blood, which is love incorruptible.” He admonished the believers in Philadelphia, Asia Minor, to “use one Eucharist so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar as there is one bishop with the presbytery and the deacons.” To the Church in Smyrna, Ignatius wrote, 

“Take note of those who hold heterodox [or heretical] opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which comes to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God ... They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes.”

Our faith in the mysteries of God should not border on the ridiculous and absurd.

Ooh, but telling God what He can and cannot do out of love for us is the height of absurdity.  For one who limits God, the authentic Faith, taught to us by Christ and His Apostles, will always seem ridiculous.  That is what Paul wrote, “Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? …Jews demand a sign and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles …For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Cor.1:20-25).

Christ Himself, when He first spoke of the Eucharist, was met with jeers and rejection:

“The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’ So Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you … for my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed …” (Jn. 6:52-56). 

And John goes on to tell how, 

“Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’ …. After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer walked with him” (Jn.6:60,66).

Derek, why is it so hard to take Jesus at His word on the Eucharist? Is it because we cannot observe the change through our five senses or detect it with our most sensitive instruments? Our technology is finite – His power limitless! As the Creator, Jesus grasps matter much better than me or you. If He pronounced the bread and wine to be His Body and Blood then I have to believe He can make it so. Lets keep in mind, this is the same Person who said, “Let there be light…dry land…living creatures….man…woman” (Genesis 1-2). He showed Himself able to manipulate matter at will – multiplying the loaves, walking on water, even appearing and disappearing into thin air after His resurrection. And let’s not forget that this is the Body and Blood formed in the womb of Mary without sexual intercourse – talk about turning the laws of nature upside down! 

Thank You

You are welcome.  Derek, I hope you do not feel that I am being antagonistic.  What I want to help you see is how your objections are nothing novel or unexpected.  They are the same objections Protestant Christians have made throughout the last 500 years, and the answers to them are relatively simple.  Jesus waits for you in the Eucharist.  He wants to give Himself to you in a way so humble and loving that we hesitate to believe it is true.  But that’s what makes the Good News, so good! “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” (Matt.11:28-29)

---