As with my last one, this wasn't exactly written to be a blog post but hopefully it makes enough sense to be of interest to those who might be interested!
Reflections on Mark 14:12-26, the story of the Last Supper
Reflections on Mark 14:12-26, the story of the Last Supper
The stories of the last supper are deeply familiar
to many of us. Instead of looking here at the broad brushstrokes of the story: so
familiar, so ingrained in our Christian tradition, I want to draw out and
reflect on some of those little details which might just be more
significant than they first appear and from them to raise some questions for us
to consider together.
At the beginning of the gospel text we see Jesus
sending off two disciples to prepare for the celebration of the Passover meal.
Later in the passage he himself arrives it says, with the twelve, which
suggests to me that these two forerunners were not among his closest friends but were others
from his entourage. It makes it, I think, safe to assume, that the meal was
shared with a wider community than just the twelve. It makes it, I think,
important that we too think about how we invite those beyond our immediate
friends to share our communion table.
Those two forerunners are sent to follow ‘a man
carrying a water jug’ ... I don’t think they identified the right man by some
kind of magic or mystery – a man carrying a water jug would have been an
unusual sight in Jerusalem at that time. Water carrying was woman’s work. I
don’t know what the significance of Jesus going to a home where a man was
carrying water is, but I can’t help feeling there must be some meaning to this
seemingly insignificant detail.
And so we come to the Passover meal, the Passover which
is a family feast, but which Jesus celebrates in a borrowed room. Admittedly,
we don’t know if this unnamed host was friend or stranger; but we do know that
Jesus was not, in the traditional sense, the head of the household, the host;
for all he takes on that role as the one who blesses and breaks the bread. I sometimes
wonder whether the hosts themselves were present and if they were, what did
they make of this turning around of the expectations, of this visitor placing
himself in the father’s place?
As they eat together, Jesus speaks of the one who
will betray him. He knows, too, undoubtedly, that the rest will abandon him and
that for the last part of his journey he will tread a lonely road. But this,
the one who will betray, and these, the ones who will not stay the course, are
none the less invited not only to eat but “to dip bread into the bowl with me”.
Do we too dare to invite those who we know will betray and abandon all that we
stand for to serve and be served, to share the same meal from the same vessels?
And after bread there is wine. In the Passover meal
wine is indeed drunk: four cups of it, each of which has a different symbolism.
Blood, on the other hand, is very definitely not drunk, or indeed, in any way consumed.
Quite the contrary: it is significant in the Passover story that the blood is poured out, daubed on door frames as a sign of
God’s protection, but it is certainly not to be consumed: that is an important part of the
whole Passover story. If, as is generally assumed, Jesus as well as taking the
role of host, is taking upon himself the role of Passover lamb, the blood,
surely, is the one part that should not be consumed, and yet these are his
words “This is my blood of the
covenant”: deeply powerful and, one can imagine, even offensive to his Jewish
audience. Deeply challenging, if we
allow ourselves to really hear them from beyond the familiarity of ritual, even to us.
So what does it mean? Well, to be honest, I'm not sure I know. But perhaps it is the moment of a reuniting of the flesh and the blood of
the lamb of the Passover story – the flesh which offered physical strength for the
journey, the blood which offered God’s protection, brought into one in the
person of Jesus. Or, perhaps it is that God’s protection: previously seen as an
external reality from a distant “out there” sort of God is to be consumed and internalised in this new understanding of a now present “in here” sort of God. Perhaps it is something else, I suggest we
should certainly think about it.
Whatever its symbolism, as Jesus drinks the wine at the meal table, he
states that he will not drink of it again until “the day when I drink it anew
in the kingdom of God.” According to the gospel accounts, that next sip of
wine, that ‘drinking it anew’ happens not after the resurrection in some
glorious new reality but on the cross as he suffers and as he dies. Is this then
where we find the kingdom of God? Not in some beautiful, imagined future where
all is well, but in this messy reality of daring to carry the power of love to
its absolute limits, in the making visible of the extreme depths of pain of
truly unconditional love?
I want to leave you with a final question: If this, the
cross, is heaven and this is where we find it; if this is the end of the last
supper, of the Passover feast, of the communion table: what now for how we
commemorate it today?
Found this very thought provoking, Steph. I heard that when Jesus referred to His blood, he was referring to his life, because the Jews of that time interchanged the two words.
ReplyDelete