Year A. 2nd Sunday after the Epiphany, January 20th, 2002
Title: “The intimate and living connection between Baptism and Eucharist.” John 1: 29-42
In a cascade of testimonials, John the Baptist identifies Jesus as the Lamb of God in verse twenty-nine, as the pre-existent one in verse thirty, and as the transmitter of the Spirit in verses thirty-two to thirty-three and Son of God in verse thirty-four.
John begins his work with a poem, called the “Prologue” by scholars, verse one to eighteen, interspersed with prose at verses six to eight and verse fifteen. These latter verses stitch the poem onto the main work. The ideas in the “Prologue,” are not found in the gospel proper. This is unlike Matthew and Luke whose “Infancy Narratives,” their equivalent to John’s “Prologue,” are overtures to their main work, introducing ideas that appear later. The interstices in verses six to eight and verse fifteen, are about the Baptist and how he is not the “light,” but only a witness a “lamp” as in John 5: 35, to that light and not the Messiah but only testifies to his coming and arrival. From the very outset John makes it clear that the Baptist is a witness, along with Jesus’ works, empowered by the Spirit, and the Father John 5: 35-37.
Verses nineteen to twenty-eight, emphasize the Baptist’s role in terms of who he is not. He is not the Messiah, not Elijah, not the expected, Moses-like Prophet. His baptism is not the real deal. There were people at the time who believed the Baptist was the One, and John wants to make clear that they are mistaken by using John’s own testimony.
Verses twenty-nine to thirty-four, emphasize who Jesus is. Again, John uses the Baptist’s own testimony. The Baptist, although not a baptized Christian himself, speaks for Christians as he attributes three “titles,” to Jesus that Christians believe capture his essential identity and mission: Lamb of God, Pre-existent One, and Giver of the Holy Spirit. Christians saw Jesus as the fulfiller of Old Testament hopes and dreams. Since “hopes and dreams,” are vague, they became “incarnate,” enfleshed, specific, in many images or metaphors. This made it easier to imagine, grasp, pass on to other generations, and live a life consistent with the values they capture. There were many of these hopes and dreams translated into images- King, Priest, Prophet, Steward, Shepherd, Suffering Servant, etc. Our text singles out three of them.
If the author and editor of John did not have a copy of Mark in front of him, he certainly had knowledge of the traditional teaching on which Mark was based. John, however, reworks this material and translates it into a higher key, moving towards poetry. The author - editor shows signs of having or being familiar with the material in Matthew and Luke in front of him as well. On the surface of John this cannot be immediately recognized. However, a deeper probe reveals how traditional his source material is. Thus, Jn begins his work with the Baptist as does Mark, his preaching and baptizing, and his encounter with Jesus, who is the heaven-sent, Spirit-endowed, pre-existent, Son of God.
In verse twenty-nine, he saw Jesus coming toward him: As in Mark, Jesus is introduced abruptly. To John’s readers Jesus apparently needs no further introduction. Such was the case with the Baptist as well.
Behold, the Lamb of God: Like all the titles applied to Jesus, this is a rich one. It involves no fewer than five layers of meaning: the first layer is the lamb in nature. Just as the lamb gives up its life to provide others with life to be eaten- as is the Lamb of God in the Eucharist, and gives up its skin for protection from the elements of evil, to be “put on,” as Christ is put on in Baptism, so does the Christ give his life that others may live.
The second layer is the lamb as substitute for Isaac. As God provided a lamb for sacrifice in place of Isaac, so Jesus is the lamb God provides to be sacrificed in place of others.
The third layer is that of the paschal lamb. Although the Passover was not technically an atonement sacrifice, it was considered that way by the people of Jesus’ time because the priests had reserved to themselves the slaying of the lambs for the celebration of Passover. They would see little difference between lambs’ blood smeared on door posts as a sign of deliverance and the lambs’ blood offered in sacrifice for their deliverance.
The fourth layer of meaning would be the lamb as Suffering Servant. All the evangelists applied the poem of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53 to Jesus, especially verse seven, “like a lamb that is led to slaughter,” and verse eleven, “he shall bear their iniquities.”
Finally the fifth layer of meaning would be the apocalyptic lamb. In apocalyptic literature there appears the figure of the conquering lamb who will destroy evil in the world. In the New Testament this figure appears in Revelation seventeen, as leader of the people and in 17:4 crushes the evil powers of the earth. This picture of an apocalyptic, destroying lamb fits in very well with what we know of the Baptist’s preaching.
In all likelihood the Baptist thought of Jesus as this conquering lamb raised up to destroy the world. There is no hint that the Baptist thought of a Messiah in the sense of number four, the Suffering Servant. However, that would be the author’s view. For him, the “Lamb of God,” is based on Isaiah 53 in the light of the Passover sacrifice. It expressed Jesus’ submission to baptism, his atoning death, not recorded here but presumed, which he received not for his own sins but as a symbol of atonement for the sins of his people. Though number three and four are prominent, the other layers of meaning are present as well and serve to make this a most pregnant image. Yet, it appears in John only here and at 1:36.
Sin of the world: In the singular “sin,” means “sinful condition,’ what Christians mean by “original sin”. In the plural it would mean “sinful acts.” The Lamb “takes away” Greek airon, “lifts up,” the human condition by offering up his own condition of physical life.
In verse thirty, coming after me who ranks ahead of me…existed before me: The Baptist testifies to the prior existence of Jesus, prior to him. In the Semitic mind “older,” was more prestigious. Disciples of the Baptist may have been claiming superiority of John over Jesus because he came before Jesus. But the testimony of the Baptist is otherwise. He may not have thought of Jesus in the same terms of pre-existence found in the Prologue or in 8:58 or 17:7. More likely, he thought of him in terms of Elijah who existed nine hundred years before John and yet was expected to return as a messenger before God’s final judgment. Remember that John denied that he was Elijah.
In verse thirty-two, I saw the Spirit come down…and remain upon him: “Remain” or “abide,” is an important word in John. The effect was permanent and abiding. For Jesus this was not a spasmodic experience, a fire of ecstasy, a mere moment of dazzling illumination. Nor was it a come-and-go experience of mystical contemplation. It remained. In the past the Spirit of God was a powerful and purposeful extraordinary phenomenon the effect of which was obvious by the results. Beginning with Jesus the Spirit will effect a permanent change in the being of a person, as well as, in the doing. Because Jesus “has the Spirit,” he will be able to give the Spirit away to others. He “will baptize with the Holy Spirit.”
In verses thirty-five to forty –two the Scriptures reflect the choosing of the first disciples.
Sermon
The inspired author-editor of John is quite impressed with the “abiding,” of Jesus in, both “within,” each individual Christian and “among,” the Christian community as a whole. When we think of John we think of such slogans as “He who abides in love abides in God and God in him, and “The Father and I will take up our abode in him who believes in me.” In the Prologue he translates the abiding of God with his people into the “Word became flesh,” and “dwelt, abided, among us.” And in chapter six he translates that into the abiding presence of Christ in the Eucharist when we “eat my, his, flesh.”
It appears that John reserves the most intimate abiding, that is, mutual indwelling, for the Eucharistic presence of Christ. Here, however, he connects it with the Holy Spirit whom he gives to his Church as the alternative way he will abide with us until the End. He connects it with our Baptism. The indwelling of the Spirit and the indwelling of Christ and the Father, are just different ways of saying the same thing. It is the same reality of God as seen in different aspects or lights. Yet, John does not go so far as to say here that the Spirit “remains in,” but rather “remains upon.” Even though it may seem to be a bit of theological hairsplitting, it appears John wants to protect the “flightiness,” the mobility, come down like a dove from the sky, of the Spirit. The Spirit remained, swirling around him, providing an environment and giving a power to do the more-than-human task he was assigned. But the “abiding in,” presence of the Trinity will have to wait until the fuller picture is drawn out by Jesus in his Last Supper Discourse, his “good-bye,” address to his disciples and friends. These are different experiences of the same reality: God. But John does appear to want to keep the Spirit free of the same kind of localization, pin-point presence as he reserves for the Eucharistic way Christ is present in the Christian during this life. Words like “fluid,” “flighty,” “blowing where he wills,” “descending,” come to mind. Baptism, our baptism, bestows this Spirit upon us. Subsequent experience in his presence and under his power and direction will make this moving presence more sedentary, more abiding, more residential within us, more a part of our being as well as doing. This movement is necessarily aided by the constant reception of the Lord into our being by the Eucharist, the complete Eucharist- the Word and the Word-made-flesh. As Jesus said, “Unless you eat of my flesh and drink of my blood you have no life within you.” Yet, all that said, the Spirit or, more correctly, our experience of God as Spirit, maintains mobility, a fluidity that cannot be pinned down to one place, cannot be contained, cannot be manipulated. Although in the new age the Spirit of God will “remain,” upon us, indeed, even “dwell within,” us, we cannot take the Spirit’s indwelling for granted or feel we “possess,” the Spirit. The Spirit remains, yes, but remains “flighty,” his own master. He will be as he will be, not as we would like him to be.
The rich imagery of and behind the “Lamb of God,” imagery evoked right before the reception of the Eucharist, reminds us of the intimate, living connection between the atoning death of Jesus Suffering Servant, the freedom it celebrates Paschal lamb, the judgment of the world, apocalyptic lamb, the complete obedience of Abraham Isaac-lamb, our own need to give our lives for others, the natural lamb- all this reminds us of the intimate and living connection between Baptism and Eucharist. Though they can be separated in language and thought, they are but one reality, a reality that both reflects and expresses the Triune God. The function of religious language- in this case, of the many titles and images for Christ and his mission- is to bring into focus for us the rather vague mystery of God so that we can both apprehend it more easily, comprehend it more fully and clearly and live it more faithfully. Let us just ponder and reflect, contemplate and meditate. From that enlightening and enriching experience we tap into the energy, power, life this religious language is meant to communicate.
Christians do not worship lambs or doves or any other animal. We do see in, into, their characteristics and “divine,” the presence of their Creator and our Creator, thus coming to know him better through his work of art. God is all encompassing. His presence permeates and penetrates everything and everyone. Christ is God in human form, human life, and human being.
Faith gives us the power to recognize Christ in a crowd or amidst a motley crew.
Humility, a derivative of faith, gives us the power to recognize someone sent by God into our lives.
Jesus’ Baptism: This text has everything the Synoptic writers have in their scene of Jesus being baptized, except, there is no actual baptism. John’s baptism of water is there and so is Jesus’ Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The descent of the Spirit like a dove is there. John’s testimony that Jesus is greater than he is there. But there is no actual submersion in water and rising from it. By the time this Gospel according to John is written the Church has come to realize that not only did Jesus not need to be baptized, but did so to “fulfill all righteousness,” with actual water, but neither do the followers of Christ need the actual water Baptism. The Church has come to recognize two other forms that Baptism can take: Baptism by blood and Baptism by desire. Baptism by blood is the Baptism that those preparing for water Baptism underwent when they were martyred along with the Christians they were associating with and learning from. In other words, those catechumens who were caught studying and preparing to become Christians and died for the faith before they were actually baptized at the hands of the law of the land. That recognition, namely, that it is the attitude of the person, having the Holy Attitude or Spirit, and not the ritual undergone that matters more, led to the next step of recognizing that there are many people in the world who would become Christian if only they had the opportunity to do so. Their lives are graced because they cooperate with the grace of God, even though they either never heard of Christ or heard of him from people who had their own tailor-made version of Christ. The Church realized that one does not absolutely have to undergo the water ritual in order to be baptized in God’s eyes. It is the Holy Spirit who can come to us through the water and the ritual or who can come to us any way he desires. In this Gospel scene what is important is the identity and the mission of Jesus, not the actual ritual.
Humility: The Baptist recognized the true identity of Jesus, could see through the externals, the age difference, the time line, and grasp who Jesus really was and is. Once he did that, once he saw Jesus for who he really is, he was able to see himself for who, whose-God’s, he really is as well. Now, he knew why he was baptizing with water, that is, “in order to make the Messiah known to Israel,” when he comes, to point him out. John’s life, his identity, his mission was incomplete until Jesus came into it. John was humble enough to recognize and to rejoice in the truth that he had no real identity or mission apart from this younger fellow whom God sent. Reflection on this text gives rise to the question: Did God just do that once or does he do it all the time? In other words, does God send people, imperfect people, into our lives to give our lives meaning, to send us on a mission, and to give us an identity beyond our family heritage? The answer is, of course, yes. While it is true that everyone sent into our lives is “sent,” by God, it is also true that some people are “paired,” by God to accomplish great things, things they could not do alone. Even though Jesus was and is divine, he needed John to advance his cause and John knew his place, once he met Jesus at the river. People meet and fall in love all the time, but not every “pairing,” is divinely intended. It takes time, testing and being true to each other, through thick and thin, before deciding whether this “pairing,” is the real deal or just a fantasy. Trust takes a lot of time to develop properly. The same is true in the Spirit world. Jesus sent out his disciples in pairs. Oh, there were legal reasons for that, that is, the law about needing two witnesses to testify to a truth. However, Jesus “paired,” up some otherwise unlikely people to create a trinity of energy, enthusiasm and effectiveness in spreading his gospel. The Lord wants us to look around and see if there is not a person in our lives whom he has sent so that we can “mutually indwell,” and be his instruments for revealing his glory. It is humbling to find out that more often than not that person, indeed that “pair,” is a divine match, but a human mismatch, a most unlikely combination. Many husbands and wife’s will testify to that, if you but listen. Yet God, in His infinite Wisdom, paired you to your spouse, to accomplish His Holy task here on earth. Amen.
