Rev. Fr. (Dr.) Osmond Anike

Readings:

First Reading: Acts 2:14, 22-33 – God raised this man Jesus to life, and all of us are witnesses to this.

Responsorial Psalm: Psalm 15(16): 1-2, 5, 7-11 – Show us Lord, the path of life.

Second Reading:1 Peter 1:17-21 – Your ransom was paid in the precious blood of Christ.

Gospel: Luke 24:13-35 – They recognized him at the breaking of bread.

As you might have probably learnt from my Easter homily, the resurrection of Jesus, unlike his crucifixion, was a phenomenon that had no eyewitnesses. Sometimes people try to discredit an event or a phenomenon by citing the non-availability of an eyewitness, as if to suggest that eye witnessing gives veracity to an event or a phenomenon.  There are events and phenomena happening out there that have never been witnessed by anybody, and will probably never be witnessed. But it doesn’t thereby mean that they are not true for lack of eyewitnesses. In the case of the resurrection of Jesus, it is a phenomenon that scholars have tried to explain not only from the perspective of the Jewish apocalyptic, but also from the sequence of other post-resurrection events. One of the arguments that have been widely evoked as a “proof” of the resurrection is the sudden and inexplicable transformation of the apostles. How is it that a fearful and apprehensive bunch of peasants who have been in hiding suddenly mustered enough courage to not only come out of their hiding but also to begin preaching vigorously and openly about this dead man? Obviously, something extraordinary must have happened to them that gave them such courage. One doesn’t just undergo such comprehensive transformation within such a very short space of time without any paranormal occurrence. Based on such newfound transformation, it is argued that it is the power of witnessing the risen Jesus that is at play in the lives of the apostles.

In today’s first reading describing the events surrounding the Pentecost, Peter (who had hitherto by no means been known for his power of oratory) suddenly took the stage, to the amazement of all who previously knew his pedigree. He was able to weave together the Old Testament Davidic prophecy and explained it not in the light of David but in the light of the resurrection of Christ. But that was not all; he claimed insistently that they are witnesses to this resurrection. Such bold and public claims like this one, was what convinced a lot of people that indeed, the power of Jesus’ resurrection was at work in them. Peter continued this claim in the second reading where he wrote that the ransom paid to free us from “useless way of life” was not paid in anything corruptible, but rather by the precious blood of Christ who was raised from the dead by God. The point we are making is this: something has taken hold of these people (the apostles). A mysterious power has enveloped them – a sort of power that they didn’t apparently possess (or rather, that was not manifested in them) when Jesus was physically with them. This power is the power of the resurrection. It is a power that rids us of fear; that makes us come out of our hidings and begin to proclaim the Good News. When we shall have witnessed the risen Jesus, we would never remain the same again.

This brings us to a subtle but important distinction between the resurrection of Jesus and his appearance. The two are separate realities and phenomena, even though they are closely linked together. However, his appearance makes stronger impression on his disciples than the mere knowledge of his resurrection. As good Pharisees that many of them were, they believed in the resurrection. Jesus also told them time and again that he would rise from the dead. When he did rise, however, it was his appearances to them that metaphysically transformed those to whom he appeared. In fact, his appearance and the ability to recognize the resurrected Jesus is a special gift not given to everybody. When Jesus was physically on earth, he was seen and recognized by all who encountered him. But a special opening of the eyes is needed for seeing the risen Christ (Remember Mary Magdalene’s encounter with the supposed gardener before she recognized him as Jesus).  In the gospel of today, two of his disciples were going to Emmaus, accompanied by Jesus. But it is said that “something prevented them from recognizing him”. They were walking along Jesus and talking with him, answering his out-of-the ordinary questions. Yet, they did not yet recognize him. Their eyes have not yet been specially opened to recognize the risen Christ. They just took this man as one inquisitive stranger who knew nothing of the “recent happenings in Jerusalem”. Then, their offer of hospitality to this “stranger” and his acceptance of their offer suddenly changed everything. During the breaking of bread, their eyes were opened and the miracle of seeing the risen Lord occurred.

If we analyze the sequence of event in this drama concerning the Emmaus duo, we can come to the conclusion that the process leading to the miracle of recognizing the risen Lord begins with scriptural enlightenment and culminates with the breaking of bread. The sequence of this event mirrors dramatically the structure of the Catholic mass that consists of the liturgy of the word and the liturgy of the Eucharist (breaking of bread). The Emmaus disciples were first enlightened by the “stranger’s” explication of the scripture. But despite explaining the Word extensively, their eyes were not immediately opened. This scriptural episode was rather designed to prepare them for the “special opening” of their eyes. It was eventually at the breaking of bread that this miracle occurred and they recognized that the supposed stranger they were travelling with had all along been the risen Jesus. It was then that the scriptural explanations they had earlier heard started making sense to them, and they expressed it thus: “Did not our hearts burn within us as he talked to us on the road and explained the scriptures to us?” If we look closely at the structure of the Catholic mass, it begins with the liturgy of the word where texts from both the Old and the New Testaments are read, followed by their explanations in the form of homily. But the ceremony does not end with the scriptural explanation. Following the pattern established by Jesus during his encounter with the disciples to Emmaus, the celebration enters the liturgy of the Eucharist where there is breaking of bread. In this way, the “eyes” of the hearts that have already been enlightened by the scripture, will eventually “open” at the breaking of bread so that they can recognize the risen Lord.

The Emmaus event actually contradicts those who use the Protestant Reformation insistence on “sola scriptura” (Scripture alone) to argue that the Catholic mass is “unbiblical”. For such people, the only thing that is important in the life of a Christian is the bible. Therefore, when the “children of God” are gathered, they should only read the bible and share the word of God and get nourished by it. After all, they argue, the word of God is food for the soul. Any other ritual, like the consecration of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, is qualified by them as “pagan”. Although the reformers adopted this sola scriptura theology to denigrate the Catholic Church’s emphases on Tradition, those who extend its use to argue against the concept of the celebration of the mass do not consider a lot of issues. Sure, the Word of God is very important; sure, the Scripture exemplifies that Word of God; sure God created the world by means of the words from his mouth. But equally sure, before God could save the world, that Word had to become flesh. The prologue to John’s gospel (John 1:1-14) captures it succinctly: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…. And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory…”  It was because he was conscious of the fact that the Word has become flesh that Jesus (who is that Word-become-flesh) literally gave us his body to eat and his blood to drink in the form of bread and wine during the Last Supper. That spectacular changing of the Jewish Passover Haggadah is of great theological importance in the development of the theology of the Eucharist.  And, as if to further stress the indispensability of this sacrament, Jesus warns us that “unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you shall not have life within you… for my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink” (cf. John 6:53-55). All this goes to show us that no matter how important and indispensable the Word of God is, it does not and should not suffice for the sacrament of his body and blood. The two are scripturally designed to go hand in hand judging from the sequence of event in the episode of the Emmaus disciples. The Catholic mass has been faithful in maintaining this sequence in the arrangement of the liturgy to consist of the liturgy of the word and liturgy of the Eucharist. It is strange, therefore, that whereas God had to make his Word to become flesh in order to dwell among us and save us, some who claim to know God and the scripture better than every other person are making frantic efforts to turn that flesh back into words, and only words.

Finally, another big lesson that we should learn from the drama surrounding the Emmaus disciples is that we must strive to always be charitable to whomever we meet. Had the Emmaus disciples not been charitable in inviting this supposed stranger to stay with them for the night, maybe their eyes would not have been opened for them to recognize him as the risen Jesus. Jesus is out there waiting to be recognized. The onus lies on us to “invite” him through our little acts of kindness.