Miracle of Loaves/human 'divinity'

  • Thread starter Thread starter grobyak
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

grobyak

Guest
Hi all - a friend of mine are in a discussion about the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He became Catholic a few years ago and attends a rather ‘liberal’ Newman Center at my old college. He was taught that the miracle of the loaves is that people shared their food, versus Jesus multiplying the loaves to feed such a gathering. I told him of the Eucharistic overtones of this miracle, which he’d not heard of. I also sent him something from Marcelino d’Ambrosio about the miracle and its connectedness to the OT.

To sum up, he asked his priest about this, and his priest said that we were both right and that a miracle is based on personal intepretation. He said that sharing was miraculous because we are divine, being made in the image of God.

I don’t recall Catholic teaching ever saying that we ourselves our divine because we’re God’s creation. I also need some direction about defending true Church teaching about this miracle. Any thoughts anyone?

God bless-
Rob in AZ
 
grobyak said:
Hi all - a friend of mine are in a discussion about the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He became Catholic a few years ago and attends a rather ‘liberal’ Newman Center at my old college. He was taught that the miracle of the loaves is that people shared their food, versus Jesus multiplying the loaves to feed such a gathering. I told him of the Eucharistic overtones of this miracle, which he’d not heard of. I also sent him something from Marcelino d’Ambrosio about the miracle and its connectedness to the OT.

To sum up, he asked his priest about this, and his priest said that we were both right and that a miracle is based on personal intepretation. He said that sharing was miraculous because we are divine, being made in the image of God.

I don’t recall Catholic teaching ever saying that we ourselves our divine because we’re God’s creation. I also need some direction about defending true Church teaching about this miracle. Any thoughts anyone?

God bless-
Rob in AZ
Click to expand...
Why is it so hard to believe that a God that can create something out of nothing (like, say, the universe?) cannot create bread from bread?!?!? To say that the people shared is to deny that Jesus is divine and couldn’t do this.

Yes, sadly, some priests have introduced the “feel good” theory that this was a sharing miracle but it takes away from the message Jesus was trying to convey.

Why would the people follow Jesus across the lake just because he taught them to share, as in John chapter 6?!?!?

With that said, we need to remember the miracle of the loaves. Jesus did not multiply the loaves. The apostles did. Or should I say, the Apostles multiplied the loaves with the power of Jesus. Now this helps to explain the mystery of the Eucharist.
 
Then you have the Apostles traveling in the boat across the lake in Mark, immediately after the multiiplication of the loaves. Jesus walks on water and joins them.

What do they do? They gripe because they only have one loaf. Jesus says, “Didn’t you see what I can do with 5 loaves? Don’t you also remember the 4000 loaves I created? Then why are you worried about having just one loaf”.

Jesus indicates here that this was not a “miracle of sharing”.
 
What your friend’s priest has actually done is put doubt into your friend’s mind with his “loosey-goosey” ideas that the people shared their food. Not so much doubt about the divinity of Christ–I’m sure his priest wouldn’t deny that. But, doubt that the word of God says what it means–not in the Fundamentalist, literalistic way, but in the way the Church has always interpreted Scripture–literally. IOW, what the text tells us is the truth.

You might want to point out to your friend that no where in the text does it mention the people sharing their food. In fact, the disciples were very concerned, as was Jesus that they might “faint along the way” trying to get food at any nearby village. If they had food with them that wouldn’t be the case. And if they had food with them they could have eaten their own food and shared with those who hadn’t brought any or enough. But, once again, the text tells us nothing of the kind, and in fact emphasizes the fact that there was no food among the crowd to share except for one little boy’s 2 small fish and a small loaf of bread.

Jesus broke them and told the disciples to distribute them. Afterwards they collected 12 baskets full. Now, if everyone had merely shared their food, why would there be any need for a collection of food at the end of the meal? No, everything in the text is against the “sharing” scenario. It’s a modern idea overlaid onto the text to try to “explain” the miracle. It’s a direct attack on the reliability of the Scriptures, although I highly doubt your friend’s priest would see it that way, which is what is truly sad about the situation, IMHO.
 
Vatican II insisted that the Gospels are historical. Since the multiplication of the bread and fish which is recounted in all four Gospels is presented as an historical account in each case, I don’t find adequate grounds doubting that this account is historical. His idea that the sharing is miraculous assumes a priori that this event never actually happened, if I understand correctly what he said. It would be interested to hear what he says to justify his view, though I don’t see what it could be. Of course, if this account was presented as a non-historical event, such as the stories Jesus provided in his parables, this interpretation would seem plausible.
NotWorthy said:
Why is it so hard to believe that a God that can create something out of nothing (like, say, the universe?) cannot create bread from bread?!?!? To say that the people shared is to deny that Jesus is divine and couldn’t do this.

Yes, sadly, some priests have introduced the “feel good” theory that this was a sharing miracle but it takes away from the message Jesus was trying to convey.

Why would the people follow Jesus across the lake just because he taught them to share, as in John chapter 6?!?!?

With that said, we need to remember the miracle of the loaves. Jesus did not multiply the loaves. The apostles did. Or should I say, the Apostles multiplied the loaves with the power of Jesus. Now this helps to explain the mystery of the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
 
Preaching the Theme of “Sharing” in the 19the Century has led to this mis-interpretation of the Miracle of the Multiplication of the loaves and fish, as a Non-miraculous event.
It is a Miracle of Jesus with “Eucharist overtones”.

The Theme of “Sharing & Charity” is good but cannot replace this miracle account. The facts before the miracle account
a) The crowd have been following Jesus for some days and they have nothing to eat.
b) Jesus then suggests his disciples to feed them
c) It was a “large” crowd to feed and all they have was the five loaves and two fish.

thecrossreference.blogspot.com/2006/05/bible-study-synoptics-11.html

Hope this helps.
God Bless
 
As richardeekw rightly pointed out it was 5 loaves of bread, not one as I wrote above. Sorry for the goof, people. :o
 
Grobyak,

I first heard the “sharing lunch” theory of the multiplication of loaves and fishes about 25 years ago. It was hogwash then, and it is still hogwash. One of your respondents has made the excellent point that the people didn’t want to make Jesus king because He had induced them to share their food.

There is something in the Bible (which the Catechism echoes) about our being “gods” of some sort. This does not make us God, obviously, but it hints at something greater than being a “mere mortal.”
  • Liberian
 
The miracle of the loaves and fishes is a sign pointing to the vastly greater miracle of the Eucharist, where Christ multiplies Himself to feed all who come to His table. Turn the loaves and fishes into a story about sharing and that whole preparation for the introduction of the Eucharist crumbles into meaninglessness.
 
Yup, that’s about what I said. Seemed to fall on deaf ears, though. I just don’t know where some folks get this, and even worse is that some of those folks are priests who are teaching it to other people! The idea of a millstone around my neck terrifies the hell out of me, but evidently not others.
 
There is something in the Bible (which the Catechism echoes) about our being “gods” of some sort. This does not make us God, obviously, but it hints at something greater than being a “mere mortal.” - Liberian
Paragraph 460 in the CCC The scripture reference is also noted there.
Click to expand...
 
grobyak said:
Hi all - a friend of mine are in a discussion about the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He became Catholic a few years ago and attends a rather ‘liberal’ Newman Center at my old college. He was taught that the miracle of the loaves is that people shared their food, versus Jesus multiplying the loaves to feed such a gathering. I told him of the Eucharistic overtones of this miracle, which he’d not heard of. I also sent him something from Marcelino d’Ambrosio about the miracle and its connectedness to the OT.

To sum up, he asked his priest about this, and his priest said that we were both right and that a miracle is based on personal intepretation. He said that sharing was miraculous because we are divine, being made in the image of God.

I don’t recall Catholic teaching ever saying that we ourselves our divine because we’re God’s creation. I also need some direction about defending true Church teaching about this miracle. Any thoughts anyone?

God bless-
Rob in AZ
Click to expand...
what’s wrong with you? Are you actually saying there’s something wrong with liberalism, otherwise known as the rule that religion consists only of “sharing and caring, love and peace, and tolerance” (🙂 ❤️ 👋 )? Come on now, you’re making a big fuss about nothing! Whether there ever was people like Noah, or Adam, or Mary of Jesus or David, or Daniel, does not matter. All that matters it that we be "kind, compassionate, and loving and respectful and sharing ". 🙂 🙂 🙂

(:rolleyes: )
 
How the heck can “liberal” and “Newman Center” be put so closely together in the same sentence? OR ON THE SAME PAGE!? For shame. 😦
 
I’m sorry, I was just making a joke! I’m not saying Newman Center is always liberal. we have a newman club in Portland, OR and it seems pretty solid to me.

But I’m not a regular.
 
grobyak said:
Hi all - a friend of mine are in a discussion about the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He became Catholic a few years ago and attends a rather ‘liberal’ Newman Center at my old college. He was taught that the miracle of the loaves is that people shared their food, versus Jesus multiplying . He said that sharing was miraculous because we are divine, being made in the image of God.

I don’t recall Catholic teaching ever saying that we ourselves our divine because we’re God’s creation.
God bless-
Rob in AZ
Click to expand...
Catholicism is neither “liberal” nor “conservative.” One is either orthodox or unorthodox. Based on what you have told us, this priest is unorthodox. I suggest you have your friend ask him where in the documents of the Church his interpretation may be found. Anything else is personal opinion.

“Divinization” of man is accomplished through the Sacraments of Christ’s Church. Sanctifying grace is God’s own Divine Life, which He shares with us when we receive the Sacraments – we “become partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4). A Mormon on the CA Forum some time ago pointed to CCC 460 as “proof” that the Catholic Church teaches that men become gods just as they allegedly do in Mormonism. Oy veh!.

Katholikos
 
Katholikos said:
Catholicism is neither “liberal” nor “conservative.” One is either orthodox or unorthodox. Based on what you have told us, this priest is unorthodox.
Katholikos
Click to expand...
I agree the Church is neither fully liberal nor fully conservative, for we can agree on some points with liberals, just as we can agree to some extent with fundamentalists. The way I put throughout my whole essay-laden site is, the Church has the hard head of the conservative, but the soft heart of the liberal.
 
Sorry if I ruffled feathers about the Newman remark. I know I can’t speak for all of them, only the one I used to attend at U of New Mexico. As I grew in knowledge and understanding of my Catholic faith, which started at this Newman Center, I came to see some “variations” and “ministries” that were instituted outside the bounds of the approved rubrics and orthodox Catholic teaching. Things started snowballing from there, and I had to finally leave and find a more orthodox parish.

I’m told by some that the Newman Center here at the U of Arizona is “really out there.” I don’t know this for a fact, having not been to it. Perhaps if I finally ever get into grad school, I’ll have the opportunity.

In the same vein, I hear that others are right on the path of orthodoxy.

And Scott, a big hearty AMEN to the church being neither liberal nor conservative. I saw a bumper sticker here a few weeks ago that said “Jesus was a Liberal.” It wasn’t two days later that I saw anotehr that said “Jesus would have been a Republican.” I nearly wanted to rear-end both those cars. I find it very sad and tragic that people want to mold Jesus to fit a human-constructed ideology rather than it being we who conform ourselves to Him. I know too many on both sides of the political spectrum who are more concered with being “liberal” or “conservative” than being Christ-like.

Peace to all this glorious fall day in the desert (where we just had another inch of rain!)-

Rob
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top