Gnostic America

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’”

Who are the “Lord, Lord” preachers? Those who do three given things – which Christ likely means archetypally – but who do not do the will of His Father in heaven. So to understand this passage, we need to understand two things. What are those three archetypal things and what is the will of the Lord’s Father in heaven.

We’ve reviewed what the Father’s will is. In Matthew’s Gospel the Father’s will comes up three times.

(1) It comes up when we pray, “Thy will be done. What does this mean? It means the Father’s will being done is something prayed for and enacted by grace. We assume a posture of passiveness and submission.

(2) It comes up when Jesus says it’s not the Father’s will that any of the lost little ones should perish; He teaches this in the context of bringing the lost brother back into the fold by showing him his sins and giving him the forgiveness of sins; this block of teaching in which He discusses the Father’s will climaxes with His teaching on the keys: whatever is bound on earth is bound in heaven, and that in turn leads into the parable of the unforgiving servant. So, bottom line up front, to not do the will of the Father is to not forgive.

(3) It comes up when Jesus is praying in the garden and asking if the Father might remove the cup from Him; He asks if he must suffer the cross but ends the prayer, “Thy will be done.” And His will was done. Why? Because it was the Father’s will that none of the little ones perish in their sins.

So, the Father’s will is that in His grace He might save the sinner by Christ’s death. Pretty simple. Now, this doesn’t preclude the Father’s will being other things, law things, but at least in the Gospel of Matthew, that’s a major focus.

When Jesus teaches about the preacher or prophet who doesn’t do the Father’s will, this needs to be kept in mind. It might seem at first glance He’s talking about a pastor who lives in sin – and we’ve meditated on how this can be a problem – but the primary false teaching of the false preacher is to run interference with God’s plan of saving sinners through the death of Jesus Christ.

What then of the three archetypal “ministries” of the false preacher? He does three things in Jesus’ name: prophesying, casting out demons, and wonders. Let’s modernize that a bit. He’s a teacher or preacher. He’s good at the art of battling dark mental states. He may do supernatural wonders, or, he may do things that make everyone go “wow!”

Let’s modernize it a bit more with possible candidates. He’s a teacher of some “Christian” program that’s popular at hotel conferences, but has nothing to do with the Gospel and in fact leaves the hearers with a burden. He’s a great Christian counselor with several “How to Do” books on dealing with your psychological distress, but again, there’s little in his teaching in the way of forgiveness, mercy, or even Jesus. He does great things around the world, beginning mass movements, or doing things he says, “could only happen by God’s grace.” But again, there’s very little in his program that has anything to do with Jesus, the cross, or the Father’s intent to save lost little ones.

Do you get the point?

The Father wants His lost little ones saved. He wants forgiveness given out abundantly. That is His will. That’s His will that church’s that pray the Lord’s Prayer – and not all do – pray be done.

Many preachers and teachers may have excellent talks, motivational talks, fun things to listen to. Many “Christian” counselors have excellent abilities to heal our psychic illness. (Or, we think of Jordan Peterson in this regard.) Many people claiming to be Christian preachers do wonders that amaze: “How could this preacher be a false prophet while filling a stadium with people?” they wonder.

There are some who cast out demons in Christ’s name, who are not among the apostles, but they are “for Jesus.” Jesus lauds them. There are some who preach in Christ’s name from evil intent, St. Paul says, but so long as their preaching is OK, he sees a bright lining. The thing that’s intolerable is the one who preaches and acts in Christ’s name, but all along He’s thwarting the Father’s will, which is to save lost little ones.

In this regards Christians need to be far more discerning than they have been. Anyone who claims to be Christian or appeal to Christian ideas – Oprah Winfrey, Jordan Peterson, Joel Osteen, Rick Warren – may do great wonders or have great abilities healing psychic distress. But if their doctrine denies the incarnation, denies salvation for the literal lost little ones (babies), minimizes the preaching of forgiveness, or minimizes the theology of the cross, it doesn’t matter. They look good on the outside, but there’s an awful hangover afterward, that you’ll very often feel in your wallet.

Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.

Very often when Christians think of “the fruits of faith,” they run to deeds. Certainly Jesus’ focus on deeds in our present Gospel warrants such an assumption. Jesus, after all, says, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.”

The message is clear: it’s not just what a preacher says, but what he does. “He doesn’t practice what he preaches.” This is supported by what St. Paul says about ministers, that they are to be above reproach. We’ve meditated how ministers who are “closet sinners,” meaning, they are harboring some sin they don’t repent of, and their message subtly begins to reflect that. They might be preaching the Gospel too much as “a liberation from,” as opposed to, “a fulfillment of” the Law. Or, they might be overcompensating by preaching the Law too harshly.

So what a preach “does” is important, and the hearer should be cognizant of his “fruits” in terms of deeds. But there’s also a lot of support that what Jesus means by fruits is the preacher’s words. What is the support for this?

First, there’s simply the logic of the expression “fruits of faith.” The only thing that truly distinguishes a Christian from a non-Christian is the sounds that come out of his mouth in worship. There are lots of good non-Christians and in the ancient world there were certainly a lot of good pagan teachers. This is what made them look like lambs! But it was their teaching that ended up being thorny. And even in the Christian preacher’s case, if he himself is a wolf, it’s not his personal sin that causes the “ouch” but the teaching arising from that sin.

Second, in the above passage, Jesus says the one with bad fruits will be thrown in hell, if that’s what fire suggests, which is likely. When else does Jesus speak like this in the context of false prophets? Here are His words, which sound almost exactly like our Gospel for this week: “A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

Here, clearly Jesus is talking about words. If that guides our understanding of fruits, then Jesus is talking about words. Those who speak condemnable words will be condemned on the day of judgment, which is to be thrown into the fire. The parallels to today’s passage are clear.

Third, the book of Hebrews and Isaiah both speak of the “fruit of the lips,” and in both cases, it’s in the context of what a false prophet does not do. Remember, a false prophet from his internal vision of a bad world speaks bad things, even if subtly: “The world is evil but here’s how together we can save the world!” The good prophet speaks from a thankful heart and a knowledge that Jesus has brought “peace on earth.” So, hear Hebrews: “Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name.” And now hear Isaiah: “‘I create the fruit of the lips: Peace, peace to him who is far off and to him who is near,’ Says the LORD, ‘And I will heal him.’

Fourth, there’s the simple context. Jesus is talking about prophets! Prophets are preachers, speakers. They in fact are judged by what comes out of their mouths, not by whether they sin. Yes, they should be above reproach. And yes, the hearer should be wary of they have a lifestyle that blatantly goes against the will of God. But as we’ve said elsewhere, there is the difference between a sinner and one who commits sin – the former identifies with his sin and the latter confesses it. The preacher should even do the latter less, but it would be unreasonable for hearers to judge any preacher a false prophet who ever sins.

Finally, we recall what the will of God is, in the context of Matthew. (a) It is something we pray be done; (b) it is to seek and save the little ones, and (c) this by Jesus’ death on the cross. The good prophet “does” this by, well, “This do(ing)” for instance. Jesus says of Holy Communion, “This do.” That’s one important way a preacher “does” the will of God, in which we see everything come together: it is what we pray for; in it Christ seeks and saves the lost little ones through the forgiveness of sins; it conveys the benefits of Christ’s death.

Other ways the preacher “does” this will of God is by getting out of the way of the message of the Gospel, Christ’s words. He preaches repentance and forgiveness.

As we began saying, what a preacher does is also important, and part of the fruits we should evaluate. Especially because he may be playing that subtle game of enabling his sin by his preaching. But in the end, as Jesus Himself expounds later in the Gospel, it’s by a preacher’s words he will be justified. The preacher should be most careful about every idle word. Every word spoken should be geared to standing out of the Father’s execution of His will, seeking the lost little ones, and proclaiming the cross.

Why? Because the Father wants the fruit of the vine to be conveyed to His children. Interesting that.

Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

The faithful prophet bears good fruit because he himself is a good tree.

It begins with the will of God, which is that lost little ones would be brought back into the fold through the forgiveness that Jesus won for him by dying on the cross. This is the righteousness that Jesus began fulfilling when He was baptized. The lost little ones – the spiritually impoverished – pray that God’s will be done, and hunger and thirst for this righteousness. They are filled with it.

To import St. Paul, their faith is reckoned as righteousness. To import St. John, the filling of their soul with the Holy Spirit casts their vision with the goodness of the Lord. Goodness is confessing and repenting of sin, hungering and thirsting for righteousness, praying the Lord’s will to be done, being filled with that righteousness, and bearing the fruits of that righteousness in acts of love toward our neighbor. If a Christian’s vision is filled with “the goodness of the Lord,” goodness abounds, beginning with himself.

The faithful prophet is part of this process. He’s the administrator of God’s goodness and will, passing on to the spiritually poor, hungry, and thirsty the righteousness they seek first. He does this by proclaiming forgiveness. Like Matthew and Peter – the two obvious cases of sinners, a thief and a denier of Christ, received and forgiven by Christ – the minister has been redeemed and made righteous by Christ’s death, and his own heart overflows with this goodness. His preaching reflects this inherent goodness with which he’s been dealt.

Again, the Christian sees the world as full of the goodness of the Lord, and he sees he himself as part of that goodness, and so his preaching, if he’s a preacher, reflects that. “Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom.” That dynamic runs through the Christian’s veins.

Which is why Eucharist. Eucharist means “thanksgiving.” If all the world flows with goodness, in our bosoms, outside our bosoms, running all over, then we have thankful hearts. How could we not? The only ones who don’t have thankful hearts are those who have nothing to be thankful for, because their vision of the world is not filled with the goodness of the Lord, but with badness.

Enter the false prophet.

Let’s begin with St. Paul. “Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

St. Paul refers to the then-arising Gnostic teaching that every creature of God is not good. The creation is an evil mistake by a lesser deity. Every material thing is a corrupted deception. For this reason the Gnostics did things like forbid marriage and abstain from certain foods, both things God created to be received how? With thanksgiving. Why? Because every creature of God is good. And nothing – nothing! – is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving. It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Even Adolf Hitler? Surely our enemies reflect the evil of the world, and surely we should love our brethren and hate our enemies! That’s at least what we’ve heard it has been said, no? No. We pray for our enemies, because they too, even Hitler, are creatures of God.

The false prophet does not begin with this premise. They look at the world as evil. They look at the world as unsaved. In a sense, the false prophet’s greatest error is denial of Jesus’ words from the cross, “It is finished.” They see the world as in need of another savior, another Christ, themselves.

Listen to Jesus’ words about the end of the world. “Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places.”

In the book of Revelation the four horsemen of the apocalypse are war, pestilence, famine, and false prophecy (or the antichrists). It always confused me why false prophecy or the antichrist goes hand in hand with war, pestilence, and famine, until I studied Gnosticism.

The reason is, war, pestilence, and famine seemingly prove the world is evil. If the world is evil, it still needs a savior. Christ is the savior, but evidently the world is still evil; therefore, we still need a Christ. The problem is, if Christ is “locked in” to the flesh and blood person named Jesus, there can be no new claims to “Christ.” Christ is a done deal – “It is finished.” So what do we do with the war, pestilence, and famine?

We need a new Christ! But again, Christ was locked in with the flesh and blood person named Jesus. The solution is, release “Christ” from His flesh and blood. Claim “Christ” is a cosmic archetype that anyone can access, and in fact certain elite spiritual ones do access, and become. Such is are the antichrists, and the Antichrist will be the supreme manifestation of this dynamic.

He comes claiming the world is evil. His vision is filled not with the goodness of the Lord, but with evils all around. His enemies are not creatures of God to be prayed for, for they know not what they do, but to be destroyed as the cosmic mistakes they are. Appearing good, he in fact is filled with what he projects onto the world, evil.

I can’t help but think of the fruits of our Gnostic culture. For decades now we’ve been told that Christians are the intolerant, bigoted haters, and that a culture devoid of religion will only result in peace, love, and harmony. At a philosophical level, we were told that religion builds walls and creates an “us vs. them” attitude that excludes the “other.” That’s the source of all warfare and conflict, pestilence and famine. If only we are freed from religion and carried along in a wave of heightened “woke” consciousness, the world can live as one.

Right. Because what we see in the daily news is nothing but unity and harmony. And what we see among the “woke” is nothing but tolerance and love. What came across first as peace and love ended up being a thorn. What looked like a lamb ended up as a wolf.

The false prophet is filled with evil because he doesn’t see a world redeemed in Christ, full of the goodness of the Lord, and this includes his own self. There is no hopeful repentance, or comforting Gospel. There is only demand after demand reflective of his own insufficiency.

Have you ever run into someone like that? They themselves fall short, so everything about them is a “sermon” of how insufficient you are. Their vision is not filled with the goodness of the Lord, but with a world full of insufficiencies. These people are exhausting.

When a preacher becomes that person, whoa. This can happen in a more evangelical context, where the tone of the sermon is very often, “Are you really living up to Christ’s standards? Do you really love Him? Have you really given your heart to Him?” Or it can happen in a liberal context, “Look at how evil the systems of this world are! You have to be the change!”

In both instances, Christ’s work is incomplete. A Savior is still needed. And instead of finding Christ’s completed work where it’s “locked in” at His flesh and blood, we’re encouraged to find it in something else. Or someone else. It looks good at first. But the thorny fruits follow.

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.

What is it about the wolf that makes it ravenous? It feeds on others to satisfy its desires. That in a nutshell is what makes a false prophet thorny. Recall, Jesus asked if you gather grapes from a thornbush. To do so, one will stick his hand into the bush expecting to find grapes, but end up getting cut. The ravenous wolf masquerading in sheep’s clothing is similar. He comes across benign, innocent, and Christ-like. But as you reach into his soul, you find out he only feeds on others to satisfy his own desires.

Now, there is no minister of the Lord without sin. As the writer to the Hebrews tells us, “[the high priest] offer[s] up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, …For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness.” Similarly did Jesus appoint apostles who had weaknesses and small faith. Their spirit was willing but their flesh was weak. Even St. Paul had his messenger of Satan which he begged the Lord to keep away from him, but the Lord said, “My grace is sufficient for you.”

So messengers, ministers, apostles, and prophets of the Lord will sin. And sin is desire made manifest. So what’s the difference between a good prophet and a false prophet? What makes the sinning false prophet a thorny, ravenous wolf, but the sinning good prophet a source of lamb-like, juicy grapes and figs?

The difference gets into how they deal with the desires of their selves. Often, in the Bible, when the Lord is describing the false prophet, He reveals how they are all about themselves. They prophecy their own thoughts and ideas. We get this especially in the Old Testament reading for this week from Jeremiah. Listen:

“They speak a vision of their own heart, not from the mouth of the LORD. …And to everyone who walks according to the dictates of his own heart, they say, ‘No evil shall come upon you.’  …Indeed they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart, who try to make My people forget My name by their dreams which everyone tells his neighbor, as their fathers forgot My name for Baal.”

False prophets speak “the deceits from their own heart.” They speak from their own desires. St. Peter echos this when he describes the false prophet, saying, “By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words.”

So, the difference between the sinning good prophet and the sinning false prophet, is the sinning false prophet is mustering the Lord and the Lord’s name in his own deceit, to support his own sin. By contrast the faithful prophet keeps his self as far out of the way of the Lord’s Word as can be. He is but a vessel for the Lord’s word.

It gets even more subtle than this. Last devotion we meditated how an antichrist fuzzifies the borders between himself and God. A good prophet wouldn’t do this! It’s very clear in his mind where God ends and he begins. He is a mouthpiece, a servant, a messenger, and the Lord is something quite distinct, with signs, indications, and clear markers as to His presence. In the New Testament this was perfectly clear – God ended where the flesh and blood of Jesus ended. In the Old Testament it wasn’t as simple, but still clear – God made clear His presence with burning bushes, signs, without-a-doubt visions.

The point being, God has never made His voice known through gentle tuggings of the heart or nebulous dreams and visions which could be anything. But the antichristian spirit arises from exactly this dynamic. “I feel like God is moving me to do X, Y, or Z.” There begins the false prophet speaking from the deceits of his heart.

What’s actually happening is pernicious, and leads to that thorny “ouch!” The false prophet has some internal desire, some desire of his heart. That could be anything. It could be a philosophy of life, an ideology, a way of thinking, a paradigm; or it could be some obvious sin, like greed, lust, or disobedience. Where the good prophet is always dying to self, the false prophet begins with a premise that he is to be identified with the desires of his self. “This is who I am!” is running through his veins. Another word for that is pride. He identifies with his desires.

The one who identifies with his sin ends up being defined by it. It’s the difference between an adulterer and one who commits adultery. King David committed adultery, but confessed his sin and was forgiven. Others embrace and celebrate a life of adultery. Being “an adulterer” is a thing of pride.

Well, the false prophet takes things to the next level, creating a message out of the identity arising from his own desires. This is where what we meditated on last devotion about the antichrist comes in. When the line between God and you becomes fuzzy, “Christ” leaks into your heart, and the desires of your heart now begin to be seen as the desires of Christ! Put another way, we project out the desires of our hearts, making an idol, but then we name that idol Christ.

An idolater at least is honest. A false prophet is pernicious, using the name of Christ – as we see in the Gospel for this week – to support the desires of His heart.

But where does the particular thorniness come in? Well, when you, as a hearer, realize your preacher is all about himself, not merely in his personality, but in his preaching, you begin to realize you’re nothing more than a player in his personal psychodrama. You help enable him in his sin. You feed his ego. And in far too many cases, you may end up sexually exploited, or financially exploited. You’ve met the wolf.

Now, the more antichristian ones theology is, the more the thorn will hurt. That is, the more one’s theology has that fuzzy line between God and self, the more one’s preaching will become nothing more than his heart’s desires. This could be the charismatic evangelical informing everyone that God wants the church to raise four million dollars, but it could also be the liberal Christian sharing with everyone her feelings that God would never make someone gay without being in favor of that.

A faithful church that rightly understands the incarnation, and knows without a doubt where God ends and man begins, will always yield to His Word, and put to death the self. Still, even in faithful churches, pastors have to be ever mindful that they’re not subtly adjusting their good theology to support their bad, unrepentant behavior. This is the closet sinner preaching the Gospel a bit too “freely” and teaching the Law is no longer in effect. But it could be the opposite, a closet sinner overcompensating by railing others with the Law.

Bottom line, every preacher needs to be ever careful. And we recall from our previous devotion what the will of God is, so that we can discern who among the “Lord, Lord” preachers is not simply using us to enable him in his sin. The will of God is that not a single little one would perish, and that Jesus would die on the cross. The preacher who “does” that is faithful. How does one “do” that? By stepping out of the way and letting the Lord do what He, in response to our request that His will be done, wills to do. And that is to save little ones through repentance and forgiveness.

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.

This verse speaks of the outside covering and inside motives of the false prophet. We’ll address both the outside and inside today and tomorrow. Today we cover the outside, the sheep’s clothing.

What is the meaning of the “sheep’s clothing”? What does it mean to appear “sheep-like”? Does the metaphor arise from Biblical themes on the lamb, so we should go back to the Passover Lamb and the sacrificial lambs? Or does the metaphor arise more from the nature of lambs themselves, to be harmless and innocent, like sheep led to the slaughter? Or finally, does the metaphor arise from its opposite, the wolf, meaning, whereas a wolf is ravenous and feasts on others, lambs are the opposite of that.

Let’s go with each possibility and see where it takes us.

If we go back to Biblical themes on the lamb, we would be working especially with the statement that Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Jesus fulfills the Passover Lamb and the sacrificial lamb. If that is the reference, then a wolf in sheep’s clothing would be someone claiming to be Christ while actually a devil. It would be the antichrist, the “in place of” Christ.

This interpretation would parallel the image given in the book of Revelation regarding the Antichrist. “Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon.”

The Antichrist claims to be Christ because he denies the flesh of Jesus. He sees “Christ” as more a cosmic archetype – a mantle certain special ones can assume – than an actually flesh and blood person. This is why understanding Gnosticism and its subtle ways is so important to understanding what the Antichrist is.

The antichristian spirit arises when there is a fuzzy line where God ends and man begins. In Christ, there are clear boundaries and borders in God – God ends where the flesh and blood of Jesus ends. (Of course, God is everywhere, but the point of Jesus is, in Him we have “God for us.”)

Once that fuzzy line enters the picture – and Jesus is seen less as the Word made flesh and more as some Cosmic Christ transcending flesh – that opens the door to anyone claiming the mantle of Christ, an antichrist. This happens all the time, and it usually happens hand in hand with an outlook of the world that sees it as still unsaved, or still unredeemed, or as evil.

So, the “ravenous” aspect of the “wolf in sheep’s clothing” (an antichrist) would be because he, a mere human with sin, is claiming to be Christ. Humans are by nature ravenous. Only one human was born without a ravenous nature, Christ. But if that line becomes fuzzy, then a ravenous human can cloak himself with Christ. How this plays out is the topic of our upcoming devotion on the ravenous inside of our image.

There is a lot of truth to mine out of this first interpretation of the wolf in sheep’s clothing, and we will, but several things argue against it. First, Jesus explicitly says He’s teaching about false prophets, not antichrists. They are not exactly the same. Second, when Jesus goes on to give examples of a wolf in sheep’s clothing, He describes how he speaks and does things “in his name.” The one doing and speaking “in the name” of another is a messenger.

Which leads to the second interpretation. If Jesus is speaking about the messengers He sends out, are there passages supporting them being compared to lambs or sheep? There are. Particularly when Jesus sends out the apostles on their “mini-mission,” and says He is sending them out as “sheep among wolves” (Matthew) or “lambs among wolves” (Luke). The theology by which He shares His own “metaphorical lamb’s clothing” with the apostles, is just as He says, “He who receives you receives Me,” and “He who hears you hears Me.”

As lambs sent by Christ, they too will be “sheep led to the slaughter,” as they themselves take up their crosses and share Jesus’ sufferings. They will conform to His sufferings and humility. This is how they are sheeplike. By contrast the wolf will fight and claw out of sufferings and humility, seeking his own advantage, avoiding the cross at all costs.

This interpretation aligns nicely with what Jesus says about His apostles being “sheep among wolves” when He sends them on their mini-mission in the Gospel of Matthew: “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues.”

If we go with this interpretation, the wolf would be something akin to the “health and wealth” Gospel, which is the opposite of the “take up the cross” theology. The wolf would be the one who, implicit in all his teaching, denies the reality of the cross. Yes, there are theologians who will spend their whole lives attempting to craft a “best life now” theology for this world. Such theologians look lamb-like and innocent, but are actually clawing their way into some security in this world.

The third interpretation asks, “What is a sheep? Not a wolf.” So, to understand a sheep we don’t go to the Scriptural background of sheep, or to their nature as innocent and slaughter-bound, but we look rather to the wolf. A wolf is ravenous because it feasts on others. The human parallel is the prophet who takes advantage of others or tries to get their money. In the early church, there was a rule that if a prophet came by, he could only stay for three days. If he stayed four days he was a false prophet. He was squatting.

This interpretation fits what Jesus says about the apostles when He sends them on their “mini-mission” in the Gospel of Luke. He says “behold, I send you out as lambs among wolves. Carry neither money bag, knapsack, nor sandals; and greet no one along the road. But whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace to this house.’ And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest on it; if not, it will return to you.”

Those who received their message would provide food and clothing for them, for a worker is worthy of his wages. In turn the hearer would get gifts of grace and peace. The point is, the apostles presented themselves as prophets with no stakes in this world. No house, no clothes, no food. They lived by grace from God through others who provided for them. In their very persons they were re-calibrating human relations from transactional to grace-oriented. In Christ, He who had nothing gives everything; so also His messengers.

The wolf, by contrast, only continues the same-old, same-old, the human drive toward accumulation and security in this world. He did messenger-like things – preached in Christ’s name, miracles, casting out demons – but in the end these were just outer cloaking for his real motive, which was to secure his spot in this world.

True prophets are pilgrims, vagabonds, and wanderers. They’re all just passing through, here one day, there tomorrow; called here, called there.

Finally, whatever interpretation we run with, it has to align with Jesus’ statement that “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.”

What is the will of the Father? Well, Jesus had just given His disciples a prayer in which we are to pray, “Thy will be done.” So, evidently, fulfillment of the Father’s will is something granted by the Father. Further, in Matthew’s Gospel, we have two specific instances where the Father’s will is revealed: (1) “[I]t is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.” This Jesus taught in the parable of the man finding the lost sheep, after which He teaches forgiveness given through the keys. (2) “My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done.” Well, the Lord’s will, that Jesus would die for the sins of the world, was to be done.

If the will of the Father is forgiveness, and the Church administering that forgiveness, then the message from Christ is clear: a false prophet does not do the will of the Father, to pass on the gifts and benefits of Christ’s death. He may do miracles, preach in Christ’s name, or even have abilities to battle the dark powers of the human mind, all in the name of Christ. But if he doesn’t present the Lamb and His sacrifice in a lamb-like way, not seeking gain from his hearers but seeking what he can give, in humility and sacrifice, he is a false prophet.

You could call the eight Sunday after Trinity “False Prophet Sunday.” The Old Testament brings up the classic statement on false prophecy, and the Gospel is Jesus’ foundational teaching on false prophets. To this point so far in the Trinity season, we have not been able to comment much on Gnosticism, which was one of the goals of this devotional. Sometimes the Gospel is so glorious you forget about error; also, while the nature of Gnosticism is to be opposed to all that is Gospel – and therefore each Gospel could have a Gnostic counterpoint – much of it would be redundant.

This week is an exception. It being about false prophecy, it will launch us into several analyses of Gnostic teaching. The Scriptural teaching on false doctrine, resonating with Jesus’ words this week, has several concepts that we will probe this week, about lawlessness, covetousness, the Self, the magical use of Christ’s name, the incarnation, the view of the world as evil, and so on. It should be an interesting week.

But lets begin with basics.

First, every Christian should grapple with the reality of false doctrine and false prophecy. St. Paul says, “there will be false teachers among you.” It’s a reality of the Christian. It tests us. It proves there is something profoundly spiritual going on. I have to shake my head when I see Christian pundits or commentators complain how Christians are treated differently than Muslims. Of course that would be the case. The devil is the prince of this world and going after Christians, and Jesus promised this would be the case. When it happens, why do we bristle? If anything, we should be thankful it hasn’t been far worse.

False doctrine is a thing. It’s a very real thing. Jesus doesn’t give His words so that we become heresy hunters – that itself is a particular form of false prophecy – but He also doesn’t give them so that we can become complacent and deem any discernment as “judgmentalism.”

Let’s do a quick review about some basic things the Bible teaches about false prophecy (that we will get more into throughout the week): (1) They teach lawlessness; (2) they perform false miracles to deceive; (3) their doctrines are rooted in covetousness – this is the “thorniness” of their teaching Jesus talked about; (4) they teach the world is evil and that only they (the false prophet or false christ) are the answer to the world’s evils; (5) they deny the incarnation and the doctrine of the Trinity.

Second, our Gospel for this week emphasizes that no everyone who claims the name of Christ is therefore to be heard. In this devotions we’ve several times referenced the trick of taking what one believes, feels, or has a passion for, and then projecting it outward, and naming it “Christ.” That way one can sanctify ones own desires. This was the exact sin Jeremiah warned against in the Old Testament reading for this week, and it permeates all false prophecy. It’s a very subtle ploy we’ll get more into later this week.

Third, false prophets teach and preach lawlessness. That word comes up time and time again in dealings with false teaching. Jesus brings it up this week; He brings it up again when talking about the false prophecy in the end times; St. Paul brings it up as well. Jesus began His sermon warning against those who do not “do and teach” the Ten Commandments. He means it. But there’s a more sublime understanding of “lawlessness” going on that leads into a discussion of Gnosticism. We’ve dealt with this topic before but we’ll review it.

Fourth, the antidote to false teaching in the teaching of Jesus. The Jeremiah reading for this week described the Word of God as a hammer. The false prophets were those who tried to soften the blow of God’s Word, to prophecy “Peace! Peace!” when in fact judgement was right around the corner. If Jesus’ words are harsh, the solution is not to re-image them in a softer way that’s culturally or psychologically friendly. The solution is to receive it the way concrete receives the seed. The seed will grow and break up the concrete, like a hammer, but the seed must be received.

Fifth, in the context of the previous paragraph we need to remember the “Sermon on the Mount Cycle” that correlates to the “dying to old sins and rising to new life” we embrace as we take up the cross daily to follow Jesus. What is that cycle? It’s this: (1) As we hear Jesus’ teaching, we hear it in awe and reverence because Jesus is God – that itself is the “rock” foundation; (2) because it’s the Word of God and not man, we set it up as a standard, something we wish we could follow perfectly, because that is the right way to live; (3) because of the standard these teachings establish, we are humbled, feel ourselves spiritual poor, are sad because of this fact, and desire to live the way Christ teaches; (4) with that, Jesus has just caused us to become part of the first four beatitudes, particularly the fourth, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled; (5) Jesus fills us with His righteousness, the bread of everlasting life in Holy Communion; (6) having been filled with our righteousness, we return to Jesus’ teachings, ever striving to live up to what He teaches; return to point # 1.

How does this relate to false doctrine? Because the false teacher generally seeks to short-circuit this process, finding some way to whitewash Jesus’ teaching or the fulfillment of it. Ultimately the false teacher wants to undermine the power of the seed to do its work, to soften the blow of the hammer and the life that follows.

But the false teacher’s false heart will be exposed soon enough. He will be seen as a teacher not of Christ’s teaching, but a teacher of the Self. Like a person who comes across as nice at first, but after awhile is revealed to be “all about himself,” so is the false prophet. That is the thorn prick; that is where you extend your hand into his teaching, and it comes out bloody from all the thorn pricks.

Christ’s teaching is a rock, not shifting sand. It’s a rock upon which we build our houses. It’s a rock that carries authority, the authority of the Son of God. It’s a rock that hammers us hard, but leads to a fruit of righteousness. As the author of Hebrews writes, “Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.”

And they took up seven large baskets of leftover fragments. Now those who had eaten were about four thousand. And He sent them away, immediately got into the boat with His disciples, and came to the region of Dalmanutha.

What’s the significance of the seven leftover baskets? Studying the symbology of the number seven takes us way beyond the scope of a devotion. It has all sorts of meanings. It’s the number of completeness, being the number of days God created the heavens and the earth. It’s the number of rest, the Sabbath being the seventh day of the week. For our purposes in this Gospel, there were seven nations around Israel, so it represented the gentiles.

So, simply speaking, it could just be a way of Christ closing the loop on His encounter with the Canaanite woman. She said that, as a gentile dog, she had a right to the crumbs that fell off of Israel’s table. If the twelve disciples represent Israel – and remember how they were the ones snootily being dismissive of the woman – their “crumbs” or leftovers, remaining after the feeding of the 4,000 were the abundance to be given to the gentiles.

But let’s go with another interpretation that might be richer and more true to the images introduced by both the feeding miracles. What, after all, is the big image invoked? Of course it’s Israel wandering in the wilderness, being fed by manna, the “bread from heaven.” Jesus explicitly states this in the John account of the feeding.

Was there a background to their being “leftovers” in that feeding? Yes! Actually a pretty big point is going on with leftovers in that Old Testament daily feeding. Israel was NOT to save leftovers, but only take what they needed for the day. If they did, that bread would rot the next day. However, on the Sabbath Day, they were to do no work, so on Friday they could collect extra – leftovers – and save it for the next day. So God sent extra on Friday, enough for leftovers, for the one day of the week on which they would have rest.

Hmmm. If God sent enough bread only for the Sabbath Day, because on that day they had rest, why oh why would Jesus give enough bread for seven extra baskets, as if He were providing enough bread for seven days of rest? Could it be because with Him, Him being the one greater than Moses from whom comes grace and truth, every day is a day of rest? This interpretation works insofar as Jesus said, “Come to Me you who are weak and heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Jesus is a seven day Savior, making each day a day of rest. Also, He finished His work on Friday for ever. Rest is all we have now. So, we don’t have to work for any bread anymore. The Lord provides for it all. Grace and truth truly.

Or, a final interpretation. Maybe it’s the one staring us in the face every day as we pray, “Give us this day our daily bread.” Seven days of the week; seven baskets providing for each day.

One thing is for sure, Jesus emphasized the number of baskets left over a few verses later when in the boat, so it matters. But matters how? To understand what’s going on we have to start with the end and back up.

Jesus recounted both His feedings to His disciples and asked them specifically how many baskets were left over after each feeding. “Twelve” and “seven,” answered the disciples. Clearly the number of baskets left over was significant and was an action parable, signifying something.

Jesus asked them this question after the disciples wondered if Jesus was commenting on their lack of bread when He warned them of the leaven of the Pharisees and Herod. “It’s because we have no bread.” When talking about the leaven of the Pharisees and Herod, it was right after the Pharisees had asked Jesus for a sign, and Jesus sighed deeply and said no sign would be given it.

Why did Jesus sigh deeply? Clearly there was something hugely important everyone was missing. To summarize, the “leaven” of the Pharisees was to test Jesus and ask for a sign, and Jesus’ two feeding miracles – specifically the number of baskets left over – answered that text, so to speak. And the disciples seemed to be completely clueless, worrying about food.

Recall the Sabbath Day was a “sign”: “It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.”

Forever means forever, meaning still now. The Sabbath Day is the seventh day on which the Lord rested and was refreshed. Israel too was refreshed, not having to work for their bread. Jesus didn’t come to end the law, but to fulfill it.

He’s fulfilling it in the feeding of the 4,000. He’s turning each day into a Sabbath Day to be remembered.

So, the Pharisees asked for a sign, and Jesus sighs deeply because they missed the biggest and most obvious sign anyone should have been able to see: Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath causing each day to be a refreshment; He fulfills the sign God gave to Israel in the Sabbath Day. The Pharisees should have recognized this sign. Meanwhile, the disciples should have recognized the significance of the statement as well, and not worried about not having bread in the boat.

All this happened, after Jesus was with His people for three days. “After three days” a new Sabbath was instituted, the refreshing feast of daily bread.

So they ate and were filled.

This verse ties together several themes and passages together.

It once again brings up the connection between bread and satisfaction, or being filled. At first glance, this would seem an obvious point: Eat and get filled. On this level, we can look at verses like these from Proverbs: “Do not love sleep, lest you come to poverty; Open your eyes, and you will be satisfied with bread.” And, “He who tills his land will be satisfied with bread, But he who follows frivolity is devoid of understanding.”

But if we turn Jesus into a teacher of practical wisdom – and there is no lack of evidence of those who try to do this – we miss the point. Accordingly, say someone wanted to teach that it’s important to work hard, so he gives a sermon on working hard. He finds all the passages in the Bible, like those above, that say you have to work hard or you will not eat. When he gets to the feeding of the 4,000 or 5,000, which seems to show people eating without having done anything but sitting in the green grass, he’ll point out how they had to walk long distances to hear Jesus preach, so there was their work. Not a bad point – and not a bad way of rounding out the “don’t work; don’t eat” formula of Scripture – but not the point of the Gospel.

Rather, clearly, Jesus’ feeding of the 4,000 is intended not to make a comment about the relationship between work and reward, or about charitable giving, but about something more spiritual. We’ve mentioned Isaiah 55 before. It serves as an excellent background to this Gospel. It has these words, “Why do you spend money for what is not bread, And your wages for what does not satisfy? Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good, And let your soul delight itself in abundance. Incline your ear, and come to Me. Hear, and your soul shall live.”

There is a bread that is not bread, a bread that appears to satisfy but doesn’t really. Rather, as the Lord told Jesus in the wilderness, man does not live by bread alone, but by every word proceeding from the mouth of God. Or as the above Isaiah passage says, “Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good, And let your soul delight itself in abundance. Incline your ear, and come to Me. Hear, and your soul shall live.” The eating here is of God’s Word.

Well, Jesus is God’s Word made flesh, and this brings us to John 6, another passage tied together by the concluding words we’re meditating on today, “So they ate and were filled.” After the feeding in John 6, the crowds followed Jesus, and Jesus rightly recognizes what’s going on. “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.”

Following Jesus because He can fill you with food is the wrong motive. Following Jesus because He makes your life better in this world is the wrong motive. Yet how often to people turn the Gospel into this sort of message? The Sunday sermon becomes valuable for the valuable life lessons it teaches, not for the Person it proclaims.

Rather, Jesus says, they should have noticed “the sign.” And this ties in the Gospel for this week with what comes immediately after it in the Gospel of Mark. Here: “Then the Pharisees came out and began to dispute with Him, seeking from Him a sign from heaven, testing Him. But He sighed deeply in His spirit, and said, ‘Why does this generation seek a sign? Assuredly, I say to you, no sign shall be given to this generation.’ ”

He had just given the most obvious of His signs. He basically commandeered half the Torah – the wilderness wandering period which comprises mid-Exodus to the end of Deuteronomy – and applied it to Himself. Clearly this was the “prophet like me” Moses promised, no? Everyone could see that. Yet, the Pharisees missed it, and so did the bulk of the people there. They were satisfied, but missed out on the greater satisfaction, the sign Jesus was showing.

There is a “being filled” that comes from a bread you can’t buy from a bread that’s not bread. We know what that is, but again, it’s nice to line up all the textual data and see it clearly:

From Isaiah: “Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good, And let your soul delight itself in abundance. Incline your ear, and come to Me. Hear, and your soul shall live.”

From the Gospels: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.”

From the beatitudes: “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, For they shall be filled.”

From Jesus: “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.”

From Jesus in John 6: “For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world. …I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, …I am the bread which came down from heaven. …I am the bread of life. …This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. …I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world. …This is the bread which came down from heaven – not as your fathers ate the manna, and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.”

So, there is a bread that truly satisfies, that money cannot buy, that satisfies our hunger for righteousness. It’s God’s Word; it’s mercy centered on Jesus Christ; it’s Jesus; it’s His flesh. To add more elements from Isaiah 55, it’s a bread that draws in Gentiles, and it’s a bread centered on an eternal covenant. Well, as to that last point, here from Jeremiah: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. …No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

So we can throw the forgiveness of sins into the mix of things attained by the bread that truly satisfies. Anyone clue as to what this could be? A bread that is the flesh of Christ, rooted in the new covenant, given for the forgiveness of sins, in which the Word of God is proclaimed?

Jesus fed the 4,000 to give a sign. That sign is His Supper. His Supper truly satisfies. He didn’t leave behind His disciples to feed masses of people with few loaves. But He did leave behind His Supper to be administered at least weekly if not more, for we ask for our daily bread, and if the bread that truly satisfies is not the bread we buy, that petition has to mean some thing more than just regular bread.

So He commanded the multitude to sit down on the ground. And He took the seven loaves and gave thanks, broke them and gave them to His disciples to set before them; and they set them before the multitude. They also had a few small fish; and having blessed them, He said to set them also before them.

Every Eucharist should bring to mind this signature miracle, this miracle that’s one of the few episodes found in every Gospel (along with Jesus’ baptism, walking on water, crucifixion, and resurrection). Jesus is showing His soon to be apostles how to administer Holy Communion, showing the symbolism going on behind it. Every time a minister gives thanks over bread and distributes the bread to God’s people, he should be thinking of this miracle, because they are so related. Surely this is exactly what the apostles thought of while administering the “breaking of bread.”

A significant element of the ritual is the “giving of thanks,” which gives us the word “Eucharist,” which means “thanksgiving.” The residual of this element is the words of the liturgy that go, “It is truly meet, right, and salutary that we should at all times and in all places give thanks…”

Yes we should. At all times and in all places. Why do we give thanks thusly? Because the earth is full of the goodness of the Lord. How do we see an earth full of the goodness of the Lord? Because we see it through Christ, whose body is the fullness of Him who fills all in all, who Himself descended and ascended so that He might fill all things.

If Jesus fills all things, all things are a gift for which we ought be thankful. How an we not?

Communion takes two elements of the creation, two elements requiring man’s manufacturing – in other words, the totality of the creation (God’s creation and man’s working with God’s creation) – grain and grape, bread and wine, and fills it with Jesus, as a type of His filling of all creation.

We receive communion as given and shed for our forgiveness, the true Gospel in a nutshell. But what about the rest of creation, which is also filled with Christ? Communion trains us to receive it all as “filled with Christ.” Everything becomes “sacramentalized.” Not in the same way, of course, that communion is, but in a theological sense, we receive the whole world, all the events of the world, all the events of our own lives, as filled with Christ. That might include His cross, which ennobles and sanctifies the ugly bits of this world. He fills all things, even the ugly things, His cross giving meaning to those ugly things.

And if everything is filled with Christ, even the ugly things, how can we not give thanks?

Goodness, Jesus was in a desert with upwards of 10,000 hungry people. He had compassion on them – problem. Solution? Give thanks over bread! That’s the yeast of God, the doctrine of God, that feeds everyone and leaves leftovers.

Communion teaches us to give thanks over all things, to have “giving thanks” the climax of our week, so that this giving of thanks might spill over into our lives throughout the week. What deserts to we find ourselves in? What impossible situations do we find ourselves in? A non-Jesus would panic and worry. A Jesus gives thanks as a miracle happens. Because that giving of thanks adds a leaven to the bread that becomes manifest in due time.

A minister gives thanks over mere bread and repeats Jesus’ words of institution, and soon a bunch of people are given eternal life. That’s a good predicate for the week.

The earth is full of the goodness of the Lord. “Oh, that men would give thanks to the LORD for His goodness, And for His wonderful works to the children of men!”

That verse is repeated four times in Psalm 107. Read it. It gives such pearls such as this, which serves as a nice anthem to this week’s Gospel: “For He satisfies the longing soul, And fills the hungry soul with goodness.”

He asked them, “How many loaves do you have?” And they said, “Seven.”

So what was it that expanded the seven loaves so as to feed 4,000 men? What is it that expands bread? God and leaven. Specifically, God’s Word and leaven.

The two are related.

Just after the feeding of the 4,000, which came shortly after the feeding of the 5,000, the Pharisees asked Jesus for a sign. He sighed. Given what we meditated on last meditation, we can see why. Everything Jesus did was a complete fulfillment of an obvious, strong theme in the Old Testament. The Lord provides bread from heaven; Jesus provides bread from heaven. Who could possibly miss that sign? So Jesus in essence says, “Enough, no more signs.”

Then this passage comes up: “Now the disciples had forgotten to take bread, and they did not have more than one loaf with them in the boat. Then He charged them, saying, “Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.”

The disciples, obviously forgetting what Jesus had just done – twice! – wonder if Jesus was upset that they had no bread, as if this were a problem with One who just fed upwards of 20,000 people with twelve loaves of bread. When Jesus reminds them of this, the Gospel of Matthew tells us (but not Mark), they realize He’s talking about the doctrine of the Pharisees. (Another interesting divergence between Matthew and Mark, is in Matthew, Jesus talks about the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees; in Mark, the Pharisees and Herod. The Sadducees were indeed the more political religious party, who would have been in cahoots with Herod’s people.)

A few other hints. In Luke Jesus says the leaven of the Pharisees is hypocrisy, and then says, “For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known.” This reminds us of Jesus’ parable of the leaven, in which He says, “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened.” Leaven is hidden, but then exposes itself by its results, which is expanded bread.

Let’s play with the image for a bit and see where it goes. St. Paul brings up leaven always negatively, twice when he talks about how a little bad doctrine can ruin the whole body. One time is moral, when he warns about the Corinthians tolerating sexual immorality; the second is doctrinal, when he warns the Galatians about tolerating those who insisted on circumcision.

He uses an interesting image with the Corinthians. He says they are “puffed up” and glorifying in their tolerance of sexual immorality. Well, “puffed up” works nicely with the leaven image, right?

Coupled with the connection between the Pharisee’s leaven and hypocrisy, we can see how the Pharisee’s got “puffed up” with airy nothingness in their teaching of the Law – a lot of blind-leading-blind fluff that sounded nice, but in the end produced nothing. A bun is just a Saltine cracker with yeast, but though it appears larger and more filling, in fact it is not.

So, if we run with this imagine, Jesus might be saying, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees,” meaning, “The teaching of the Pharisees is like leaven, all puffy fluffiness without really adding anything to it.” By contrast, Jesus actually added to the dough. He didn’t just do a parlor trick with yeast and cause existent bread to expand a bit more. He created.

Can we surmise from this that the bread Jesus used was unleavened, just as He used at the Last Supper? We can’t know for sure.

But then there’s the parable, where Jesus talks of leaven positively, unlike St. Paul. It’s hidden in the meal but then later its exposed for what it is. He gives this parable just after His comparisons of the Kingdom of Heaven to a seed. Seeds work similarly. Hidden, but then exposed as the beautiful growths they are.

Running with this image, we might say Jesus’ miracle was an after-the-fact action parable. 4,000 men had followed Him out into the wilderness to hear Him preach, to hear His doctrine. His doctrine expanded 12 men to 4,000. Those were real results. And it wasn’t airy nothingness or puffy fluff, which the hypocrisy of the Pharisees created. It was real.

And it continued after Jesus ascended. Those twelve men went out and with baptism taught new disciples to observe all things Jesus had instructed them on. That’s resulted in a Church of some two billion people today. Not bad leaven.

Though hidden at the time, hanging on a cross abandoned by most of His disciples, surrounded by just a few, outside the city gates, in the darkness, this hidden event has become manifest as the powerful, life-changing, world-changing event it was.

Jesus’ Word did it. His word of blessing or giving thanks. His doctrine expands the bread, as St. Paul writes, “For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.”

This is the day of the expanding man.