Today, we arrive at the pivotal turning point of Matthew’s Gospel and the spotlight falls on identity politics. Jesus’ self-definition is essentially relevant to us. Up till now, this wonder worker would have heard plenty about Himself. To raise a dead to life would have elevated His status beyond today’s standard of a celebrated personality. If Despacito could garner 6 billion views on YouTube, Jesus would have no problem amassing billions of subscribers, if not more. Furthermore, clientele such as Mary Magdalene and Zacchaeus surely attract hearsays. And so, to the query about who He is, the Apostles readily echo the “safe” sentiments floating about the marketplace of salacious gossips and racy rumours. John the Baptist? Elijah? Jeremiah or one of the Prophets?
We all recognise that there is a “safe” way of answering a question without committing oneself. One does it by raising the tone at the end of the reply. It is possibly a product of our post-Truth culture that emphasises a victim identity. A culture which is markedly uncertainty on one hand and where commitment, on the other, might lead to public ridicule, any question is best answered with another question since we can never be sure of anything. Ask children questions and they will reply tentatively. What is the largest city in Malaysia? Kuala Lumpur???
Cutting through the thickets of hearsay or better still, ambiguity and doubt, Jesus poses a personal question the Apostles: “Never mind what others say. Who am I to you?”. Fortunately, we are rescued by Peter’s courage, confidence and conviction. His commitment establishes the foundation of our faith for Peter provides the stability that is all the more necessary these days. “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”. In Peter and his successors, the Church exists through time to personally respond to the question that Christ poses anew each epoch and era: “Who do you say that I am?”.
Indeed, such a faith cannot be merely human as it is also a gift of the supernatural because God wants to establish for Himself a Church to guide humanity safely into eternity. Peter is the key in this endeavour, the rock upon whom the beacon of faith stands and whose light shines a path for mankind along this pilgrimage to the eternal.
Eternity, not temporality is the goal of human existence. Born also of the spirit, we are made for the everlasting which goes beyond mortal death. This vocation to the eternal perdures for as long as we are bound by time and space, which makes Peter’s Confession necessary for our journey and his faith is protected by what we commonly understand as the Apostolic Succession.
For most, this concept or notion is a canon of authenticity to determine which was the true Church and which doctrines belong to the true teachings of Christ. Concretely, tracing the legitimacy of a Bishop’s authority, Apostolic Succession is that line that stretches back to the Apostles. But that is not all there is to it because it is also forward-looking from the perspective of John 6. In that long Eucharistic Discourse between Jesus and the Jews, there is an insistence by the Lord that eternal life is premised on the Sacrament of Eucharist, that is, “If you want to live forever, eat my flesh and drink my blood”. It is a lifeline from eternity.
Such a demand would not make any sense if Christ did not provide for this possibility. How else can we be assured that what we consume is the Body and what we imbibe is the Blood of Christ unless we can be assured that the power of confection is handed down through Apostolic Succession, notably, through the laying on of hands.
Therefore, Peter’s Confession, whilst it is central to the Institution of the Papacy or the Office of the Pope, it is not restricted by it but is at work in the nitty-gritty celebration of the Sacraments Christ gave us—especially Confirmation, Confession, Anointing of the Sick, Eucharist and Holy Orders. Through Peter, the doctrine of Apostolic Succession guarantees that what we receive is what Christ Himself wants to give to us—His Body and Blood, truly, really and substantially present under the appearance of bread and wine. Peter’s Confession of faith is as concrete as it can get in the manner the Church is formed around the Sacraments.
But, unwittingly, we may have painted ourselves into a corner. Virtual conferencing has come to replace face-to-face communications. Earlier in the lockdown, many were lauding this development as the way forward in this new “abnormal”. No doubt, social distancing demanded it. Even though one can conduct business from the safety of one’s home, still people are exhausted. Why? This medium of convenience ignores the centrality of time and space in human interactions. These aspects of reality point towards the sacramental nature of existence. Man is hopelessly sacramental because he is a creature defined by time and space. Two examples. 1st. Francis Xavier used to carry the names of his companions with him in Asia. Just like anyone who carries a photo of a loved one. 2nd. Imagine a man proposing to marry his fiancée through FaceTime whilst defaecating. The very suggestion is gross simply because it makes a mockery of the human and therefore sacramental actions of proposing and consenting to a marriage. A person does not simply propose but will look for a good time and a proper place to do it. In a homogenised setting—anywhere, office, toilet, home, driving—of teleconferencing, the sacramental nature of man is forgotten.
The sacraments are sensible and tangible realities, not virtual. We may have swum in virtuosity to the point we now mistake what is virtual to be real but there is a divide that cannot be bridged, and it is grounded in nature or creation. As an organism, we all need food to survive. How long can a person continue without eating or how long can an online gamer play without sustenance or sleep? Moreover, bodily contact is the basis for human reproduction. Those of you with an offspring, did you produce a child on your own? Even Mary required the agency of the Holy Spirit, proving that sacramentality or mediation is involved in the very act of reproduction. Regrettably, in this pandemic, we have encouraged the vulnerable to receive Spiritual Communion without the proper catechesis that Spiritual Communion is always directed at Actual Communion. The Real Presence of the Eucharist is our Viaticum. In our virtual prison, the exceptions which are Spiritual Communion, life-streamed Adoration and online Masses all run the danger of becoming the rule. The Eucharist is truly Jesus and not a mere symbol as Flannery O’Conner was heard to have remarked, “If it is only a symbol, to hell with it”. For a multitude, the Eucharist is no more than a symbol which explains why Catholics have not rushed back in droves to our parishes.
You recognise that Peter’s Confession and the doctrine of Apostolic Succession are not two distant Roman realities removed from our lived experience. They stand at the very heart of who we are as Church. The Church confects the Eucharist so that She may feed us with the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ Himself. Our journey to heaven is powered by the Sacraments, most especially, the Eucharist. But, without Peter’s Confession which grounds the doctrine of Apostolic Succession, we would never be able to feast on the Bread of eternal life.
At present, the road back to the regular celebration of the Eucharist is arduous and challenging. In a sense, there could be a diabolical aspect to this pandemic. Hence, we need to be spiritually attentive to movements that may, under the guise of “good”, obstruct the providence of this essential food for our journey (the Viaticum) to heaven. Nothing makes the Devil happier than to deny us the Holy Eucharist—the sustenance vital for eternal life. In conclusion, the identity politics of Jesus have nothing to do with race, gender, sexual orientation, social background, class or even religion. Instead, the identity of Jesus—“Who am I to you?” is tied to our salvation. To know who Jesus is, is to be nourished and so be saved by Him.