Skip to main content

A Large Catch Of Fish, and Jesus Comes To Breakfast (John 21:1-14)

 It's possible the apostles didn't believe what they had already seen, so Jesus comes again to reveal himself. It might've been a kind of hangover for the apostles, because they had such joy when they saw Jesus again, and then they had to go back to regular life.

Or so they thought.

Several of them went fishing, including St. Peter. They didn't catch anything. It reminds me of when Jesus said, "Apart from me, you can do nothing."

They thought they saw a man on the beach, and they didn't know it was Jesus. Whether Jesus prevented them from knowing it was him, or whether they couldn't see them because they were a long way off, Jesus wanted to wait until the right moment to let them know it was him. As it turned out, Jesus decided to let the miracle do the talking. They cast their nets on the right side of the boat. St. Peter probably thought he was just being nice to a guy trying to give him advice on fishing. He is a fisherman; I would hope Peter knows what he's doing by now.

They couldn't haul it in by themselves, because they caught so many fish.

St. John is the one who told Peter that it was the Lord. I guess Peter thought that it would be undignified to meet the Lord again in his work clothes, which were almost nothing, so he put his regular clothes on and jumped right in the water, to meet Jesus at the shore.

Jesus had already made a charcoal fire with fish and bread, and he told them to bring some of the fish they had just caught. St. John tells us that they caught 153 large fish. Even so, the net was not torn. Perhaps St. John sees this as a miracle; the number of fish probably is, especially since they caught nothing the night before. Here's an interesting question: did St. John recognize Jesus with his eyes, or did he know it must have been Jesus, because of the miracle?

I think it's fair to say that Jesus ate in front of them to prove he was alive, and that they had not seen a ghost, when they saw him before.

In worship, we bring the ordinary things of life--like bread and wine--and they become for us the body and blood of Christ. On this occasion, God gives the ordinary things in life, and shares them with us. "God is with us." It's a profound mystery that goes both ways: he sheds light on God, because he is God, and he sheds light on our humanity, because he shares it with us.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...
17 comments
Read more

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...
Post a Comment
Read more

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...
Post a Comment
Read more