I simply cannot get over the unbelievable reality that all loaves and fishes discourses perfectly mirror Catholic Sacramental theology in junction with Catholic theology on Christian division.
And it is absolutely appropriate for physical food to image spiritual food, hence, that the there are seven objects in each feeding story is a perfect metaphor for the sacraments.
The other case, of three loaves at midnight, perfectly images disciplinary variation: different time schedules (for Jews, time begins at sunset, for Romans, at midnight.) Hence, midnight is inappropriate for Jesus’ time, yet the friend asks for three loaves as in, in Eastern Tradition, the beginning of the day of life has three loaves, the three sacraments of initiation.
The other stories are total overload:
five loaves, two fish:
Five sacraments require the priesthood and are lacked by heretics: Confession, Confirmation, Eucharist, Holy Orders, Unction. Only two remain for heretics: Baptism and Marriage. Too, two FISH. Fish are caught in the sea, a place of chaos. Protestants are ever in doctrinal chaos. They do not have the earth to grow barely to make loaves. The earth is, 1 Tim 3: 15, the pillar and GROUND of truth, which is Apostolic Succession and Tradition. Only with the stable foundation of the Episcopate and Tradition can Scripture be understood properly, and the fullness of the sacramental life dispensed. Five sacraments require the earth of Bishops and Tradition to grow barely in.
seven loaves, few fish:
As for seven loaves, few fish, the Orthodox, in mere schism, have the earth, or Apostolic Succession and Tradition. Therefore, they have all seven sacraments in validity, seven loaves. But they have a “few fish”, in that what is settled dogmatically in Orthodoxy is LESS than in Catholicsm, relative to Catbholic belief. The Orthodox “waver a little in the water” and “debate” what Rome has claimed in the last millennium.
Finally, there are 5 Apostolic Sees. In the Great Schism, 4 of them broke away. In this land of the East, the land of 4 great Princes of Christendom, the primary separation of Christians, relative to Catholic teaching, has been schism, Catholics and Orthodox.
The land of the West retained only 1 Prince, PETER. However, relative to Catholic teaching, Peter assumes within his singular being the whole authority of Apostolicity He can define, if done freely and supremely from the chair, dogmas all by himself entirely without the consent of the other bishops. Hence, Peter is like all Apostles in himself, and is like the number 5.
And in his kingdom, the primary separation has been heresy, or Catholics and Protestants.
And this is absolutely amazing for a Catholic:
It was to 4000 that seven loaves and a few fish were fed [in the East, there are 4 Apostolic Princes, and the primary separation is SCHISM, seven loaves, few fish]
And it was to 5000 that 5 loaves and 2 fish were fed. So also, in Peter’s Kingdom, the West, the kingdom of FULL Apostolicity (all ***5***Sees in one), the primary division has been HERESY, five loaves two fish.
Jews have a way to measure the day, and the Romans have another way. Jews start at sunset, Romans at midnight. Jesus is a Jew, so His timing is preferred by God. So the Roman time, while not wrong, places timing that is sometimes inappropriate. It is not appropriate to go to your friend at midnight and ask to be lent three loaves. Would be better at sunset.
The Catholic Church has a way of measuring liturgical time, and the Orthodox sometimes different. Neither is really right or wrong, but heaven perhaps prefers Peter’s just as Joseph had a multicolored coat, or Judah was the king of the tribes, losing 10 of his 12 brothers in the North/South Schism, just as Peter lost all his other brothers in the East/West Schism.
Nevertheless, in a different liturgical dimension, not wrong, just different, Peter loans out three loaves to his beloved friend, the princes in the East, that the friend may feed his baby at the beginning of his day, Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist.
I am charitably but seriously challenging if the Orthodox can give an alternate Sacramental interpretation that justifies their position? I am not being facetious, just challenging in all honesty.
Thank you for reading.