INTERPRETING THE EUCHARISTIC ELEMENTS - Iain McKillop
1Cor.11:22 calls us to take Communion “in a worthy manner”. This encourages us to come to the service spiritually prepared, aiming to be holy & worship “in spirit & in truth”. Worthy preparation may include considering sins & failings, seeking forgiveness, turning our lives around to be more authentic followers of God. We seek to comprehend what we can of the Eucharist to take part meaningfully. This might include:
Despite the richness & depth of potential meanings within the Eucharist many modern churches have reduced the sense of significance applied to it. In mediaeval & Orthodox churches congregations did not always participate in the elements; it was thought that blessings were conferred by just being present Today, while some church traditions celebrate the Eucharist daily, others have reduced its frequency to monthly, quarterly or yearly, & some no longer include the Eucharist at all. Some Evangelical Anglican churches disregard the rubric that the Eucharist should be offered frequently, laying more emphasis on preaching & song than sacrament.
The various words that Christians use for sharing Communion demonstrate a wide variety of interpretations among Christians. They reflect the multi-varied aspects of people’s spirituality. The service is variously called:
These & other titles reflect a number of differences in theological or church-cultural interpretations of the practice. Since individuals, communities & cultures are so varied, beliefs, practices & interpretations of meaning will also vary. It is inevitable that we may change in our understandings or feelings as we develop spiritually, physically, intellectually & emotionally & as we encounter varied experiences & traditions.
As well as these varied interpretations of the meal, different Christians interpret or understand what they are doing & receiving in several ways:
2/ Epiclesis [first used by Irenaeus C2nd] - means ‘calling upon’ or ‘invoking God’s presence’, which includes prayer for the consecration of the elements by the Holy Spirit & asking Christ to be present with us.
The truth of what the Eucharist is, may possibly contain elements of many or even a majority of these & more. Many superstitious, interpretations or connotations about the Eucharist developed in churches throughout history. Some interpretations definitely seem unsound, such as beliefs about magical qualities of the consecrated elements & some literal/physical interpretations of ‘transubstantiation’. Christ definitely gave the Eucharistic celebration to his followers, with the intention that it should become a significant event or memorial for Christians to share regularly. (Churches differ over how often they share it together.) He told his disciples that this meal was a participation in his body & his blood. (The word translated ‘take, eat’ is more precisely ‘devour’.) But I do not believe that it is now possible for us to comprehend exactly what Jesus meant by giving these symbols & by calling the bread his ‘body’ & the wine his ‘blood’. From the surviving evidence of the Gospel accounts & early traditions, it does not seem that Jesus ever explained exactly what he meant by using the words “my body & my blood.” [Matt.22:66; Mk.14:22; Lk.22:19].
Although individuals may disagree with certain interpretations, I am not sure that any particular Christian or doctrinal standpoint has the moral right to deny the sincerely-held interpretations of other believers. For example, those who are rationally or doctrinally certain that ‘Transubstantiation’ is true or false, often feel that they have a responsibility to ‘stand for the truth’ & convince those who believe otherwise. Whatever Jesus meant by “Take, eat, this is my body” is what we take and eat, whether we interpret it correctly or not. In this life at least, what is ‘true’ within the Eucharist is always going to remain veiled in ‘mystery’.
I am not sure that we have a right to ‘correct’ others’ views or sincere beliefs, though we may wish to persuade some of truths within our interpretation. It is wise ot remain open to learn from others’ interpretations, for the broadening of our own relationship with God. The history of the Church is littered with individuals & groups that have persecuted others for ‘heresy’ over issues like the interpretation of the Eucharist. We recognise now that many of the victims of such persecutions were falsely attacked & that the persecutors themselves were not being true to Christ or God’s ways. While scripture tells us to seek the truth & encourages us to root out what is wrong, it does not give us a carte-blanche to undermine the faith of others, or destroy them, as Crusaders did. Destruction of heresy was the approach of Pharisees & Sadducees who thought that they were protecting truth according to the commands of the Hebrew Scriptures when they persecuted & executed Jesus. Their aimed to keep the faith & the people pure may have been faithful, but destructivity damages the advance of true faith.
The Christians Scriptures claim that we have a responsibility to advance understanding of what is true. We are also justified in aiming to help people rationalise & seek truth in what they believe & do. But amid the varieties of approach to spirituality, we need to recognise, that no individual or group has monopoly of truth with regard to ‘spiritual mysteries’. Is our teaching we should consider helping people understand many of the interpretations or references that make the Communion so significant, in order to develop & deepen their spiritual understanding. Primarily we want to help people find a secure relationship with God & be authentic disciples, seeking truth in all they do & believe.
SYMBOLIC MEANINGS, HISTORIC CONTEXTS & MEMORIALS
In addition to the different particular interpretations of what we are doing & sharing, believers often find in the Eucharistic meal, reflections or apparent references to significant events, symbols & metaphors in the Hebrew & Christian Scriptures. Not all of these may specifically contained within the Eucharist, but historic or symbolic references can give believers a deeper sense of meaning when they take Communion. The liturgy mentions some of these parallels & symbols but popular or theological interpretations often expand upon these. Some of the most common are contained within this list:
HEBREW SCRIPTURES
NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES
These are mostly metaphors & symbolic parallels, rather than precise aspects of the meaning of the Eucharist. They can add to the profundity which we may sense when we receive the elements. But what essentially matters is not the depth of our understanding of what we are receiving, as it is a mystery rather than something we fully comprehend. I believe that the primary reason for receiving the Eucharist is to help link us to the truth of whatever God is about & whatever Christ has achieved for us, & to help us feel that we are in the presence of that truth. The liturgy reminds us of the story of Christ & salvation & many believe that they are receiving something that confers God’s grace on them & on the Church. The sacramental aspect suggests that we take communion primarily as a covenant vow to follow Christ’s ways & consecrate ourselves to truth & God, as whatever is true about God is consecrated to us.
WHAT ESSENTIALLY MATTERS?
I believe that the most significant aim in presenting Communion, is to enable the act to become meaningful for each person who participates. We want that meaning to be true, though whatever ways are true are known to God alone. It is important that churches aim to help participants feel that what they are doing is significant & to help assure them that they are individually & collectively united with God through Christ (whatever that means). Jesus’ main intension in instituting the Eucharist seems to have been for his followers to participate together in an act which essentially reminds us that we belong personally & corporately to God. His prayer on the night before he died, as describes in John 17, was that we might be united with each other & with God: “May they all be one. As you Father are in me, & I am in you, may they also be one in us...” [Jn.17:21]
As we share Communion we should value our individuality & corporate identity, as God values us, & as Jesus demonstrated in his self-offering on our behalf. As St. Paul emphasised when giving instructions on Communion, Christianity is not an individualistic religion [1Cor.11:20-21]. It is challenging to ensure that when we share Communion, we focus our appreciation beyond ourselves & our personal relationship with Christ, to consider that God has unified us, brought us together & values us corporately. The variety in our world suggests that we are designed to be diverse & live & think differently. Corporate life & celebration should build us together as a body of diverse people. The Eucharist will always be understood differently by different people who participate. Valuing this might help us grow spiritually, learning from other’s interpretations.
THE PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS
When I was wrestling with whether I was called to ordination, and not feeling and not feeling worthy,or a leader, I was helped by a phrase in a book on the priesthood: “It is the responsibility of the priest to help all members of ‘the priesthood of all believers’ to recognise and fulfil their priestly role. “ Coming previously from a non-conformist background, which stresses the priesthood of all believers, this helped to confirm my calling.
Congregations should be helped to recognise their role as part of the ‘Priesthood of all Believers’. This doctrine recognises that all God’s people are “a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests to our God.” [Ex.19:6; Isa.61:6; 43:21-24; Deut.7:6; 14:2 & 21; 1 Pet.2:9; Rev.1:6 & 5:10]. Christ’s followers should recognise that we have priestly responsibilities towards God, each other, others beyond our community, & priestly duties to perform in our world. An ordained priest celebrating the Eucharist is presiding on behalf of all present. Congregations are rarely taught that all are responsible to be “a royal priesthood, a Holy nation”, putting their full efforts & minds into the service. Some clerics seem to behave as though they feel they are superior to their congregants, but that is not ‘service’ as Christ taught it. When Jesus’ disciples rivalled for position, Jesus reminded them that he & his followers are meant “to serve, not to be served” [Matt.20:20-28; Mk.10:35-45]. The priest’s role is to enable all members of the Church to fulfil their priestly duty. An important word in the communion service is the ‘Great Amen’ which concludes the Eucharistic Prayer. By acclaiming this confidently together we acknowledge that all of us together as God’s priestly people mean & assent to what the celebrant has prayed.
Presiding at, giving & receiving the Eucharist should be an egalitarian practice. It is special gift & responsibility to be both a priest & receiver, but neither is more important than the other. Teaching his disciples about service, Jesus reminded them: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” [Acts 20:35]. All should regard ourselves as servants of truth and not pander to a false hierarchy of importance in the Church or in community. Each believer has a variety of roles & responsibilities, but a priority should be to serve the world, not even to serve one another in the Church community. Being able to receive the Eucharist is a gift of God’s grace. It does not make the priest who presides more significant than those who receive. Neither, I believe, do churches have a right to withhold the Eucharist from anyone who wishes to receive, just as Manna was God’s gift available for all.
Communion should help us recognising our value in God’s eyes, but this should be balanced by humility in realising our limitations & dependency on God’s grace, forgiveness & love. None should take the gift of the Eucharist arrogantly, feeling they ‘deserve’ to be here. This is a reason why I like the ‘Prayer of Humble Access’ though I know some are uncomfortable with it, regarding it as humiliating. In the liturgy I also feel uncomfortable with the call: “God’s holy gifts for God’s holy people.” It is adapted from an Eastern rite used since C4th, which says: “holy things for holy people”. From experience neither I, many in congregations, or other priests, could be called universally “holy”. It might be better to adapt the phrase to something more theologically precise like: ‘God’s holy gifts for those who are declared (or made) holy by God’s grace.’
It is receiver’s responsibility to make sure that they take the Eucharist in a meaningful way. We do not fully understand the meaning of St. Paul’s warning against taking the bread & wine “in an unworthy manner” [1Cor.11:27-30]. Paul’s warning may have been speaking into a specific context now lost in time. His declaration that some had become ill or died as a result of unworthily taking the elements seems over-the top, so he may have been referring to a particular contemporary superstition. Hopefully most churches today would no longer seek to impose superstitions on their congregations, though I have encountered many believers who indulge in biblically unsound superstitions. However, this warning definitely reminds us that sharing in the Eucharistic meal is a sacred responsibility & vow to be holy, not to be undertaken lightly. Paul encourages believers to “examine ourselves & only then eat the bread & drink the wine.” [1Cor.11:28].
Churches & their teaching programmes have a responsibility to teach people to understand what they are doing, as much as they are capable of comprehending, & in as meaningful way as possible. Although we offer confirmation classes, teaching about the meaning & content of the Eucharist is fairly lacking in many churches. This may be because we feel unable to cope with introducing believers to multiple, varied potential meanings & interpretations. Too much church teaching emphasises one form of believing rather than nourishing people’s individual spiritualities or a variety of understandings. As Christians mature, our interpretation of what we are doing may modify, mature & change. Our teaching should help develop individual Christians to find the fullest meaning in the Eucharist that speaks to them. Some churches are woefully bad at incorporating & affirming those whose ideas are altering & maturing through changing experiences & developing knowledge. If one’s comprehension of the meaning of the Eucharist remains the same as when we first attended preparation or confirmation classes, we will not have grown spiritually.
THE PATTERN OF THE WHOLE COMMUNION SERVICE
The consecration & receiving of the elements is designed to flow from the pattern & flow of the whole service:
Gathering
Greeting - “The Lord be with you”
Prayer of Preparation
Prayers of Penitence ; Confession / Prayer for the Blessing of Forgiveness / Absolution.
Gloria
Collect
Liturgy of the Word
Readings
Sermon
Creed
Prayers of Intercession
Liturgy of the Sacrament
The Peace
Preparation of the Table
Eucharistic Prayer
The Lord’s Prayer
Breaking of the Bread
Giving of Communion
Prayer after Communion
Dismissal
Blessing
Sending Out
THE PATTERN OF THE LITURGY OF THE SACRAMENT
In one sense the whole service could be deemed ‘sacramental’ as it is a vow & commitment between us & God. Some claim that all life is, or should be, sacramental. The pattern of the Liturgy of the Sacrament is designed to flow meaningfully towards us sharing the Eucharist as the highpoint of recollecting Christ’s involvement in binging us the grace of our relationship with God. We are receiving physical signs which assure us of that grace.
● The Peace - Sharing Peace among the congregation emphasises our unity together through Christ’s self-
giving love unites us with God. It recollects the risen Jesus sharing peace with the disciples [Jn.20:19-20].
THE EUCHARISTIC PRAYERS
Until the mid-20th Century most traditional churches used just one Eucharistic liturgy. Only variations were the ‘Prefaces’. Changes in Vatican II & Anglican Common Worship provided alternative Eucharistic Prayers for a variety of needs & services. Extended Prefaces further expanded the contexts for which we give thanks. Some congregations & individuals may have favourites & find difficulties with others, just as some objected to the introduction of the Peace as a sign of unity before taking Communion. Though some of the Eucharistic Prayers feel more modern than others, they are not merely invented by recent liturgists, Most relate back to former traditions considered relevant & inclusive. All reflect service patterns in the Didache. Eucharistic Prayers A, B, C, & E are based on liturgical patterns in the Western Church; D, F, G & H are closer to the Eastern liturgy.
Common Worship Prayer A - This is a rewriting of Series 2 [1967], Series 3 [1971] & the Alternative Service Book [1972;1980]. It is loosely based on the C3rd. Apostolic Tradition of Hyppolytus. Though long & wordy it emphasises Christ’s priesthood & our response. Not all congregations like the optional response “To you be glory & praise for ever.” As with other responses, this interaction stresses that the congregation are ‘the priesthood of all believers’. The Anamnesis uses a variety of words: “We remember... we proclaim... we look for”. The section “Through Christ & with Christ & in Christ, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, with all who stand before you in earth & heaven, we worship you, Father almighty, in songs of everlasting praise”, which is repeated in modified ways in most prayers except D & H, reminds us that our participation is made worthy because it is infused by the grace of God in Trinity. The prayer ends with the ‘Song of the Lamb’ from Rev.5:13, which links our praise & thanksgiving with the congregation of heaven.
Prayer B - is closer to the Eucharistic words of the C3rd. Apostolic Tradition of Hyppolytus & the 2nd Eucharistic Prayer in the modern revised Roman rite. It was Prayer 3 in the ASB & recounts Christ’s life & his achievement of the salvation in which we share as a community. It replaces the phrase “seen on earth” with “lived on earth” to clarify the theology of Jesus’ identity & counter ‘Docetism’ (the idea that Jesus might have only ‘seemed to be human,’ rather than the orthodox doctrine of Christ being ‘wholly God & wholly human’).
Prayer C - Is a revision of the wording of the ASB 4th Eucharistic Prayer, adapted from the 1552 & 1662 Book of Common Prayer. It allows for Proper Prefaces but not the Extended Prefaces offered in Prayers A, B & E. Several sections develop a 1764 Scottish Liturgy. It has a stronger, conservative emphasis on redemption through Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross than the other liturgies: “Who made by his one oblation of himself once offered, a full, perfect sufficient sacrifice, oblation & satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.” Rather like ‘light from light, true God from true God’ etc. in the Nicene Creed, this attempts at precision of doctrine, but does not accord with several modern, more loving, non-sacrificial interpretations of Christ’s death.
Prayer D - & Prayer E are short Eucharistic Prayers, newly written for Common Worship to meet the requirements for a briefer liturgy, without Prefaces. It uses vivid, direct, contemporary language, aiming to bring the story of salvation alive, using biblical imagery without abstract phrases. It emphasises Gods love (“he touched untouchables with love”), the “darkness” into which Christ brought God’s ‘light’, love & salvation. The Epiclesis says “we celebrate the cross on which he died to set us free”. The Anamnesis prays: “Send your Spirit on us now, that by these gifts we may feed on Christ with opened eyes and hearts on fire”, recalling the Supper at Emmaus. As with Prayer A, it ends with the Song of the Lamb in Rev.5:13.
Prayer E - also newly written, is a brief liturgical prayer in short, easily understandable sentences, aiming to simplify the service. It has a brief Preface that can be replaced by applicable Prefaces. Its words are not particularly theologically definitive, especially about sacramental grace: “His dying & rising have set us free from sin & death.” This may be attractive to those who do not wish to emphasise sacrificial aspects of the Eucharist. The Anamnesis does include: “we plead with confidence his sacrifice made once for all upon the cross...” Yet “Bringing before the bread of life and cup of salvation” gives a positive emphasis to the elements.
Prayer F - is influenced by the Eastern Orthodox Church liturgy [attr. Basil of Caesarea d.379], the revised Roman rite & American 1979 BCP. The Orthodox liturgy does not include Prefaces. It opens with the story of creation & struggle through time to be faithful to God. It recounts salvation history & Christ’s proclamation of the Kingdom, of which the Eucharistic feast is a foretaste. It uses expressive verbs, encouraging us to ‘proclaim’, ‘celebrate’, ‘rejoice’, ‘long for’, ‘form’, ‘look’, ‘gather’. It has a strong Trinitarian emphasis. The responses “Amen, Lord we believe” acclaim our involvement as the priesthood of all believers. It includes prayers to “bless the earth, heal the sick, let the oppressed go free & fill your church with power from on high,”
based on the marks of mission.
Prayer G – is a shortened adaption of a never-authorised Roman Catholic 1984 liturgy, with additional phrases from Eastern rites & an opening echoing Jewish prayers: “Blessed are you...” It contains poetic, pastorally sensitive phrases including ‘silent music of your praise’ [from John of the Cross], ‘the crown of all creation’, ‘plead with confidence’, the feminine biblical image ‘as a mother tenderly gathers her children’ [Isa.66:13; Matt.23:37] & “the vision of that eternal splendour for which you have created us.” The Epiclesis asks: “pour out your Holy Spirit... may [these gifts] be for us the body and blood of your dear Son”. It celebrates Christ’s unification of creation: “build us into a living temple to your glory”, & ends with the doxology & the Song of the Lamb from Rev.5:13, which looks forward to the heavenly banquet.
Prayer H - was newly written for Common Worship as a brief interactive responsorial liturgy, emphasising the congregation’s sense of unity together among the priesthood of all believers. It has no Prefaces & opens with a reflection of the Parable of the Prodigal Son: “When we turned away you did not reject us, but came to meet us in your Son”. Many words emphasise inclusivity: Its opening ‘In love you made us for yourself’ resembles St. Augustine’s “You made us for yourself & our hearts are restless until we find our rest in you.” “You welcomed us to sit & eat with you” recalls George Herbert’s “Love bade me welcome.” Surprisingly, rather than the traditional Great Amen, it concludes with the climax of the Sanctus - ‘Holy, Holy, Holy’ [Isa.6:3], echoed in the heavenly praise of God & Christ in Rev.4:8-11
SUMMARY
Great significance has been ascribed to the Eucharist since the practice of the earliest Church.
Consequently if we are to worship ‘in spirit & in truth’ [Jn.4:21-23] it seems important to consider the meaning within what we are doing & prepare spiritually for the service (however we interpret what it signifies).
It is unfortunate that the Eucharist is sometimes devalued: Despite St Paul’s warnings, Communion is taken lightly by some individuals & churches, becoming a less regular & less significant feature of some churches.
There are a wide variety of interpretations of what Jesus meant in instituting the practice - what he meant by sharing & eating his body & drinking his blood, & how he is present with us in the activity, some of which are reflected in the various names given to the service and the doctrines applied to it. Some cause controversy.
As Christ’s words did not precisely define or explain its meaning, we cannot definitively assert that any particular interpretation is wholly true. Some interpretations may seem more reasonable & others may appear to have developed from cultural superstitions, but the complete, ultimate truth still remains a mystery.
However, if believers with a variety of interpretations take the elements in an attitude of spiritual truthfulness, surely God would apply to them whatever true benefits the Eucharist offers.
Our understandings of the meaning & content of the Eucharist may change as we alter or mature in faith, encounter various experiences & learn from different spiritual cultures, doctrines & traditions.
To me, a priority is to help congregants focus on meeting whatever is truly ‘God’, in spirit & in truth, through the service and feel that they are united with and in Christ in whatever ways are true. Jesus’ inauguration of the practice implies that the Eucharistic service is an important element in assuring us of our relationship with God.
Most liturgies still use sacrificial language in connection with Jesus’ death, though much modern Christian theological thinking often prefers to emphasises Jesus’ self-giving as an act of love. It seems important to help believers move away from the superstitious idea of God as vindictive & demanding retribution for sin to regarding Christ’s self-offering as an act of love and freedom.
The Eucharist is a reminder that our relationship with God involves mystery. It is significant that we should not try to define or explain its meaning over-precisely or simplistically as some attempt, neglecting the mystery.
3 poems considering ideas of the meaning of the bread & wine in early British Protestant tradition:
EDWARD IV [his only known poem (not great), addressed to privy councillor Sir Anthony Seyntleger - modern spelling]:
In Eucharist then there is bread,
Wherein I do consent:
Then with bread are our bodies fed;
But further what is meant?
I say that Christ in flesh and blood
Is there continually;
Unto our soul a special food,
Taking it spiritually.
And this transubstantiation I
Believe as I have read:
That Christ sacramentally
Is there in form of bread.
St. Austen (St. Augustine) saith the Word doth come
Unto the element:
And there is made, he saith in sum
A perfect sacrament.
The element then doth remain.
Or else must needs ensue:
St. Austen’s words be nothing plain,
Nor cannot be found true.
For if the Word, as he doth say,
Come in the element:
Then is not the element away,
But bides there verament (truly).
Yet who so eateth that lively food,
And hath a perfect faith:
Receiveth there Christ’s flesh and blood,
For Christ himself so saith.
Not with our teeth his flesh to tear,
Not take blood for our drink:
Too great absurdity it were
So grossly for to think.
For we must eat him spiritually,
If we be spiritual:
And whoso eat him carnally,
Thereby shall have a fall.
For he is now a spiritual meat,
And spiritually we must
That spiritual meat spiritually eat,
And leave our carnal lust.
Thus by the Spirit I spiritually
Believe, say what men list:
None other transubstantiation I
Believe of the Eucharist.
But that there is both bread and wine,
Which we see with our eye:
Yet Christ is there by power divine,
To those that spiritually
Do eat that bread and drink that cup,
Esteeming it but light:
As Judas did, which ate that sop,
Not judging it aright.
For I was taught not long ago
I should lean to the Spirit
And let the carnal flesh alone,
For it did not profit.
God save him that teaching me taught,
For I thereby did win:
To put me from that carnal thought
That I before was in.
For I believe Christ corporally
In heaven doth keep his place:
And yet Christ sacramentally
Is here with us by grace;
So that, in this high mystery
We must eat spiritual meat
To keep his death in memory,
Lest we should it forget.
This do I say, this have I said,
This saying say will I:
This saying though I once denied,
I will no more to die.
ELIZABETH 1
Twas God the Word that spake it,
He took the Bread and brake it:
And what that Word did make it,
That I believe and take it.
ELIZABETH 1 A MEDITATION HOW TO DISCERN THE LORD’S BODY IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT.
AND if Men’s Fingers cannot make the Wheat,
Which makes the Sacramental Bread we eat;
What Art of Transubstantiation can.
Make God of Wafere, who of Dust made Man?
When we are by th' Apostle truly told,
The God-head is not like Silver or Gold;
Or any thing Corruptions Power can waste,
For He to all Eternity must last:
And if the Art of Man can make his Maker,
The Smith may do as well as do's the Baker;
Bread was the substance which our Saviour gave,
And Bread it was the Apostles did receive;
His Real Body was but in the Sign,
He gave his Flesh, and Blood in Bread and Wine:
For if his Body he did then divide,
He must have eat himself before he dy'd.
His humane Body which for us was given,
Is given to us of Bread which came from Heaven;
The which if we unworthily Receive,
We eat our Judgments, and our selves deceive.
In not discerning what his Body is,
Our Souls are rob'd of everlasting Bliss.
We must believe the Words of him, who said,
This is my Body, when he gave the Bread:
And sure that Blood which curdl'd in each Vein,
Did in His Sacred Body still remain,
Till he was Crucify'd and Slain.
However, there's great Influence therein,
Which expiates and cleanseth us from Sin:
We are made One with him in Holy Union,
When we in Faith receive the Blest Communion.
In Commemoration of his bitter Passion,
Who shed his Blood to purchase our Salvation;
We on his Merits must depend alone,
Sufficient 'tis that Merit we have none:
Nor can there any other Name be given
To save us, but by him who sits in Heaven.
His Body here on Earth need not appear,
When Angels to the Women say, He is not here;
He's not i'th' Press or Cup-board, as some say;
For then the Mice might carry him away.
The Primitive Christians never were so blind,
To think he could be blown away with wind.
Or that some Thieves or Robbers might devour,
Him who created Heaven by his Power.
We are not sav'd by Sense, but by our Faith,
And ought to credit what our Master saith.
He call'd himself a Vine, and yet we see,
He was a perfect Man, and not a Tree.
He call'd himself a Door; 'tis understood,
We enter Heaven through Him, and not thro Wood.
He call'd himself a Way, the which doth lead
Our Steps to Heaven, yet none doth on him tread.
His blessed Words were oft-times Mystical,
And are not rightly understood by all:
Save such on whom he doth that Gift bestow,
Who to the Ignorant the Truth may shew.
His Blessed Body Heaven must contain,
Where He a King eternally doth Reign:
Until the Restitution of all,
Then we with him and Angels ever shall,
Sing Allelujahs in their Hierarchie;
For where He is, there must his Servants be.
SOME POTENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
1Cor.11:22 calls us to take Communion “in a worthy manner”. This encourages us to come to the service spiritually prepared, aiming to be holy & worship “in spirit & in truth”. Worthy preparation may include considering sins & failings, seeking forgiveness, turning our lives around to be more authentic followers of God. We seek to comprehend what we can of the Eucharist to take part meaningfully. This might include:
- Considering the meaning behind the service & the elements.
- Considering our lives, beliefs & attitudes, to ensure that we are following Christ’s intention authentically, as far as we comprehend them, in our actions, faith & in receiving this gift.
- Interpreting what we do in taking the Eucharist, to be as true as possible in our thoughts & actions.
- Considering how the Eucharist unites us with God through Christ & recognising that God is with us.
- Considering Jesus’ teaching on forgiveness, salvation & unity, which are memorialised in the Eucharist.
- Considering what we may be praising God for in the Eucharist.
Despite the richness & depth of potential meanings within the Eucharist many modern churches have reduced the sense of significance applied to it. In mediaeval & Orthodox churches congregations did not always participate in the elements; it was thought that blessings were conferred by just being present Today, while some church traditions celebrate the Eucharist daily, others have reduced its frequency to monthly, quarterly or yearly, & some no longer include the Eucharist at all. Some Evangelical Anglican churches disregard the rubric that the Eucharist should be offered frequently, laying more emphasis on preaching & song than sacrament.
The various words that Christians use for sharing Communion demonstrate a wide variety of interpretations among Christians. They reflect the multi-varied aspects of people’s spirituality. The service is variously called:
- Communion / Holy Communion,
- Mass, or the Mediaeval term ‘Sacrifice of the Mass’
- Eucharist,
- The Sacrament of Bread & Wine
- The Lord’s Table / The Lord’s Supper,
- The Family Meal,
- The Table,
- The Pesach or Paschal Meal
- The Resurrection Meal.
These & other titles reflect a number of differences in theological or church-cultural interpretations of the practice. Since individuals, communities & cultures are so varied, beliefs, practices & interpretations of meaning will also vary. It is inevitable that we may change in our understandings or feelings as we develop spiritually, physically, intellectually & emotionally & as we encounter varied experiences & traditions.
- Communion - This most common description, suggests that we are corporately & individually communing with God, through the spiritual presence of Christ with us, through the inspiration & guidance of God’s Spirit, & through sharing our lives as the corporate body of Christ.
- Holy Communion - The traditional addition of ‘Holy’ helps to emphasise that this meal is a ‘sacrament’ (below). ‘Holy’ suggests that we specially dedicate ourselves to God through sharing & receiving something that is holy. Some believe we are declared holy through God’s grace in offering us the consecrated elements.
- Mass - This tends to be a Roman Catholic or High Anglican term. A popular interpretation of ‘Mass’ is that the ‘Catholic’ Church is ‘unified’ in ‘corporate’ worship. Actually the term originates from the Latin dismissal phrase at the end of the service in the Catholic Missal: “Ite missa est” / “Go forth!” This reminds participants that, after we take the elements, we are sent out with God’s grace to live for Christ & serve God in the world. It is similar to the Common Worship dismissal: “Go in peace, to love & serve the Lord.” This intends to remind us of Christ’s command in the Great Commission [Matt.28:19]. How often do we authentically practice this call to mission? We do not just take the Mass as an individualistic expression of our relationship with God; we take it to recognise our unity with God, the community of all believers & the world, to encourage & empower us to engage in Christian mission & ministry individually & corporately.
- Sacrifice of the Mass implies or is interpreted by some as meaning that each celebration is a new, or a renewal of, the sacrifice of Christ on the altar. A new act of Christ himself, through which he applies his sacrifice of redemption to those who are present or partake.
- Eucharist - The Greek term ‘Eucharistos’ means ‘thanksgiving’ from the root ‘kharis’ meaning ‘favour’. It suggests that the service is about giving thanks for all that God has provided, & recognise the favour & grace shown to us, especially thanksgiving for Christ. This has broad potential meaning. It does not necessarily mean specific thanksgiving for Christ’s ‘sacrifice’, though the context, content of the liturgy & tradition often imply this focus, especially for those who interpret Jesus’ death as a sacrificial offering
- The Sacrament of Bread & Wine - Many churchgoers remain unsure of the meaning of the non-biblical term ‘sacrament’. Its traditional definitions: “an outward sign of an inner spiritual grace,” or “an outward sign of an inner spiritual reality, conferring grace on those who receive it” are open to many interpretations. The Latin ‘sacramentum’ carries the ideas of both a ‘vow’ & ‘consecration’. ‘Sacramentum’ was also used by early scholars to translate the Greek term for ‘mystery’, adding to the difficulties in definition.) The term has accrued additional interpretative meanings through Church history. ‘Sacrament’ suggests that this is not just participation in the body & blood of Christ, as the Eucharistic Prayers state. It implies that the elements contain promises, covenant vows by which God is consecrated to us & we consecrate ourselves to God.
- The Lord’s Table - This tends to be a Non-Conformist or low-church term, attempting to remove superstitious hocus-pocus about the liturgy while retaining the emphasis on the presence of Christ sharing the meal with us & uniting us in him. Christ is the focus as celebrant, self-giver & special guest, present at the table. The minister or whoever breaks the bread & shares out the wine does so as his representative.
- The Lord’s Supper - This also tends to be primarily used by Non-Conformists & Evangelicals. It implies links with the Last Supper. Again Christ is the one who presides & is the one who offers us the elements.
- The Family Meal - This suggests that we share & celebrate together an intimate personal relationship as Christians. It may imply a less a formal liturgy, though this is not necessarily how the service is conducted.
- The Table - Like the former title, this democratises the meal, not necessarily involving a priest. Participants share as equal members around the table under the invitation of Christ.
- The Pesach or Paschal Meal - This links the service more precisely to the Jewish Passover meal, which many believe the Last Supper to have been. (Theologians & biblical historians differ over whether the Last Supper was actually the celebration of the Passover Meal.) The term implies the interpretation of Jesus as the sacrificial lamb & emphasises the meal as a memorial of his death to achieve salvation. Because Jesus followed the supper by adding a further breaking of bread & drink of wine, it seems clear that sharing this bread & wine was intended to add a new, supplementary meaning to the traditions of the Passover meal.
- The Resurrection Meal - This distinguishes the meal from the Last Supper, emphasising our Christian hope & trust for the future. It may suggest links to the Supper at Emmaus as recognition that Jesus rose from death, & also that we share the meal as a foretaste of the promise of participation in the Heavenly Banquet after our own Resurrection.
As well as these varied interpretations of the meal, different Christians interpret or understand what they are doing & receiving in several ways:
- The Eucharist includes 2 particular elements:
2/ Epiclesis [first used by Irenaeus C2nd] - means ‘calling upon’ or ‘invoking God’s presence’, which includes prayer for the consecration of the elements by the Holy Spirit & asking Christ to be present with us.
- Some feel the meaning as particular to them personally, taking Communion as an individual experience.
- Some regard the meal as an essentially corporate practice. Many churches stipulate that priests may not preside at Communion unless at least one other communicant is present.
- Some believe that the bread & wine mysteriously, & in some way ‘physically’ become the body & blood of Christ given for us - ‘Transubstantiation’.
- Some believe that the bread & wine ‘spiritually’ become the body & blood of Christ given for us, though what ‘spiritually becoming’ means is not precisely defined.
- Some believe that Jesus teaching about receiving his ’Body’ refers to us as the ‘Body of Christ’ sharing unity together, not to his own physical or sacrificial body.
- A symbol - This may detract from magical sacramental aspects of the consecrated elements. It implies that they represent Christ’s presence with us but does not necessarily suggest that they contain spiritual realities.
- A sign - A ‘sign’ may have slightly stronger connotations than a ‘symbol’, though not as powerful as a ‘sacrament’. ‘Sign’ may suggest that the elements are given by God, just as the rainbow was believed to be a God-given sign of God’s presence & an assurance of God’s promises. Zwingli implied that the offered elements are a ‘trans-signification’ in which the elements are a sign that Christ is perceived as being present with us.
- A sacrament – This is variously interpreted: “An outward sign of an inner spiritual grace.” “An outward sign of an inner spiritual reality, conferring grace on those who receive it”. A ‘vow’ or ‘consecration’ of God towards us & of us towards God. Holy & sacred elements with mysterious, deep inner meaning, carrying grace & blessing. Those who believe in transubstantiation believe that they are the nearest we come to physical contact with Christ himself. This led to the practice of adoration of the sacrament.
- A ‘memorial’ of the Last Supper, being present at a commemoration of Jesus offering himself to us.
- A Christianisation of the Jewish ‘Pesach’ or Paschal Passover festival meal, adding layers of deeper historic religious meaning to it, perhaps including a memorial of the Exodus, the giving of Manna etc.
- ‘A visible expression of God’s saving grace’ Many Congregationalists were taught to perceive it as this.
- A memorial meal with elements of the epiphanies of Christ at Wedding Feast at Cana, the presence of the risen Christ at the Supper at Emmaus, etc.
- A reminder of Christ’s promise of Christians hope & trust in the eschatological Banquet of Heaven.
- A reflection of the celebratory memorial feasts, which were celebrated in Roman times at the tomb of relatives & close friends in the Catacombs on significant dates after deaths.
- A covenant affirmation of our promises to follow God.
- A physical sacrificial act like Christ’s sacrificial self-offering. Hence the table became called an ‘altar’ & the use of “our sacrifice of praise & thanksgiving” in the Eucharistic liturgy.
- A spiritual sacrificial act, linking us spiritually with Christ’s self-giving.
- The sacrifices brought into the Holy of Holies to appease the wrath of God.
- A sacrifice of praise for all that has been done on our behalf.
- A corporate shared meal affirming our unity as believers.
- A metaphor for our oneness with Christ.
- A ceremonial which actually physically or spiritually unites us with Christ.
- A memorial of Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf.
- Many contemporary theologians downplay the sacrificial connotations of Jesus’ death in some New Testament texts & much past Christian tradition, preferring to interpret his self-offering as a sign of God’s love rather than the sacrifice of God’s Son, which can make God seem vindictive or cruel.
- A celebration of our individual union with God through Christ.
- A celebration cementing the congregation together in unity as one Body of Christ & our unity with God.
- A celebration cementing us together as one Body of Christ with all Christians locally.
- A celebration of our unity as members of a diocese, communion or Christian community.
- A celebration of our unity with all others in our particular churchmanship.
- A celebration cementing us together as one Body of Christ worldwide - ‘The Church Militant’.
- A celebration cementing us together with the whole company of heaven - ‘The Church Triumphant’.
- An act at the centre of community praying to confer blessing on our society.
- An awe-inspiring mystery in which we sense that God is present in our midst.
- A ceremonial by which we invoke the presence of God in our midst.
- The sacraments given to the sick, offering the security of grace & the possibility of healing or a peaceful death, assured of salvation,
- The sacraments given to the dying as a blessing of grace or purification on their journey.
- The sacraments given to cement unity at a marriage or between churches meeting together. (Sadly, this unity feels broken or only notional, where certain churches will not share communion with other believers.)
- A foretaste of the Heavenly Wedding Banquet, which we hope some day to share with Christ & one another.
- A dramatization or putting into action of the gospel, which transforms those who participate. (This is often how Pentecostals interpret the celebration.)
- An absorption into the passion and death of Christ.
- Transformation - becoming one with Christ as we share Communion, Or expressing our oneness with Christ and renewing it.
- Consubstantiation (a Lollard, then a Lutheran interpretation) as compared to transubstantiation, this is the belief that the physical substance of bread and wine remain, but that during the sacrament, the body and blood of Christ are present alongside them.
The truth of what the Eucharist is, may possibly contain elements of many or even a majority of these & more. Many superstitious, interpretations or connotations about the Eucharist developed in churches throughout history. Some interpretations definitely seem unsound, such as beliefs about magical qualities of the consecrated elements & some literal/physical interpretations of ‘transubstantiation’. Christ definitely gave the Eucharistic celebration to his followers, with the intention that it should become a significant event or memorial for Christians to share regularly. (Churches differ over how often they share it together.) He told his disciples that this meal was a participation in his body & his blood. (The word translated ‘take, eat’ is more precisely ‘devour’.) But I do not believe that it is now possible for us to comprehend exactly what Jesus meant by giving these symbols & by calling the bread his ‘body’ & the wine his ‘blood’. From the surviving evidence of the Gospel accounts & early traditions, it does not seem that Jesus ever explained exactly what he meant by using the words “my body & my blood.” [Matt.22:66; Mk.14:22; Lk.22:19].
Although individuals may disagree with certain interpretations, I am not sure that any particular Christian or doctrinal standpoint has the moral right to deny the sincerely-held interpretations of other believers. For example, those who are rationally or doctrinally certain that ‘Transubstantiation’ is true or false, often feel that they have a responsibility to ‘stand for the truth’ & convince those who believe otherwise. Whatever Jesus meant by “Take, eat, this is my body” is what we take and eat, whether we interpret it correctly or not. In this life at least, what is ‘true’ within the Eucharist is always going to remain veiled in ‘mystery’.
I am not sure that we have a right to ‘correct’ others’ views or sincere beliefs, though we may wish to persuade some of truths within our interpretation. It is wise ot remain open to learn from others’ interpretations, for the broadening of our own relationship with God. The history of the Church is littered with individuals & groups that have persecuted others for ‘heresy’ over issues like the interpretation of the Eucharist. We recognise now that many of the victims of such persecutions were falsely attacked & that the persecutors themselves were not being true to Christ or God’s ways. While scripture tells us to seek the truth & encourages us to root out what is wrong, it does not give us a carte-blanche to undermine the faith of others, or destroy them, as Crusaders did. Destruction of heresy was the approach of Pharisees & Sadducees who thought that they were protecting truth according to the commands of the Hebrew Scriptures when they persecuted & executed Jesus. Their aimed to keep the faith & the people pure may have been faithful, but destructivity damages the advance of true faith.
The Christians Scriptures claim that we have a responsibility to advance understanding of what is true. We are also justified in aiming to help people rationalise & seek truth in what they believe & do. But amid the varieties of approach to spirituality, we need to recognise, that no individual or group has monopoly of truth with regard to ‘spiritual mysteries’. Is our teaching we should consider helping people understand many of the interpretations or references that make the Communion so significant, in order to develop & deepen their spiritual understanding. Primarily we want to help people find a secure relationship with God & be authentic disciples, seeking truth in all they do & believe.
SYMBOLIC MEANINGS, HISTORIC CONTEXTS & MEMORIALS
In addition to the different particular interpretations of what we are doing & sharing, believers often find in the Eucharistic meal, reflections or apparent references to significant events, symbols & metaphors in the Hebrew & Christian Scriptures. Not all of these may specifically contained within the Eucharist, but historic or symbolic references can give believers a deeper sense of meaning when they take Communion. The liturgy mentions some of these parallels & symbols but popular or theological interpretations often expand upon these. Some of the most common are contained within this list:
HEBREW SCRIPTURES
- The Communion meal is a sign of the restoration of salvation after the Fall [Gen.3:23].
- The Cross as the tree offering eternal life after the Fall banished humanity from the Tree of Life [Gen.3:24].
- Melchizedek providing bread & wine & blessing Abram [Gen.14:17-20].
- Abraham’s meal with the three visitors by the oaks of Mamre [Gen.18:1-15].
- Sacrifice of the Passover lamb & the smearing of blood over the lintels, bringing salvation [Ex.12:21-23].
- Making bread without yeast for the Passover [Ex.12:8f]. A majority of churches use unleavened bread for the Eucharist as a reference to the Passover meal. Practically, it is also less messy to break & hand out, as it creates less crumbs!) However several churches prefer the symbolism of leavened bread, which they suggest looks forward to the resurrection, rather than backward to the past.
- Manna provided for Israel in the wilderness. [Ex.16:4ff].
- The establishment of the feast of Unleavened Bread [Ex.23:15; 34:18].
- Ruth & Naomi being blessed by gleaning in the fields of Boaz. [Ruth 2:8ff].
- David given the show-bread / bread-of-the-presence in the Temple. [1Sam.21:6].
- Bread made specifically for the Sabbath [1Chron.9:32].
- Bread of Angels [Ps.78:29].
- The Bread of Tears [Ps.80:5].
- Being satisfied with the Bread of Heaven [Ps.105:40].
- Feeding in peace under the care of the Good Shepherd [Ps.23:2&5].
- “Wine to gladden the heart” [Ps.104:15].
- Elijah being fed in the wilderness. [1Ki.17:6].
- Elijah’s miracle of the widows’ jar of meal & cruise of oil, which never emptied. [1Ki.17:12f].
NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES
- John the Baptist’s prophecy of Jesus as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” [Jn.1:29].
- Jesus changing water into wine at the marriage at Cana [Jn.2:1-11].
- The parable of the Wedding Banquet as an image of the Eucharist [Matt.22:1-14].
- Christ as the True Vine & we as the branches dependent on him [Jn.15:1f].
- Jesus’ meals with the despised like Zacchaeus [Lk.19:2f] & in the house of the Pharisee, where the sinful woman expressed thanks & found forgiveness. [Lk.7:36-50].
- The miraculous feeding of the 4,000 [Matt.13:32; Mk.8:1] & 5,000 [Matt.14:15; Mk.6:34; Lk.9:10; Jn.6:3].
- The ‘daily bread’, for which we pray in the Lord’s Prayer: The Greek term used for ‘daily’ in the prayer [Matt.6:11; Lk.11:3] is ‘epioúsion’, which is only found here in the Bible & nowhere else in ancient literature. It is therefore hard to be sure what it means, or what Aramaic word it might have translated. The general assumption is that it approximates to ‘for the present’. It may derive from ‘epiénai’, in which case it might mean ‘regular’, ‘daily’ or ’appropriate’. If from ‘hē epióusa’ it would mean ‘for the next day’ or ‘for the day already dawning’, which could have eschatological meaning. If from ‘epi tén oús(i)an’ it could mean ‘for the present day’, ‘for vital sustenance’, or even ‘not exceeding our need’, though ‘sufficient’ seems an inadequate translation, considering the idea of substantial blessing which it suggests. We pray for ‘the bread that we need’ but this inadequately conveys the concept that Jesus brings blessings that are overflowing [as in Lk.6:38]. For the Vulgate, Jerome translated ‘epioúsion’ into an invented Latin term: ‘supersubstantium’, translated into English as ‘superessential’ or ‘supersubstantial’ [Douay-Rheims Bible, Catholic Catechism & Eastern Orthodox liturgy]. This encouraged the idea that the consecrated Eucharist bread is greater than normal substance or essence, leading to devotion to the Eucharistic elements. There is little linguistic reason behind this translation.
- Jesus as the Bread of Life that came down from heaven [Jn.6:48f].
- Jesus telling his followers to ‘feed on him’ [Jn.6:51-58].
- The promise of new wine [Matt.9:17; Mk.2:22; Lk.5:37-38].
- Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane & the High-Priestly Prayer in Jn.17 as the “winepress” - the meaning of the name ‘Gethsemane’ [Matt.26:36; Mk.14:32]. Cf. Isa.63:3: “I have trodden the winepress alone”
- The Eucharist as the abundant well of the water of life [Jn.4:13-15].
- Recognition of the Risen Christ at the Supper at Emmaus [Lk.24:13ff].
- The Cross as a sign of the Tree of Life in Rev.22:2.
- The bread having healing properties like the leaves of the Tree of Life [Rev.22:2]
- The wine as the Water of Life. [Rev.7:17; 8:10; 22:17].
These are mostly metaphors & symbolic parallels, rather than precise aspects of the meaning of the Eucharist. They can add to the profundity which we may sense when we receive the elements. But what essentially matters is not the depth of our understanding of what we are receiving, as it is a mystery rather than something we fully comprehend. I believe that the primary reason for receiving the Eucharist is to help link us to the truth of whatever God is about & whatever Christ has achieved for us, & to help us feel that we are in the presence of that truth. The liturgy reminds us of the story of Christ & salvation & many believe that they are receiving something that confers God’s grace on them & on the Church. The sacramental aspect suggests that we take communion primarily as a covenant vow to follow Christ’s ways & consecrate ourselves to truth & God, as whatever is true about God is consecrated to us.
WHAT ESSENTIALLY MATTERS?
I believe that the most significant aim in presenting Communion, is to enable the act to become meaningful for each person who participates. We want that meaning to be true, though whatever ways are true are known to God alone. It is important that churches aim to help participants feel that what they are doing is significant & to help assure them that they are individually & collectively united with God through Christ (whatever that means). Jesus’ main intension in instituting the Eucharist seems to have been for his followers to participate together in an act which essentially reminds us that we belong personally & corporately to God. His prayer on the night before he died, as describes in John 17, was that we might be united with each other & with God: “May they all be one. As you Father are in me, & I am in you, may they also be one in us...” [Jn.17:21]
As we share Communion we should value our individuality & corporate identity, as God values us, & as Jesus demonstrated in his self-offering on our behalf. As St. Paul emphasised when giving instructions on Communion, Christianity is not an individualistic religion [1Cor.11:20-21]. It is challenging to ensure that when we share Communion, we focus our appreciation beyond ourselves & our personal relationship with Christ, to consider that God has unified us, brought us together & values us corporately. The variety in our world suggests that we are designed to be diverse & live & think differently. Corporate life & celebration should build us together as a body of diverse people. The Eucharist will always be understood differently by different people who participate. Valuing this might help us grow spiritually, learning from other’s interpretations.
THE PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS
When I was wrestling with whether I was called to ordination, and not feeling and not feeling worthy,or a leader, I was helped by a phrase in a book on the priesthood: “It is the responsibility of the priest to help all members of ‘the priesthood of all believers’ to recognise and fulfil their priestly role. “ Coming previously from a non-conformist background, which stresses the priesthood of all believers, this helped to confirm my calling.
Congregations should be helped to recognise their role as part of the ‘Priesthood of all Believers’. This doctrine recognises that all God’s people are “a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests to our God.” [Ex.19:6; Isa.61:6; 43:21-24; Deut.7:6; 14:2 & 21; 1 Pet.2:9; Rev.1:6 & 5:10]. Christ’s followers should recognise that we have priestly responsibilities towards God, each other, others beyond our community, & priestly duties to perform in our world. An ordained priest celebrating the Eucharist is presiding on behalf of all present. Congregations are rarely taught that all are responsible to be “a royal priesthood, a Holy nation”, putting their full efforts & minds into the service. Some clerics seem to behave as though they feel they are superior to their congregants, but that is not ‘service’ as Christ taught it. When Jesus’ disciples rivalled for position, Jesus reminded them that he & his followers are meant “to serve, not to be served” [Matt.20:20-28; Mk.10:35-45]. The priest’s role is to enable all members of the Church to fulfil their priestly duty. An important word in the communion service is the ‘Great Amen’ which concludes the Eucharistic Prayer. By acclaiming this confidently together we acknowledge that all of us together as God’s priestly people mean & assent to what the celebrant has prayed.
Presiding at, giving & receiving the Eucharist should be an egalitarian practice. It is special gift & responsibility to be both a priest & receiver, but neither is more important than the other. Teaching his disciples about service, Jesus reminded them: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” [Acts 20:35]. All should regard ourselves as servants of truth and not pander to a false hierarchy of importance in the Church or in community. Each believer has a variety of roles & responsibilities, but a priority should be to serve the world, not even to serve one another in the Church community. Being able to receive the Eucharist is a gift of God’s grace. It does not make the priest who presides more significant than those who receive. Neither, I believe, do churches have a right to withhold the Eucharist from anyone who wishes to receive, just as Manna was God’s gift available for all.
Communion should help us recognising our value in God’s eyes, but this should be balanced by humility in realising our limitations & dependency on God’s grace, forgiveness & love. None should take the gift of the Eucharist arrogantly, feeling they ‘deserve’ to be here. This is a reason why I like the ‘Prayer of Humble Access’ though I know some are uncomfortable with it, regarding it as humiliating. In the liturgy I also feel uncomfortable with the call: “God’s holy gifts for God’s holy people.” It is adapted from an Eastern rite used since C4th, which says: “holy things for holy people”. From experience neither I, many in congregations, or other priests, could be called universally “holy”. It might be better to adapt the phrase to something more theologically precise like: ‘God’s holy gifts for those who are declared (or made) holy by God’s grace.’
It is receiver’s responsibility to make sure that they take the Eucharist in a meaningful way. We do not fully understand the meaning of St. Paul’s warning against taking the bread & wine “in an unworthy manner” [1Cor.11:27-30]. Paul’s warning may have been speaking into a specific context now lost in time. His declaration that some had become ill or died as a result of unworthily taking the elements seems over-the top, so he may have been referring to a particular contemporary superstition. Hopefully most churches today would no longer seek to impose superstitions on their congregations, though I have encountered many believers who indulge in biblically unsound superstitions. However, this warning definitely reminds us that sharing in the Eucharistic meal is a sacred responsibility & vow to be holy, not to be undertaken lightly. Paul encourages believers to “examine ourselves & only then eat the bread & drink the wine.” [1Cor.11:28].
Churches & their teaching programmes have a responsibility to teach people to understand what they are doing, as much as they are capable of comprehending, & in as meaningful way as possible. Although we offer confirmation classes, teaching about the meaning & content of the Eucharist is fairly lacking in many churches. This may be because we feel unable to cope with introducing believers to multiple, varied potential meanings & interpretations. Too much church teaching emphasises one form of believing rather than nourishing people’s individual spiritualities or a variety of understandings. As Christians mature, our interpretation of what we are doing may modify, mature & change. Our teaching should help develop individual Christians to find the fullest meaning in the Eucharist that speaks to them. Some churches are woefully bad at incorporating & affirming those whose ideas are altering & maturing through changing experiences & developing knowledge. If one’s comprehension of the meaning of the Eucharist remains the same as when we first attended preparation or confirmation classes, we will not have grown spiritually.
THE PATTERN OF THE WHOLE COMMUNION SERVICE
The consecration & receiving of the elements is designed to flow from the pattern & flow of the whole service:
Gathering
Greeting - “The Lord be with you”
Prayer of Preparation
Prayers of Penitence ; Confession / Prayer for the Blessing of Forgiveness / Absolution.
Gloria
Collect
Liturgy of the Word
Readings
Sermon
Creed
Prayers of Intercession
Liturgy of the Sacrament
The Peace
Preparation of the Table
Eucharistic Prayer
The Lord’s Prayer
Breaking of the Bread
Giving of Communion
Prayer after Communion
Dismissal
Blessing
Sending Out
THE PATTERN OF THE LITURGY OF THE SACRAMENT
In one sense the whole service could be deemed ‘sacramental’ as it is a vow & commitment between us & God. Some claim that all life is, or should be, sacramental. The pattern of the Liturgy of the Sacrament is designed to flow meaningfully towards us sharing the Eucharist as the highpoint of recollecting Christ’s involvement in binging us the grace of our relationship with God. We are receiving physical signs which assure us of that grace.
● The Peace - Sharing Peace among the congregation emphasises our unity together through Christ’s self-
giving love unites us with God. It recollects the risen Jesus sharing peace with the disciples [Jn.20:19-20].
- Preparation of the Table - Usually members of the congregation are encouraged to bring the elements to the Chancel as an offering & sign that our ordinary gifts, like our lives & financial gifts can be blessed & used by God’s grace. This is also an expression of the congregation’s participation in ‘the priesthood of all believers’.
- Eucharistic Prayer - explained in more detail below, the various Eucharistic Prayers contain a ‘memorial’ (Anamnesis) of what Christ achieved for us & the ‘invocation’ (Epiclesis) of God’s presence, to bless us & bless our communal & individual receiving of the elements of Communion.
- The Eucharistic prayer opens with a reminder of why we are here & what we are here to do. This is often focused specifically for the day, liturgical feast or season by the inclusion of a Preface or Extended Preface.
- Sanctus - The Preface leads us into praise – often the Sanctus – The “Holy, Holy, Holy” of Isaiah’s vision of sacred praise in the Temple [Isa. 6:3]. It is often extended with the acclamation made as Jesus entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.” [Matt.21:9; Mk.11:9-10; Lk.19:38; Jn.12:13]. Often priests will cross themselves at this point, remembering that they too are sent to share & proclaim the name of the Lord. (The ‘name’ represents the entirety of what “the Lord” is & stands for.) Congregational members sometimes also cross themselves, especially if they also recognise their own role in the priestly mission.
- The Epiclesis - moves from praise to petition, calling on the power of God, through the Spirit to be present & to charge this celebration with true meaning & blessing. For those who believe in Transubstantiation, or the holiness of the sacrament, the epiclesis leads to the transformation of the elements at the consecration.
- The Institution Narrative - recalls Christ’s first institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper & his identification of himself with the bread & wine.
- The Anamnesis - “Therefore Heavenly Father, we remember his offering of himself... etc.” In this we identify ourselves with memorialising Jesus’ through this rite & look towards his & our resurrection & the coming Kingdom.
- An Acclamation often follows - “Christ has died...etc.” “Dying you destroyed our death...etc.”... “When we eat this bread...etc.”... “Lord by your cross & resurrection you have set us free...etc.” It is a congregational response that unites us in the Eucharistic Prayer.
- Prayer for the benefits of the sacramental meal – “Accept through him our great High Priest...etc.”:
- Doxology - Ending the Eucharistic prayer, the ‘doxology’ is a tradition found in the Didache, (an early Christian liturgical manual, probably of Syrian origin). The doxology is common in Eastern rites. We proclaim our unity with all in earth & heaven in giving praise & glory to God through Christ.
- The Great Amen - Declares our unity in the Eucharistic Prayer, as members of the Priesthood of All Believers. We are proclaiming that this has been our sincere prayer, individually & collectively.
- The Lord’s Prayer - is an integral part of the Eucharist. As with the Doxology which we have just prayed, we are expressing unity in praying the prayer that Jesus taught his followers. It includes the request for our ‘daily bread’, of which this sacrament is part, but also prays for the coming of the Kingdom & our part in bringing about the situation where God’s will is done “on earth as in heaven.”
- Breaking of the Bread - The one who presides breaks the bread to share it, recalling St. Pauls’ words about the Eucharist in 1Cor.10:17 or alternatively 1Cor.11:26.
- The Agnus Dei - We recall John the Baptist’s statement that Jesus us the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. This is a reassurance to us, before we take communion, that God’s grace has set us free through the saving act of Christ, & a prayer for God’s continued mercy & grace upon us..
- Giving of Communion - We share the consecrated bread communally. This is not just an individual gift for each one of us, it is a sign of our unification under God as Christ’s body. Usually as we take it we say “AMEN” in prayer that this may be for us what God would have it be. (Whether a blessing, grace, transubstantiated Christ, sign to us of Christ’s presence with us, made a member of Christ’s corporate body, etc. (It’s true meaning & identity is known only to God & truth, independent of what we may feel it to be.)
- Prayer after Communion - This gives thanks for what we have received together. It ends the section with a form of Collect, just as the Gathering section ended with a Collect, & the Liturgy of the Word section ended with a prayer similar in form to a Collect. A Post-Communion Prayer is said by the one who has presided. This is often treated as optional, but is designed to be specific to the week, as with Collects. Then a corporate prayer is said as our response to the gift we received: In the first corporate prayer “Almighty God we thank you for feeding us ...etc.” we dedicate our lives to being ‘living sacrifices’ to glorify God, as in Rom.12:1. (Ours is a living reflection of Christ’s total self-offering.) The second alternative: “Father of all, we give you thanks & praise” contains multiple biblical references, including the Prodigal Son: “When we were still far off, you met us in your Son & brought us home.”. “You opened the gate of glory” [Matt.7:13; Jn.10:7, 9; Rev.21:12 etc,]. “May we who share his body live his risen life” [2Tim.2:11]. “May we who the Spirit lights give light to the world” recalls Jesus’ command to not hide our lights under bushels [Matt.5:14-16]. Both of these alternative prayers lead into the Dismissal section of the service, as they remind us that we have been given God’s grace in order to be active for God in the world, as was Jesus Christ.
THE EUCHARISTIC PRAYERS
Until the mid-20th Century most traditional churches used just one Eucharistic liturgy. Only variations were the ‘Prefaces’. Changes in Vatican II & Anglican Common Worship provided alternative Eucharistic Prayers for a variety of needs & services. Extended Prefaces further expanded the contexts for which we give thanks. Some congregations & individuals may have favourites & find difficulties with others, just as some objected to the introduction of the Peace as a sign of unity before taking Communion. Though some of the Eucharistic Prayers feel more modern than others, they are not merely invented by recent liturgists, Most relate back to former traditions considered relevant & inclusive. All reflect service patterns in the Didache. Eucharistic Prayers A, B, C, & E are based on liturgical patterns in the Western Church; D, F, G & H are closer to the Eastern liturgy.
Common Worship Prayer A - This is a rewriting of Series 2 [1967], Series 3 [1971] & the Alternative Service Book [1972;1980]. It is loosely based on the C3rd. Apostolic Tradition of Hyppolytus. Though long & wordy it emphasises Christ’s priesthood & our response. Not all congregations like the optional response “To you be glory & praise for ever.” As with other responses, this interaction stresses that the congregation are ‘the priesthood of all believers’. The Anamnesis uses a variety of words: “We remember... we proclaim... we look for”. The section “Through Christ & with Christ & in Christ, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, with all who stand before you in earth & heaven, we worship you, Father almighty, in songs of everlasting praise”, which is repeated in modified ways in most prayers except D & H, reminds us that our participation is made worthy because it is infused by the grace of God in Trinity. The prayer ends with the ‘Song of the Lamb’ from Rev.5:13, which links our praise & thanksgiving with the congregation of heaven.
Prayer B - is closer to the Eucharistic words of the C3rd. Apostolic Tradition of Hyppolytus & the 2nd Eucharistic Prayer in the modern revised Roman rite. It was Prayer 3 in the ASB & recounts Christ’s life & his achievement of the salvation in which we share as a community. It replaces the phrase “seen on earth” with “lived on earth” to clarify the theology of Jesus’ identity & counter ‘Docetism’ (the idea that Jesus might have only ‘seemed to be human,’ rather than the orthodox doctrine of Christ being ‘wholly God & wholly human’).
Prayer C - Is a revision of the wording of the ASB 4th Eucharistic Prayer, adapted from the 1552 & 1662 Book of Common Prayer. It allows for Proper Prefaces but not the Extended Prefaces offered in Prayers A, B & E. Several sections develop a 1764 Scottish Liturgy. It has a stronger, conservative emphasis on redemption through Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross than the other liturgies: “Who made by his one oblation of himself once offered, a full, perfect sufficient sacrifice, oblation & satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.” Rather like ‘light from light, true God from true God’ etc. in the Nicene Creed, this attempts at precision of doctrine, but does not accord with several modern, more loving, non-sacrificial interpretations of Christ’s death.
Prayer D - & Prayer E are short Eucharistic Prayers, newly written for Common Worship to meet the requirements for a briefer liturgy, without Prefaces. It uses vivid, direct, contemporary language, aiming to bring the story of salvation alive, using biblical imagery without abstract phrases. It emphasises Gods love (“he touched untouchables with love”), the “darkness” into which Christ brought God’s ‘light’, love & salvation. The Epiclesis says “we celebrate the cross on which he died to set us free”. The Anamnesis prays: “Send your Spirit on us now, that by these gifts we may feed on Christ with opened eyes and hearts on fire”, recalling the Supper at Emmaus. As with Prayer A, it ends with the Song of the Lamb in Rev.5:13.
Prayer E - also newly written, is a brief liturgical prayer in short, easily understandable sentences, aiming to simplify the service. It has a brief Preface that can be replaced by applicable Prefaces. Its words are not particularly theologically definitive, especially about sacramental grace: “His dying & rising have set us free from sin & death.” This may be attractive to those who do not wish to emphasise sacrificial aspects of the Eucharist. The Anamnesis does include: “we plead with confidence his sacrifice made once for all upon the cross...” Yet “Bringing before the bread of life and cup of salvation” gives a positive emphasis to the elements.
Prayer F - is influenced by the Eastern Orthodox Church liturgy [attr. Basil of Caesarea d.379], the revised Roman rite & American 1979 BCP. The Orthodox liturgy does not include Prefaces. It opens with the story of creation & struggle through time to be faithful to God. It recounts salvation history & Christ’s proclamation of the Kingdom, of which the Eucharistic feast is a foretaste. It uses expressive verbs, encouraging us to ‘proclaim’, ‘celebrate’, ‘rejoice’, ‘long for’, ‘form’, ‘look’, ‘gather’. It has a strong Trinitarian emphasis. The responses “Amen, Lord we believe” acclaim our involvement as the priesthood of all believers. It includes prayers to “bless the earth, heal the sick, let the oppressed go free & fill your church with power from on high,”
based on the marks of mission.
Prayer G – is a shortened adaption of a never-authorised Roman Catholic 1984 liturgy, with additional phrases from Eastern rites & an opening echoing Jewish prayers: “Blessed are you...” It contains poetic, pastorally sensitive phrases including ‘silent music of your praise’ [from John of the Cross], ‘the crown of all creation’, ‘plead with confidence’, the feminine biblical image ‘as a mother tenderly gathers her children’ [Isa.66:13; Matt.23:37] & “the vision of that eternal splendour for which you have created us.” The Epiclesis asks: “pour out your Holy Spirit... may [these gifts] be for us the body and blood of your dear Son”. It celebrates Christ’s unification of creation: “build us into a living temple to your glory”, & ends with the doxology & the Song of the Lamb from Rev.5:13, which looks forward to the heavenly banquet.
Prayer H - was newly written for Common Worship as a brief interactive responsorial liturgy, emphasising the congregation’s sense of unity together among the priesthood of all believers. It has no Prefaces & opens with a reflection of the Parable of the Prodigal Son: “When we turned away you did not reject us, but came to meet us in your Son”. Many words emphasise inclusivity: Its opening ‘In love you made us for yourself’ resembles St. Augustine’s “You made us for yourself & our hearts are restless until we find our rest in you.” “You welcomed us to sit & eat with you” recalls George Herbert’s “Love bade me welcome.” Surprisingly, rather than the traditional Great Amen, it concludes with the climax of the Sanctus - ‘Holy, Holy, Holy’ [Isa.6:3], echoed in the heavenly praise of God & Christ in Rev.4:8-11
SUMMARY
Great significance has been ascribed to the Eucharist since the practice of the earliest Church.
Consequently if we are to worship ‘in spirit & in truth’ [Jn.4:21-23] it seems important to consider the meaning within what we are doing & prepare spiritually for the service (however we interpret what it signifies).
It is unfortunate that the Eucharist is sometimes devalued: Despite St Paul’s warnings, Communion is taken lightly by some individuals & churches, becoming a less regular & less significant feature of some churches.
There are a wide variety of interpretations of what Jesus meant in instituting the practice - what he meant by sharing & eating his body & drinking his blood, & how he is present with us in the activity, some of which are reflected in the various names given to the service and the doctrines applied to it. Some cause controversy.
As Christ’s words did not precisely define or explain its meaning, we cannot definitively assert that any particular interpretation is wholly true. Some interpretations may seem more reasonable & others may appear to have developed from cultural superstitions, but the complete, ultimate truth still remains a mystery.
However, if believers with a variety of interpretations take the elements in an attitude of spiritual truthfulness, surely God would apply to them whatever true benefits the Eucharist offers.
Our understandings of the meaning & content of the Eucharist may change as we alter or mature in faith, encounter various experiences & learn from different spiritual cultures, doctrines & traditions.
To me, a priority is to help congregants focus on meeting whatever is truly ‘God’, in spirit & in truth, through the service and feel that they are united with and in Christ in whatever ways are true. Jesus’ inauguration of the practice implies that the Eucharistic service is an important element in assuring us of our relationship with God.
Most liturgies still use sacrificial language in connection with Jesus’ death, though much modern Christian theological thinking often prefers to emphasises Jesus’ self-giving as an act of love. It seems important to help believers move away from the superstitious idea of God as vindictive & demanding retribution for sin to regarding Christ’s self-offering as an act of love and freedom.
The Eucharist is a reminder that our relationship with God involves mystery. It is significant that we should not try to define or explain its meaning over-precisely or simplistically as some attempt, neglecting the mystery.
3 poems considering ideas of the meaning of the bread & wine in early British Protestant tradition:
EDWARD IV [his only known poem (not great), addressed to privy councillor Sir Anthony Seyntleger - modern spelling]:
In Eucharist then there is bread,
Wherein I do consent:
Then with bread are our bodies fed;
But further what is meant?
I say that Christ in flesh and blood
Is there continually;
Unto our soul a special food,
Taking it spiritually.
And this transubstantiation I
Believe as I have read:
That Christ sacramentally
Is there in form of bread.
St. Austen (St. Augustine) saith the Word doth come
Unto the element:
And there is made, he saith in sum
A perfect sacrament.
The element then doth remain.
Or else must needs ensue:
St. Austen’s words be nothing plain,
Nor cannot be found true.
For if the Word, as he doth say,
Come in the element:
Then is not the element away,
But bides there verament (truly).
Yet who so eateth that lively food,
And hath a perfect faith:
Receiveth there Christ’s flesh and blood,
For Christ himself so saith.
Not with our teeth his flesh to tear,
Not take blood for our drink:
Too great absurdity it were
So grossly for to think.
For we must eat him spiritually,
If we be spiritual:
And whoso eat him carnally,
Thereby shall have a fall.
For he is now a spiritual meat,
And spiritually we must
That spiritual meat spiritually eat,
And leave our carnal lust.
Thus by the Spirit I spiritually
Believe, say what men list:
None other transubstantiation I
Believe of the Eucharist.
But that there is both bread and wine,
Which we see with our eye:
Yet Christ is there by power divine,
To those that spiritually
Do eat that bread and drink that cup,
Esteeming it but light:
As Judas did, which ate that sop,
Not judging it aright.
For I was taught not long ago
I should lean to the Spirit
And let the carnal flesh alone,
For it did not profit.
God save him that teaching me taught,
For I thereby did win:
To put me from that carnal thought
That I before was in.
For I believe Christ corporally
In heaven doth keep his place:
And yet Christ sacramentally
Is here with us by grace;
So that, in this high mystery
We must eat spiritual meat
To keep his death in memory,
Lest we should it forget.
This do I say, this have I said,
This saying say will I:
This saying though I once denied,
I will no more to die.
ELIZABETH 1
Twas God the Word that spake it,
He took the Bread and brake it:
And what that Word did make it,
That I believe and take it.
ELIZABETH 1 A MEDITATION HOW TO DISCERN THE LORD’S BODY IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT.
AND if Men’s Fingers cannot make the Wheat,
Which makes the Sacramental Bread we eat;
What Art of Transubstantiation can.
Make God of Wafere, who of Dust made Man?
When we are by th' Apostle truly told,
The God-head is not like Silver or Gold;
Or any thing Corruptions Power can waste,
For He to all Eternity must last:
And if the Art of Man can make his Maker,
The Smith may do as well as do's the Baker;
Bread was the substance which our Saviour gave,
And Bread it was the Apostles did receive;
His Real Body was but in the Sign,
He gave his Flesh, and Blood in Bread and Wine:
For if his Body he did then divide,
He must have eat himself before he dy'd.
His humane Body which for us was given,
Is given to us of Bread which came from Heaven;
The which if we unworthily Receive,
We eat our Judgments, and our selves deceive.
In not discerning what his Body is,
Our Souls are rob'd of everlasting Bliss.
We must believe the Words of him, who said,
This is my Body, when he gave the Bread:
And sure that Blood which curdl'd in each Vein,
Did in His Sacred Body still remain,
Till he was Crucify'd and Slain.
However, there's great Influence therein,
Which expiates and cleanseth us from Sin:
We are made One with him in Holy Union,
When we in Faith receive the Blest Communion.
In Commemoration of his bitter Passion,
Who shed his Blood to purchase our Salvation;
We on his Merits must depend alone,
Sufficient 'tis that Merit we have none:
Nor can there any other Name be given
To save us, but by him who sits in Heaven.
His Body here on Earth need not appear,
When Angels to the Women say, He is not here;
He's not i'th' Press or Cup-board, as some say;
For then the Mice might carry him away.
The Primitive Christians never were so blind,
To think he could be blown away with wind.
Or that some Thieves or Robbers might devour,
Him who created Heaven by his Power.
We are not sav'd by Sense, but by our Faith,
And ought to credit what our Master saith.
He call'd himself a Vine, and yet we see,
He was a perfect Man, and not a Tree.
He call'd himself a Door; 'tis understood,
We enter Heaven through Him, and not thro Wood.
He call'd himself a Way, the which doth lead
Our Steps to Heaven, yet none doth on him tread.
His blessed Words were oft-times Mystical,
And are not rightly understood by all:
Save such on whom he doth that Gift bestow,
Who to the Ignorant the Truth may shew.
His Blessed Body Heaven must contain,
Where He a King eternally doth Reign:
Until the Restitution of all,
Then we with him and Angels ever shall,
Sing Allelujahs in their Hierarchie;
For where He is, there must his Servants be.
SOME POTENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
- What do you personally regard as the most important aspects of taking the Eucharistic elements together?
- The term ‘sacrament’ has caused confusion & discord at various times in Church history. What does ‘sacrament’ mean to you? What do you understand by taking the consecrated Eucharistic elements as a ‘sacrament’? How can we best explain the concept of ‘sacrament’ to our congregations?
- If you regard the consecrated Eucharistic elements as more than just ‘symbols’, are there other words in common, modern usage the might be more meaningful to call them, in order to help a larger number of people comprehend their significance? e.g. ‘ a seal of promise’, ‘a token of a guarantee’, ‘a guarantee of a mutual covenant promise made between God and us’, ‘a visible sign of God’s saving grace’, ‘a token we take as a seal or bond of the relationship to which we are committing ourselves.’
- Is it important to encourage universality of interpretation of the Eucharist in congregations? Does is matter that many in one congregation interpret the Eucharistic elements in different ways? Can our diversity of understanding help us connect with the diversity of God’s truth & the variety in creation?
- In what ways do the multiple images, biblical connections, & theological & historical traditions behing the Eucharist & in the Eucharistic Liturgy enhance our relationship with God? Are there ways in which such multiplicity of associations may distract from or confuse people’s personal encounter with the presence of God in the Eucharist?
- There have been several attempts to simplify the wording of the Eucharistic liturgy. Do simpler-worded liturgies enhance or over-simplify people’s encounter with God?
- Some Anglican churches, especially some in the Evangelical tradition, no longer offer a weekly Communion, & reduce the frequency of its celebration, rather as the Baptist or Methodist traditions have done. What are the advantages and disadvantages of celebrating the Eucharist frequently? Does frequency of participation in the Eucharist enhance or distract from its significance?
- Many of our Eucharistic prayers still contain reference to Christ’s death in terms that can be interpreted as ‘sacrifice’:
- “giving him... to de upon the cross....we remember his offering of himself made once for all upon the Cross” (Prayer A)
- “he opened wide his arms for us on the cross; he put an end to death by dying for us... his death on the cross, his perfect sacrifice made once for the sins of the whole world” (Prayer B)
- “(you) gave your only Son, our Saviour Jesus Christ, to suffer death upon the cross for our redemption, who made here by his oblation of himself, once offered, a full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world...” (Prayer C)
- “in him we plead with confidence his sacrifice made once for all upon the cross...” (Prayers E & G)