From the Lectionary Saturday of Ordinary Time, Proper 10, July 18, 2020
Matthew 26:26-35
While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said: “Take, eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will never again drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
When they had sung the hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Then Jesus said to them, “You will all become deserters because of me this night; for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’ But after I am raised up, I will go ahead of you to Galilee.” Peter said to him, “Though all become deserters because of you, I will never desert you.” Jesus said to him, “Truly I tell you, this very night, before the cock crows, you will deny me three times.” Peter said to him, “Even though I must die with you, I will not deny you.” And so said all the disciples.
Having entered Jerusalem for the last time, Jesus has concluded his fifth and final discourse to the disciples, and is seated with them in the home of “a certain man,” where they are celebrating the Passover meal. It is here during his final hours before his arrest and Passion that he introduces what will become the Lord’s Supper. His words to the disciples on this night are the Words of Institution for Holy Communion: “Take, eat; this is my body,” and “Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” What exactly did Jesus mean by “This is my body?” There are three historic interpretations of this verse which have caused great conflict within the Church through the ages, a conflict which has been partly responsible for the infighting and schisms in the Church that have resulted in the existence of three major denominations.
I want to spend a little time in today’s reflection examining these interpretations and the implications they have had on the beliefs and practices of Christians throughout history. The first interpretation is that of the Roman Catholic Church, and it borrows from the Aristotelian philosophical categories of “substance” (the essential thing itself) and “accidents” (the concrete appearance of something in its particularity). This view says Jesus’ words mean “This actually is my body and blood.” The bread and the wine are actually in substance Jesus’ body and blood. The word “transubstantiation” characterizes this position. In Greek the word is metousious, meaning “change of essence,” and the Latin word is transubstantio meaning “essential change.” The Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms defines this term as “in Roman Catholic theology, at the consecration of the Mass, the changing of the substance of bread and wine, by God’s power, into the ‘substance’ of Jesus Christ’s body and blood, which become present while the ‘species’ (bread and wine) remain.” The second interpretation is the one most of the Reformed Church—Protestants including Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, among others—uses, and it says “This represents my body and blood.” Jesus was only speaking metaphorically, and did not mean to imply that he was actually giving his body to the disciples to eat. The bread or wafer and the wine are symbols of Christ’s body and blood. The third interpretation is essentially what the Lutheran and Episcopalian churches have used, and it says Jesus’ words mean “that Christ is really present in the wafer or bread and the wine, but that we don’t know how Christ is really present.” Holy Communion is Sacrament, and the word “sacrament” means “mystery.” A sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual (invisible) grace. Christ is really present in, with and under the wine and wafer. Lutherans view this a little differently, by saying that the whole of creation is imbued with the presence of Christ, so Jesus’ actual presence is inherently and already a part of the bread and wine. You will also see or hear the word “consubstantiation,” from the Latin consubstantialis meaning “with substance.” It is defined in the Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms as “a late medieval view of the Lord’s Supper. While the substance of the bread and wine are not changed into the body and blood of Christ, they coexist or are conjoined in union with each other: bread with body and wine with blood. The term is sometimes used to describe Lutheran views of the Lord’s Supper.”
How do we as Episcopalians interpret Jesus’ words? Article XXVIII in the Articles of Religion within the Historical Documents of our Book of Common Prayer (p. 873) states “Transubstantiation in the Supper of the Lord cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and has given occasion for many superstitions. The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith.” While we may differ in our thinking about what is actually happening with the bread and wine, generally speaking our interpretation is more in line with the third above, specifically that Christ is really present in the bread and wine. We just don’t know exactly how. It is a mystery, and one with which the Episcopal Church is comfortable. It seems that the important thing is not how Jesus is present in the Sacrament, but that through it his Presence becomes real in the life of the one receiving it.
These different ways of interpreting Jesus’ words have been a source of conflict, division, and polarization among Christian churches and denominations throughout history and today. Practices which have evolved based upon these differences have served to segregate Christians in exclusionary ways. For instance, Roman Catholics generally exclude non-Catholics from the Lord’s table. To its credit the Episcopal Church has been discussing whether to institute the Open Table, meaning that all Christians, including those never baptized, are welcome at the Table. This is already happening in some dioceses and parishes. I think that in arguing over these things we can miss Jesus’ greatest message to his disciples and to us in his words at the Last Supper. Perhaps what Jesus was saying is that he is giving himself completely and fully—his body and his blood—holding back no part of himself, in order to show us how completely he loves us, and by so doing offering us a new relationship of love for him and for each other. In the Eucharist God is blessing us with the Presence of Christ himself, both in the bread and wine, and in the gathered community. This may not explain the nuances of the theories and opinions about what is actually happening, but I don’t think it needs to. Jesus’ words are an invitation. Let’s take him up on it!
Bob Donnell
July 18, 2020
Collect For the Human Family (BCP p. 815)
O God, you made us in your own image and redeemed us through Jesus your Son: Look with compassion on the whole human family; take away the arrogance and hatred which infect our hearts; break down the walls that separate us; unite us in bonds of love; and work through our struggle and confusion to accomplish your purposes on earth; that, in your good time, all nations and races may serve you in harmony around your heavenly throne; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
