The Eucharist in New Testament Christianity Part I

 

                                                                        

                                                                I. Introduction:

When it comes to the Lord's Table, the doctrines of the Eucharist have been among some of the most debated topics in Christian history, perhaps as much or more than Baptism. While Catholics and most Protestants supported infant baptism at the time of the Reformation, various factions of Western Christianity differed over the subject of the Eucharist. 

Through these posts, I will attempt to demonstrate what I believe is the most Biblical view of the Eucharist. This will be no easy task for several reasons:

1. There are so many views on the Eucharist. Because of this, one needs to understand what each of the views are and why/why they are not Biblical. 

2. Whereas the Bible details Baptism in various New Testament passages, there are fewer Scriptural passages that directly concern the Eucharist. Thus, all theological views pertaining to the Eucharist rely heavily on logic and philosophy in explaining if there is a change, and even for those who assert that there is no change of substance, a reliance upon logic considering the parables of Christ being no less allegorical than Christ's words, ''This is my Body and Blood.'' 

In short, on many accounts, the Eucharist is a more complicated area of doctrine than Baptism. This is principally because of the great amount of philosophy that concerns it. 

Throughout this series of posts, I will be discussing a theological and Biblical defense of what I believe is true concerning the doctrines of the Eucharist. First, however, we need to define the most popular views about Holy Communion. 

As with any other topic of theology, our view of a particular passage in Scripture reflects our view of God. Likewise, how we treat others, evangelize, and pray, all stems from the theology that we hold. The Eucharist matters primarily because the truth matters and there can be no truth contrary to God's dictates, whether in creation or written in Scripture. 

                                                         2. The Major Views

Traditionally, there have been several major views of the Eucharist. They are as follows:

1. Hyper-Transubstantiation is the view that was espoused by some peasants in Medieval Times, though never taken seriously by any of the Catholic Church's theologians. It holds that Christ receives pain in Heaven when His flesh is eaten in the Eucharist. 

2. Aristotelian Trasubtantiation-after the Reformation, this became the most common view among Catholics. Through the philosophy of Aristotle, many theologians attempted to explain how the Body and Blood of Christ still looked like wine and bread. Likewise, the Council of Trent added important concepts to this doctrine which differed from previous views concerning Transubstantiation. Ultimately, it was far more specific in explaining the Eucharist than it had generally been understood in Earlier Medieval thought. 

3. Early Medieval Transubstantion-Many church fathers, both East and West believed a change occurred at the altar in which the wine and bread became the Body and Blood of Christ. Many of them, however, did not use Aristolean philosophy to explain this mysticism. Likewise, some of them still continued to speak of wine as present at the alters, unlike some later understandings of Transubstantiation. Lanfranc of Canterbury held this view. Though Eastern Orthodox do not generally use the term ''transubstantiation'' this is generally the closest of Western understandings to their own. Some Eastern Orthodox prefer the term ''Definitive change'' instead. 

4. The Sacramental Union was the view of Martin Luther. It asserts that the Body and Blood of Christ are present alongside both wine and bread. The sacrifice of the Mass, a particular teaching of transubstantiation, is downplayed. 

5. Consubstantiation is the view that was arguably held in some of the writings of John Wycliffe. It claims that Christ is truly spiritually present under both the Wine and Bread, but not His physical Body and Blood. This view was also endorsed by William of Ockham.  

6. Receptionism is the view endorsed by Thomas Cranmer and many Anglicans centuries after the Reformation. It is also the traditional view of Presbyterians and Methodists. It is also the view that was embraced by John Calvin. Basically, it claims that Christ is fed in a spiritual manner by the faithful. By this, it means that Christians are feeding upon Him by faith and not in a carnal sense. 

7. Memorialism is the view that Christians take the Lord's Tabel to commemorate Christ's death on the Cross, etc. However, they assert that remembering Christ's work is alone the meaning of the Eucharist. To them, Christ is no more present during the taking of Wine/Grape Juice and Bread than anywhere else. Some argue that Zwinglie held this view, though this has been contested. 

8. Suspension is the view that the Lord's Table was not intended to be observed by all Christians and thus, has ceased. This has been the view of the Quakers. 

                                                          III. Future Posts

Now, that the main views have been posted, I will lead the reader into discussions of philosophical and theological problems with some of them. Clarity is key in theology, for without it, one will not know why they are disagreeing with another view. 

For many Catholics, simply hearing the current pope's view on a subject matters more than the teachings of the Gospels. However, for the Evangelical Christian, as good or bad as the pope may be from one issue to the next, his views are inferior to Scripture. Thus, all theological discussions should primarily appeal to Scripture; specifically, the New Testament. 

                                                     IV. The Eucharist in Christianity

Today's the Lord's Table is observed by hundreds of millions of Christians around the world. Some churches practice it once a year, some quarterly, some monthly, some every week, and some every day. I will discuss more on how often it should be given in a later post, as well as to whom it should be given. 

Historically, the Eucharist has been a major phenomenon within Christianity. During the reign of the Roman Empire over Jerusalem and the known Jewish world, Christian believers partook of the Eucharist very frequently. Indeed, it was central to their worship of Christ. Calling it the Body and Blood of Christ, they were persecuted by the Romans who could not understand why the Christians saw it as so. The Romans accused the Christians of Cannibalism. 

For over a millennia, most Christians believed that the Eucharist was the literal Body and Blood of Christ. Even those who contested this view did not generally believe it to be simply a memorial of Christ's work. One does not have to venture far into the writings of the church fathers to see that they believed that Christ was truly present when believers partake in the elements of bread and wine. 

History, aside, however, all Bible-believing Christians must ask themselves, ''What does Scripture teach?'' 

That is the question to which this series shall primarily address. Later, we shall look at the teachings of select church fathers on this issue. 

                                                             V. The Passages Debated

The Biblical passages most often used in discussions concerning the Eucharist are Mark 14: 22-24, Luke 22: 19-20, John 6: 35, John 6: 51-58, Acts 2: 46-47, 1 Corinthians 10: 16-17, 1 Corinthians 11: 28-29, and John 15: 5. These passages will be focused on in these series of posts. 

Over the coming posts, it will take some time to address the theology of the Eucharist. It's also hard to say where to start as there is debate among scholars as to what book of the New Testament was written first. The Gospels, however, this is where the discussions of the New Testament pertaining to the Eucharist shall start in this series. Before getting to the New Testament, however, let us look to the Passover in the Old Testament, as some see this as prefiguring the Eucharist.