Τη αυτη ημερα θεασαμενος τινα εργαζομενον τω σαββατω ειπεν αυτω· ανθρωπε, ει μεν οιδας τι ποιεις, μακαριος ει· ει δε μη οιδας, επικαταρατος και παραβατης ει του νομου.
On the same day, seeing one working on the sabbath, [Jesus] said to him: "Man, if you know what you are doing, you are blessed: but if you don't know, you are cursed and a transgressor of the law." -
Codex Bezae at Luke 6:4
See lines 16-20 (beginning in the middle of line 16) in the manuscript page:
Image 391 of 856 - Page 205v
Some background
First read these two older posts I wrote about communion:
"Single-Serving Jesus"
Last Supper, Eucharist, And The Didache
From reading them you can see that there are probably no definitive answers for some of the questions one might have about communion. Rather, there are several traditions on which one may base one's view and practice, and this post addresses some of those questions and options.
Leavened or unleavened bread?
If one considers the Last Supper to have been a Passover meal and bases one's view and practice of communion on that, then one would likely want to use unleavened bread.
If, however, one sees the chronology in the Gospel of John as indicating that the Last Supper occurred
before the Passover, then one might want to use leavened bread.
[During lunch in Abu Gosh (near Jerusalem) on April 12, 2009, Randall Buth, who is an expert in Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, told me that the New Testament use of ἄρτος (artos = bread, loaf) for the communion loaf without the adjective for "unleavened" (ἄζυμος azymos) doesn't prove anything, because (as I recall his comment) a Hebrew or Aramaic speaker would have used the same word when taking and blessing either leavened or unleavened bread. Randall knew that I had recently been Orthodox, and also knew that the Orthodox Church specifically uses leavened bread for the Eucharist because of GJohn's chronology for the Last Supper, which has it occurring before Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.]
If one's view and practice of communion are based on things other than the Last Supper—e.g., Jesus' table meals or His feeding of the multitudes—then one is probably free to use whatever kind of bread one wishes.
Real wine or grape juice?
I favor using wine in keeping with the Biblical tradition, but based on
this informative article from the
Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible it appears that wine diluted 2:1 or 3:1 with water is probably most in keeping with what was used at the Last Supper and by the early church, though mixing today's wines with more water than a 1:1 ratio will greatly weaken the taste. Such mixed wine would still be strong enough to cause intoxication if too much was drunk (see Paul's comment at 1 Corinthians 11:21), yet weak enough for all to drink (preferably shared from a single cup) without negative effects. While some churches allow white wine, I think the blood symbolism is lost if anything other than red or purple-colored wine or grape juice is used. On the other hand, some early Christian groups used water, not wine, as they apparently viewed taking and sharing a common cup as being more important than what was in the cup.
A single loaf and cup, or individual pieces/wafers/crackers and cups?
Paul's comment at 1 Corinthians 10:17, as well as Jesus' taking of a single loaf (ἄρτος
artos) at the Last Supper, are reasons I favor using a single loaf—to be broken as it's distributed, either by each person or by the host after saying the blessing—so as to preserve and present the symbolism of the participating members being one body. Though
The Didache preserves a tradition of broken bread pieces (which could have come from a single loaf), the word (κλάσμα
klasma "fragment, piece, crumb") is singular in both its occurrences, rather than plural, which has led scholars to speculate that the original text read ἄρτος, as it's hard to see how a single fragment could be "scattered over the mountains" (unless the word meant "broken loaf").
I would favor all drinking from a single cup, as that seems to be the tradition in the Last Supper accounts and 1 Corinthians 10:1-11:34 and
The Didache, and also because of this comment from Thomas O'Loughlin:
One of the distinguishing features of the meals of Jesus was that he took a cup and, having blessed the Father, shared it with his disciples. This is a ritual without parallel in the ancient world: it is one thing to offer a thanksgiving over a cup—and by extension over all the cups of the participants of the meal—but quite another to pass a single cup from one to another. Yet here we find this practice: to share a cup is to assert an intimate unity and a common purpose. The disciples have to be prepared to drink from the cup of Jesus (Mark 10:38–39) and thereby they share in his destiny. At the meal in the Didache one of the rituals is that the single cup of the Lord is shared by all those at the meal. One cup is unity, and it cuts across every human boundary and division—it is not accidental that Christians have always tried to find ways around sharing the cup in their celebrations! - (O’Loughlin, T. (2010). The Didache: A Window on the Earliest Christians (95). London; Grand Rapids, MI: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; Baker Academic.)
Separate ritual or meal component?
Communion originated in the context of a shared meal, and that seems to have been the early church practice. One could open the meal with the blessing and breaking of the bread and the blessing and sharing of the cup, or one could open the meal with the blessing and breaking of the bread and close the meal with the blessing and sharing of the cup. If done as a separate ritual but still in the context of a meal, the bread and the cup could be taken together, either before or after dining.
Closed, semi-closed, or open?
One's practice will be related to what one views communion as being.
- If one views communion as being similar to a covenant meal like the Passover, then one will likely restrict it to those who are in covenant with Jesus, however one so defines being a member of the household of faith. The tradition in The Didache has restricted communion in view. Also, Luke's account of the Last Supper seems to have Jesus making His covenant only with and for those who are at table with Him. (But as noted in my post on Last Supper, Eucharist, And The Didache, the original wording of Luke's account is difficult to determine.)
- Even if regarded as a covenant meal in which communion is restricted to those who have embraced Jesus and His New Covenant, thereby usually excluding non-believers and children who have not yet professed faith in Jesus and/or been baptized, Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 7:12–14 seem to me to allow for the participation of the unbelieving spouses and underage children of believers, should they wish to partake, and I believe Jewish custom was to include children in the covenant feasts and holy days (Jewish males, of course, became part of the covenant people from their 8th day when they were circumcised):
12 I (not the Lord) say to the rest of you: If a brother has a wife who is an unbeliever and she is willing to live with him, he must not abandon (Or divorce) her. 13 And if a woman has a husband who is an unbeliever and he is willing to live with her, she must not abandon (Or divorce) him. 14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified because of her husband (Other mss. read (her/the) brother, the reading preferred by most critical Greek New Testaments). Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. (ISV)
- Some may wish to restrict communion because of the warning in 1 Corinthians 11:27ff.:
27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks from the cup in an unworthy manner will be held responsible for (ἔνοχος enochos) the Lord’s body and blood. 28 A person must examine (δοκιμάζω dokimazō) himself and then eat the bread and drink from the cup, 29 because whoever eats and drinks without recognizing (διακρίνω diakrinō) the body, eats and drinks judgment (κρίμα krima) on himself. 30 That’s why so many of you are weak and sick and a considerable number are dying. (Lit. are falling asleep). 31 But if we judged ourselves correctly (διακρίνω diakrinō), we would not be judged (κρίνω krinō). 32 Now, while we are being judged (κρίνω krinō) by the Lord, we are being disciplined so we won’t be condemned (κατακρίνω katakrinō) along with the world. 33 Therefore, my brothers, when you gather to eat, wait for each other. 34 If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you gather it may not bring judgment (κρίμα krima) on you. And when I come I will give instructions concerning the other matters. (ISV)
While some commentators think that in 11:29 Paul is referring to not recognizing that the bread and wine are really Christ's body and blood (or at least some "special" kind of food and drink), others say it's about not recognizing and treating all those assembled as fellow members of the one body of Christ. The latter was the basis of his chastisement in the second half of 1 Corinthians 11, and in other parts of 1 Corinthians, including the immediately-following three chapters, Paul wrote about how the church as the body of Christ is composed and is to function. That Paul wrote "without recognizing the body" instead of "without recognizing the body and the blood" further supports 11:29 being not about the bread and the wine but about not properly understanding that all at the table are members one of another and treating everyone accordingly, which may be what the self-examination in 11:28 involves. Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:33–34 further support this understanding of the passage.
- If one views communion as being an extension of Jesus's fellowship meals with followers, sinners, harlots, tax collectors, and any who wished to learn about or enter the Kingdom, or of His feeding of the multitudes, then it could be open to all who are present and wish to partake. Also, Matthew's and Mark's accounts of the Last Supper seem to differ from Luke's account in having Jesus making His covenant "for many."
Other Questions
Bread and wine/grape juice, or not?
Must communion always be done with bread (whether leavened or unleavened) and wine or grape juice? What about crackers or pretzels or chips, or tea or soda? What about people who live in countries where rice or another grain, or some kind of tuber or fruit, rather than wheat and grapes, is their "staple" food and source of fermented or juice beverage?
Who may officiate?
Must communion be officiated over by an ordained or appointed person—e.g., a priest, a pastor, an elder, a deacon, etc.? Or can any person in the assembly bless and offer the bread and wine? How about women? Or children? The questions also apply if the thanking/blessing of the bread and wine/juice/cup are done as part of a meal instead of as a separate ritual.
Real Presence or Spiritual Presence or Symbol or...?
- Do the bread and wine change into Jesus's Real Body and Blood? The Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach this, and the Catholics use the term "transubstantiation." The Roman Catholic Church believes the priest has the power to effect the change by pronouncing the words of institution ("This is my body.... This is my blood") whereas Orthodox priests call upon the Holy Spirit to effect the change during the epiclesis (literally "calling upon").
- Is Jesus specially present at communion in a real but non-transubstantiation way? Lutherans use the term "consubstantiation" for this, and other Christian denominations also assert that Christ is really present in the bread and wine.
- Are the bread and wine simply symbols of Christ's body and blood?
- Or...?
