This is an interesting little clip giving the history of the eucharist, or communion. From Paul Mayer’s blog.
- Archive Assortment (55)
- Brainwaves (496)
- Creational Theology (56)
- Dan Wilt Bio (2)
- Dreams (3)
- EmergingChurch (274)
- Events (42)
- FullyAlive (171)
- FutureDay (4)
- IdeaMill (6)
- Institute Information (47)
- Introductions (25)
- LightenUp (12)
- Media & Books (3)
- Moments In Time (3)
- Songs (New) (2)
- St. Stephen's University (8)
- Stories & Poetry (21)
- TechnoJumble (15)
- WorshipAids (41)
5 Comments
That’s nice Dan. A few things are a bit too simple though - first the last supper is a Passover in all but the Johannine traditions - where Jesus is the passover. But I think that the connection is theologically deliberate (for both traditions). The danger is one can easily lead into a hyper Jewish interpretation and miss the richness of Eucharistic history and theology. The other is the unhelpful statement about Roman Catholic teaching on transubstantiation. That needs to be qualified. Indeed the ARCIC found that the Eucharistic theology of the RC church is completely compatible with the Anglican church. Anglicans tend to con-substantiation. What is more useful is to assert Real Presence in the Eucharist. Something Zwingli robbed most of our protestant traditions of. It would be more helpful to say that Roman Catholics believe that the real presence of Jesus is encountered in the bread and wine of the Eucharist. Transubstantiation tends to scare folks off, at least in my experience. Personally I am all about the presence and not hung up on trans- con- or whatever-substantiation. All that was a late medieval articulation anyway.
that’s what i love about you, Frank. well done.
I thought it was taught to be a purely symbolic act?
Hey Rich, taught by which group? It is really the influence of Zwingli that removes the mystery of something really happening in the act of Eucharist. Luther held it and Calvin did but to a lesser degree than Luther (but Calvin is wrestling to the middle ground between Zwingli and Luther). Many of our protestant traditions have held the Zwinglian line and said it is purely a symbolic act. To be fair the Eucharistic life of the church in that early Modern period was not its richest anyway. What is interesting is that the Reformation forced a serious liturgical re-evaluation that we still see being played out in our day (Vatican II is a great example).
Currently there is quite a resurrgence in Eucharistic sensibility amongst post-reformers. Many of us have realized we threw something important out because of our history and our fear of mystery. As a pastor in a community that embraced and built a sense of Eucharist I’m convinced that this is what we should be celebrating. Not as a symbolic act, but as a participation in the life of God through the Church. By participation I mean we encounter Jesus in the bread and wine. It is a way that our life is infused with His life, and it is a way that we can recognize the Church as more than a building or a social club - but the body of Christ expressed in the world for the sake of the world. For me Eucharist is high worship because it is so full of the potential for an inbreaking of God’s presence. Symbolically it is profound, but sacramentally it is holy and awe-some.
hi Dan, i just wanted to say that the clip was used in context with a whole service that was orientated around communion - on its own it it is a bit stark and i appreciate the comments above. Good feedback
Incoming Links
Leave a Reply