Remember

And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Luke 22:19 KJV

The Last Supper; Holy Communion; the Eucharist. These are the most common names given to the rite initiated by Jesus at His last Passover before His crucifixion. Regardless of the name, this ritual is a cause of both unity and division.

It divides denomination between those who believe in the "Real Presence" and those who see a powerful symbol. And yet, it unifies all Christians who accept that through this act they are sharing in the life of Christ. It was a profound experience for the original apostles and it continues to be an important practice for believers today.

But, what does it mean?

Communion is first and foremost a sacrificial meal, the eating of a sacrifice. This is a common practice throughout history in many, if not most cultures. Participants believed that by eating the sacrifice, they physically and spiritually became joined with that sacrifice. This was important because a sacrifice was typically offered at the consumation of a contract. Thus, by both parties eating the sacrifice both parties became the sacrifice, and as a result, both parties became each other. The eating of the same food effectively made them the same person.

As an aside, it is interesting to note that sharing a meal with someone was considered a very high compliment in ancient times because doing so was sharing your life. And, by contrast, to withhold food from a guest is an insult because by doing so you are depriving them of life.

So, Communion is joining ourselves with Jesus as our sacrifice, and becoming part of His death. Additionally, we are joining ourselves with the other participant in the contract, which is God the Father. By participating in Communion, we are expressing our desire to be one with God.

To the original apostles, this rite was a Passover meal; a very important Jewish observance. Passover was instituted when God led the children of Israel out of Egypt. This ritual regularly reminded the Jews that they were specifically chosen and rescued. Each aspect of the meal had a particular meaning which can be seen in the Communion rite (the details are for another time).

Now, when Jesus presided over this Passover He did something that was revolutionary. In addition to the breaking of the bread which Jesus equated to His body, Jesus also offered them wine which He related to His blood. This must have shocked, if not disgusted the apostles. You see, the Jews were, and still are, forbidden to eat or drink blood or anything with blood in it.

Why? Because, "the life is in the blood." To a Jew, to drink blood was to drink the very life of whatever provided the blood and to extend your life at the cost of another's is, well, bad form. So you can see why the apostles would have been taken aback. Yet, their experience with Jesus allowed them to understand that He was doing something extremely important; He was giving them His life to enrich theirs.

In it's initiation, Communion provided identification with the sacrifice through Jesus' body; the bread, and also provided a source of life through Jesus' blood. The apostles saw that by Jesus offering Himself, he was showing Himself as the Passover personified; He was their deliverance.

Today, we don't sacrifice very often. We've lost a lot of the understanding of sacrifice and too many of us have reduced the intimate rites initiated by Jesus to symbols. Meaningful, maybe, but symbolic nonetheless. This is a bit of a problem.

A symbol is really nothing but a pointer and is empty in itself. Symbols can be attended to or ignored with minimal peril, if any at all. A symbol is meant to lead to whatever it symbolizes and should not be confused for anything else. To stop at a symbol is to not go far enough.

In I Corinthians 11:29 & 30 Paul says, "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

Paul is saying that many are sick and dead because they mishandled Communion; they did it wrong. Symbols don't kill. I find this a very convincing argument against a symbolic rite. It is this understanding of Communion that has caused many to avoid it out of fear, and many congregations to refuse to serve it to outsiders. Right understanding, wrong application.

Why is Communion so powerful? Because of what Catholics call the "Real Presence"; that is the understanding the the very essence of Jesus is present in elements of Communion. Some, like the Pharisees in Jesus day, have a hard time accepting this.

Jesus said explicitly that to have eternal life we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Many claim that Jesus was speaking symbolically, yet the Pharisees did not understand Him that way. Neither did many of His followers who left Him when He made this claim. And the telling fact here is that Jesus did not correct any of them, which we would expect if they misunderstood Him. After all, Jesus corrected Nicodemus when he misunderstood about being born again (cf John 3:1-12).

It seems to me that the trouble accepting that Jesus is present in the Communion elements results from too much confidence in physical existence. It's too easy to think that Jesus' body was finite, and thus would eventually "run out." We need to remember that when dealing with God, we cannot limit our experience to what is physically possible.

Also, when partaking of Communion, we are eating regular bread and drinking plain old wine. The elements do not change into flesh and blood. Again, our physical experience clouds our vision of a spiritual reality. It's interesting that when we take medication, we identify the pills we take as the prescribed drug. Yet, the majority of the pill is in fact filler. Generally speaking, the active ingredient in our medication is not readily recognizable in the pills we take. So, we are familiar with the concept of an essential quality as an identity. This is not totally dissimilar to the Communion elements.

It is not so farfetched to accept that when we partake of Communion, we are partaking in the body and blood of Christ.

In Communion, we are making a contract with God to identify with Him while recognizing that Jesus is the sacrifice that connects us to Him and that participation is necessary to our well-being within the body of Christ.

Giving or Getting

Sac·ra·ment : noun

Etymology: Middle English sacrement, sacrament, from Anglo-French
& Late Latin; Anglo-French, from Late Latin sacramentum, from Latin, oath of
allegiance, obligation, from sacrare to consecrate

a : a Christian rite (as baptism or the Eucharist) that is believed
to have been ordained by Christ and that is held to be a means of divine grace
or to be a sign or symbol of a spiritual reality
b : a religious rite or observance comparable to a Christian
sacrament

from Webster.com

Sacraments, in a Christian context are those practices of special significance. To most non-Catholic Christians the sacraments (baptism and communion) are rites that are required by Christians; they are symbols of obedience, yet not necessarily affective. To Catholics, the sacraments (they count seven) are actions that allow them to receive specific grace from God.

I think both are missing something important, though I believe non-Catholics are at least looking in the right direction.

In the definition quoted above there is a phrase that I've never noticed before; "oath of allegiance." As I came to understand Christianity, I came to realize that the sacraments were more than mere symbols. I could not, however, get comfortable with the idea that I performed these rites to get something. The sacraments became practices that I respected and desired to perform.

Not until I found the phrase "oath of allegiance" did I have some way to understand my desire. It is allegiance in particular that strikes a chord with me. I am familiar with oaths, promises, vows and commitments; I understand these things. But the idea of allegiance is what make both Catholic and non-Catholic perspectives of the sacraments incomplete.

You see, you can get obedience through intimidation. But even with perfect obedience, you do not necessarily have allegiance. You can buy cooperation with gifts, but that cooperation does not naturally lead to allegiance. Allegiance is something we choose and cannot be coerced.

We pledge our allegiance to someone or something because we see that it is right and good. We are loyal to what we see as true. We dedicate ourselves to those people and ideas that represent the standard that we desire to live up to. Allegiance comes from deep within us and causes us to go contrary to the crowd. Allegiance cannot be cajoled or forced.

The sacraments are an oath of allegiance. Baptism is an identification with the truth as lived by Jesus. Communion is a participation in the very life and death of Christ. These are actions that make statements about who we are and who we want to be. The sacraments are not acts of obedience, or a way to get something. The sacraments are the most profound acts a Christian can perform.