Lord's Supper, Eucharist, Communion, etc.

-
eucharist-still-life-painting.jpgThis is a really interesting issue.  And frankly, I don't care what you call it (but I prefer Eucharist).  What gets me is that it is the one issue that should unite us who follow Jesus and yet, sadly, it divides us.  And that is wrong.

The reason for the division, as you know, is the answer to the question 'What is it?'.  That is, is the Eucharist just a memorial, just symbolic, or is it that actual body and blood of Jesus?  Well, being an Episcopalian, it think it is a little of both and neither at the same time.  And my take on it (and we must remember, this debate has been going on for a long, long time) is just that, my small understanding.

My daughter Sumi had a friend come over and visit us Saturday night and she went to church with us on Sunday morning.  Her friend, being Catholic, asked me very specifically about how we viewed the Eucharist.  'What do you mean', I replied.  'Well, do you believe that it is the real body and blood of Jesus or just a symbol?'  I love loaded questions, don't you?  This is a good question but it's asked in the wrong way.  I appreciate the question, but it is worded in such a way as playing 'real' versus 'symbol'.  I said, 'It's both and it's neither'.  I told her that I don't believe that the bread and wine actually become the literal body and blood of Jesus, but I don't believe that it is just a symbol either.  To me, the bread and wine are literally bread and wine, but they have the presence of Jesus in them in a very real way.  'That makes a lot of sense', she replied.  And then it struck me, we have made this mystery very had to comprehend, let alone understand.  Think of it this way...

The Bible teaches that the entire creation has a real presence of God in it, and yet, it is not God.  It point to God, but creation itself is not God.  Just like a road sign points to the destination, so does creation.  Creation is a huge sign post that has 'glimpses' of God within it but it is not God.  It speaks to us, in very real ways, about God, but it is not God.  I believe the same is true concerning the Eucharist.  It has the very real presence of Jesus in it, but it is not Jesus.

Now, I know.  Someone will say 'But Jesus said this is my body... this is my blood.  He didn't say his presence would be (somehow) in it.  He said the bread and wine was his body and blood.' And that's all fine.  But are we really going to be that literal in a very wooden sense?  I mean, Jesus also said 'I am the door' but he doesn't have hinges.  So, while Jesus was enacting a great mystery, it is at least comprehensible.  His presence is with us when there are 'two or more gather in [his] name' right?  We have the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit with us but we are not the Holy Spirit, right?  It is the same with the bread and the wine.  These elements symbolize the act of Jesus death for us and his presence, his very real presence, is, well, present in them... somehow.

Peace be with you.

+ OD

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Linux Mint 5

-
Image
It's been a while since I did a technological (read: geek) blog, so I thought I would update you on what's going on. As you are aware, I am a full-fledged geek by trade and passion and I have gone from Windows to Mac to Linux.  My Linux evolution went from Linspire to Mepis to PCLinuxOS to Ubuntu .  I stayed with PCLinuxOS and Ubuntu for the longest.  However, I have always read good things about another distribution called Linux Mint .  It's based on the latest Ubuntu release but with a lot of add-ons.  The latest version is called Linux Mint 5, Elyssa.  So, at the office, I downloaded the latest iso and tried it out to see how it all worked. First of all, there are always some things I keep in mind when trying any new Linux distro, the primary thing being, 'How would the average user feel about using this OS?'  'Is it (very) simple to install?  Is it easy to use?  Is it easy to get help?  Is it easy to add or remove applications?  Is the terminal (command
Read more

Series: New Testament Eschatology

-
Image
From time to time, I hear a lot about the early church’s understanding of the “end of the world” or their belief that the “Second Coming of Jesus” would take place within their generation. And it’s usually not in a very good light. “They were obviously mistaken,” is often the remark I hear most. I know it’s hard to imagine but what if we’re mistaken? What if we’ve misunderstood what they meant? I’m hoping that this series on some of the major statements from the New Testament about the “end of the world” will show that they weren’t mistaken in their understanding of the “signs of the times.” Before we begin, however, let’s look at some terms that will have to be used. As most of you know, I try to refrain from using big “church” words. My reason for this is because those words are like suitcases where ideas and thoughts and understandings are packed into them. To explain the words would mean a long time spent unpacking the suitcases and explaining their contents. While such a pil
Read more

'Sick to my guts...'

-
I usually don't make posts like this because I'm way outta my element. But I am sick of all of the hype I see in the media. The whole one sided take on journalism. Each program has an agenda. As my wife says, 'You find what you're looking for'. It would absolutely kill a mainstream media person like Olbermann to say President Bush has done something good and right. Likewise it would kill a 'talk radio' media person like Limbaugh to say that Senator Clinton or Senator Obama did something good and right. We are a country shown the extremes. Most of the mainstream media are such Bush haters, that's right I stated 'haters', that they would actually explode if they had to report on the good that he has done. Likewise 'Fox' news and talk radio hosts are such Democrat haters that they, too, would explode if they had to report on any good that they have done. 'Fair and balanced' my butt! Everyone, everyone has their agenda. I
Read more