The obvious answer to the above question is; words are spoken, bread is broken, wine or juice poured and people partake. My guess is that anyone reading this article has participated in communion and thus could give a fairly accurate retelling of the process. The question being asked however is looking for a different kind of answer. I am asking if there anything out of the ordinary that happens. In other words, do the elements become the body and blood of Christ? Is Christ really present? Is Christ spiritually present? Or in the end is the Lord's Supper no more than meal with a memory attached. I ask these questions because the church (as in the universal church in all of its forms and fashions) has debated and fought about what happens at communion for hundreds of years. What follows are some rather simple descriptions of how the church has answered the question of what happens at the table.
Transubstantiation: this term describes the belief of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches (though the Orthodox churches do not use the actual term, instead they speak of mysteries) that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus. Though the term was late in coming (sometime around 1100 CE) the belief behind it has been part of church teaching for centuries. Explaining how this happened was not of great concern. It was simply as accepted as fact. An explanation finally arrived through the incorporation of an Aristotelian view by the church (1250s CE). In today's Roman church transubstantiation is still the official teaching though Aristotle has been left behind.
Consubstantiation: this term refers to a view often expressed by Lutherans about communion. The idea is that while the bread and wine do not actually become the body and blood of Christ, the substance of the body and blood is alongside the elements. Luther himself spoke of Christ being objectively present "in, with and under the forms" of the bread and cup. This view has also been referred to as "sacramental union." Lutherans attempt to speak of the real presence of Christ while at the same time avoiding any superstition associated with the meal.
Spiritual Presence: Presbyterians have traditionally spoken of the spiritual feeding which happens at the table. We have not believed in the elements becoming something other than bread and wine (or in our case juice). At the same time we also want to speak of the real presence of Christ at the meal. We see this in the work of John Calvin (1509-1564) where he speaks of us feeding on the presence of Christ in the meal, while being clear that the bread and cup are not actually Jesus' body. Calvin did not want to separate the action (being spiritually fed by Christ) from the elements at the table. Thus we as Presbyterians believe that at the Lord's Table, we encounter Christ in a way we would not normally do so in day to day life.
Symbolic: this view of the Lord's Supper is that it is merely a time to remember what Christ did for us. This concept was originally promoted by Huldrych Zwingli (1484-1531) who denied the real presence and instead focused on the supper's power to support faith through witnessing to what Christ had done. In other words there is real power present, but not through any mystical presence of Christ. This way of viewing the event is shared by a wide variety of churches and denominations.
Ordinance: the final manner in which the Lord's Supper is viewed is that of an ordinance. This way of looking at communion simply views it as something that we are supposed to do because Jesus told us to do it. There is nothing powerful or mysterious about it. Thus when churches which take this view engage in communion they take great pains to eliminate any sense of ritual in order that no one ascribe any kind of mystery, power or presence to it.
In the end each of us is given the freedom to see and experience the meal as we so choose, knowing that Christ asked us to come to the table while at the same time promising to be with us always.
No comments:
Post a Comment