Concerning Christian Books

The Eucharist is More than Mere Symbolism (Reflection)

The ritual of holy communion - or whatever else we may call it - is something many Christians share and celebrate. Naturally it is common knowledge that it commemorates the Last Supper between Jesus and His disciples before the fateful day in which Christ would die on the cross. A worthy event to remember and honour, without a doubt - just like we might look back fondly, nostalgically and respectfully on the last great occasion of intimacy we shared with any loved one before they passed on. But the Last Supper is more than this. Jesus's own words were charged with imagery, metaphor and symbolism.

Blessing and breaking the bread, he offered it to His disciples, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me". Proffering likewise the wine, He said, "This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you". (I ought to state I have quoted here the passage from Luke according to the Douay-Rheims translation of the Bible which is Catholic yet is not referred to even in Catholic mass today. My choice to reference this translation consistently in my writing is due to advice I received from my father-in-law, who is a very devout Catholic and who I greatly admire). 

Most Christians these days tend to view the holy communion as a beautiful but essentially symbolic ritual wherein we re-enact that solemn occasion of Christ's last meal with His apostles. Historically there has been, and continues to be, much derision thrown at Catholics for their theology of transubstantiation - that is, the literal transformation of the bread and wine into the precious body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ. Now I cannot personally take major issue with this position as, being an uninformed Catholic myself for many, many years, I somehow escaped the necessity of confronting the proposition of Christ's literal presence in the Eucharist. When I went through the sacramental program for Holy Communion at around age eight or so, it mustn't have been reinforced that much, or else I just wasn't paying attention. Probably the latter.

But upon being led to proper consideration of the Eucharist as a Catholic sacrament that emphasises the actual presence of our Lord, I eventually came to a deeper understanding of how truly wonderful and yet incomprehensible this gift of God is. This reflection will not be my attempt at Catholic apologetics - I will leave that for my book On Catholicism. I will not linger on the natural and perfectly justified difficulty many face in accepting the reality of the Eucharist as professed by the Catholic Church. I will just say that having come to acceptance of it myself, I disagree with anyone - Christian or otherwise - that the Eucharist is in any way an idolatrous violation against God. 

On the surface, it does indeed appear idolatrous if not blatantly absurd to see Christians (with the Israelites and the golden calf in mind) kneeling reverently before a small white circle of wafer bread. There are, worldwide, countless and recurring instances of what Catholics call Adoration, where we gaze upon the consecrated host and feel Our Lord presence. But it must be remembered that the bread is not the object of worship - just as the wood or plastic or any other material composed into a figure of Christ is not the object of worship - but rather, what is represented in this humanly crafted form. Is that just a fancy attempt to justify idolatry? Could the same be said about the golden calf crafted by the desperate Israelites in rebellion against Yahweh as He led them through the wilderness? 

I say no. Not at all. The Eucharistic host is, before transubstantiation, merely a piece of bread. But through the act of consecration performed by an ordained priest at the altar of any church, the bread becomes no longer bread, but the body of Christ Himself, which was physically and spiritually given up for us through His suffering on the cross.  Therefore, we do not worship bread - that would be idolatry - but instead, what we believe to then inhabit the bread, that blank slate, through the glorious intercession of God. 

"So why does the bread not taste like flesh? Clearly, it is still bread," one might respond with. This is exactly what my mind threw at me when faced with the choice of acceptance or rejection. And my own instinctive conclusion, found after substantial and somewhat fixated reflection, was simply that I had no answer because it was beyond me or any human being to explain that. It does completely confound logic. That is why atheists reject such a notion - along with everything else Christians believe. That is why Christian - and, more specifically in this case, Catholics - believe it. We who have faith also affirm that God is beyond our logic. He can perform any action He wants, irrespective of the natural laws we ourselves are bound to. Therefore, my reason and rationality can only go so far - to the border of logic, let's say. If I was willing to go further, to enter into belief of the metaphysical realm, my logic would have to be left behind - or rather, be "logically" disregarded, just as one logically exits their car if they want to safely enter the ocean.  

In this metaphysical realm that co-exists with our universe of time and space, of temporal reality, God can do whatever He wishes. And sometimes He will even perform his acts within our our sphere, wherein He defies the laws of reason and logic. You can call this "ridiculous" and "impossible" ... or you can call it "miraculous". The choice will generally depend on whether you accept or reject the existence of God in the first place.

Finally, going beyond my own reasonable (or, if you like, "unreasonable") conclusions, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (p. 97) provides a more authoritative explanation of why the Eucharistic host is not altered in outward appearance: "(Transubstantiation) is brought about in the Eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, the outward characteristics of the bread and wine, that is the "Eucharistic species", remain unaltered". 

The reason why the "externals" of the Eucharistic species remain unchanged - why the bread does not look or taste like flesh (barring the occasional miracle in which it does!) - God alone knows. But most likely it is due to the same reason He doesn't manifest Himself in many other obvious ways that would go against His preference for drawing us through love, trust and faith rather than monumental displays of power (which, incidentally, have also been rejected by non-believers whenever they do occur anyway).