8.

1.

Christian viewpoint of Communion

A.

Biblical

Communion

And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, This cup which is poured out
for you is the new covenant in My blood. And when He had taken some bread and given thanks,
He broke it and gave it to them, saying, This is My body which is given for you; do this in
remembrance of Me.
( LUKE 22:19-20)
B.

BACKGROUND

Eucharist
The Eucharist or Communion or The Lord's Supper, is the rite that Christians perform in fulfillment of
Jesus' instruction, recorded in the New Testament[1], to do in memory of him what he did at his Last
Supper. Jesus gave his disciples bread, saying "This is my body," and wine, saying "This is my blood."
Christians generally recognize a special presence of Christ in this rite, though they differ about exactly
how, where, and when Christ is present. The word "Eucharist" is also applied to the bread and wine
consecrated in the course of the rite.
The word "Eucharist" comes from the Greek noun (thanksgiving) [1]. This noun or the
corresponding verb (to give thanks) is found in 55 verses of the New Testament. (,
the uncontracted form, given in some aids for students, is not used in the New Testament.) Four of these
verses (Matthew 26:27, Mark 14:23, Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 11:24) recount that Jesus "gave thanks"
before presenting to his followers the bread and the wine that he declared to be his body and his blood.
Most Christians classify the Eucharist as a sacrament, but many Protestant traditions avoid the term
sacrament, preferring ordinance. In these traditions, the ceremony is seen not as a specific channel of
divine grace but as an expression of faith and obedience of the Christian community.
1 Names for the Eucharist
2 Eucharist in the Bible
3 Christian Theology
3.1 Roman Catholic: Sacrifice; Transubstantiation
3.2 Eastern Christianity: True Sacrifice and Objective Presence but Pious Silence on the Particulars
3.3 Anglicans/Episcopalians: Real Presence with Opinion
3.4 Lutherans - the Sacramental Union: "in, with, and under the forms"
3.5 Methodism: presence as "mystery"
3.6 Calvinist Reformed: spiritual feeding, "pneumatic" presence
3.7 Zwinglian Reformed: no Real Presence
3.8 Summary of views
4 Ritual and liturgy
4.1 The Agape feast
4.2 Eastern Christianity
4.3 Roman Catholicism
4.4 Protestantism
4.4.1 Anglican
4.4.2 Lutheran
4.4.3 Reformed/Presbyterian
4.4.4 Minimalist
4.5 Jehovah's Witnesses
4.6 Open and closed communion

5 Alleged association with pre-Christian theophagy

6 See also
7 Footnotes
1.

2.

Names for the Eucharist

A.

Eucharist (from Greek eucharistia, "thanksgiving") is the term with the earliest
established historical use. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who was martyred in Rome in about 110,
used the term "Eucharist", referring to both the rite and the consecrated elements, three times in
his Letter to the Smyrnaeans [2] and once in his Letter to the Philadelphians [3]. Justin Martyr,
writing around 150, gave a detailed description of the rite, and stated that "Eucharist" was the
name that Christians used: "This food is called among us the Eucharist..." (Apology, 66 [4]).
Today the term "Eucharist" is used by Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox,
Anglicans, and Lutherans. Most other Protestant traditions use this term rarely, but few reject it
entirely.

B.

Communion (from Latin communio, "sharing in common") is a term used by Catholics, Orthodox
Christians, Anglicans, and many Protestants; Holy Communion is also prevalent. Catholics and
Orthodox typically apply it to the partaking of the consecrated bread and wine, and to these
consecrated elements themselves, rather than to the Eucharistic rite as a whole. In their
understanding, it is possible to participate in the celebration of the Eucharistic rite without
"receiving Holy Communion" (partaking of the consecrated elements). On the other hand, groups
that originated in the Protestant Reformation usually apply this term to the whole rite. Many,
especially Anglicans, prefer the fuller term "Holy Communion" rather than just "Communion".
The term Communion holds further ambiguity in that it also refers to the relationship of Christians,
as individuals or as a Church, with God and with other Christians (see Communion (Christian)),
and can also refer to the relationship between the Three Divine Persons within the Trinity, a
relationship known as perichoresis which is considered the archetype of the other forms of
communion.

C.

The Lord's Supper and the Breaking of Bread are terms that the New Testament (1 Corinthians
11:20; Acts 2:42, 20:7) applies to celebration of the Eucharist. The first of these terms tends to be
preferred by "minimalist" traditions, especially those strongly influenced by Huldrych (or Ulrich)
Zwingli and the Restoration Movement. The Lord's Supper is also a common term among
Lutherans, as is the sacrament of the altar. Other Churches and denominations also use these
terms, but generally not as their basic, routine term.

D.

Certain terms are limited to the Orthodox Christian and Catholic traditions, and are typically
applied to the rite as a whole. The Divine Liturgy is used by Orthodox and the Eastern Catholic
Churches, who also, especially for the consecrated elements, use the Divine Mysteries. Roman
Catholics use many other terms, including the Mass, the Memorial of the Passion, Death and
Resurrection of the Lord, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and the Holy Mysteries[2]. The
Blessed Sacrament and the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar are also common terms for the
consecrated elements, especially when reserved in the Church tabernacle. "Mass" is also used by
Anglo-Catholics and the Church of Sweden.
Eucharist in the Bible

The three synoptic Gospels (Matthew [5], Mark [6], and Luke [7]) as well as Saint Paul's first Letter to the
Corinthians [8] contain versions of the Words of Institution spoken by Jesus at the Last Supper: "Take, eat,
this is my body ... Take, drink, this is my blood ... Do this in remembrance of me." All subsequent
celebration of the Eucharist is based on this injunction. John 6 is also interpreted in connection with the
Eucharist: " For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats My flesh and drinks

My blood abides in Me, and I in him." (John 6:55-56)

See also: Historical roots of Catholic Eucharistic theology
[edit]
3.

Christian Theology

The Eucharist has always been at the center of Christian worship, though theological interpretations vary.
In general, the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox traditions see the Eucharist as the fulfillment of
God's plan for the salvation of humanity from sin (the "Divine Economy"), a commemoration and making
present of Jesus' Crucifixion on Calvary and his Resurrection, the means for Christians to unite with God
and with each other, and the giving of thanks for all these things. Differences in Eucharistic theology tend
to be related to differences in understanding of these areas.
Efforts at mutual understanding of the range of theologies led in the 1980s to the consultations on Baptism,
Eucharist and Ministry (BEM) through the World Council of Churches, which included the Roman
Catholic Church.
[edit]
Roman Catholic: Sacrifice; Transubstantiation
Main articles: Mass (liturgy), Transubstantiation and The Blessed Sacrament
In the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, the Eucharist is one of the seven sacraments, but is also
considered the "queen of the sacraments" and "the blessed sacrament", and the institution of the Eucharist
is one of the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary. The Eucharist is a commemoration, or, in Greek,
anamnesis [9] of the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Christ (called the Paschal Mystery), understood in
the fullest sense given to it in Biblical tradition. In other words, it is a memorial which does not just bring
to mind the event celebrated, but also makes it truly present. The Eucharist is therefore understood to be not
simply a representation of Christ's presence, or a remembrance of his Passion and Death, but an actual
participation in the Sacrifice of Christ, the manifestation, in the present, of an event that occurred once for
all in time. The Eucharist makes present that one sacrifice, not a different sacrifice. The priest and victim of
the sacrifice are one and the same; the only difference is in the manner in which it is offeredthe Church
teaches that the Mass is the sacrifice at Calvary made present in an unbloody manner.
The only minister of the Eucharist, that is, one authorized to celebrate the rite and consecrate the Eucharist,
is a validly ordained priest (either bishop or presbyter) acting in the person of Christ (in persona Christi). In
other words the priest celebrant represents Christ, who is the Head of the Church, and acts before God in
the name of the Church. The matter used must be wheaten bread and grape wine; this is essential for
validity.
According to the Roman Catholic Church, when the bread and wine are consecrated in the Eucharist, they
cease to be bread and wine, and become instead the body and blood of Christ. The empirical appearances
are not changed, but the reality is. The consecration of the bread (known as the host) and wine represents
the separation of Jesus's body from his blood at Calvary. However, since he has risen, the Church teaches
that his body and blood can no longer be truly separated. Where one is, the other must be. Therefore,
although the priest (or minister) says, "The body of Christ", when administering the host, and, "The blood
of Christ", when presenting the chalice, the communicant who receives either one receives Christ, whole
and entire.
The mysterious change of the reality of the bread and wine used in the Eucharist, a change to which
patristic writers had given other equivalent names, began to be called "transubstantiation" in the twelfth
century. In the judgement of the Catholic Church, this term, with its accompanying unambiguous
distinction between "substance" or underlying reality, and " accidents" or humanly perceptible appearances,
still best safeguards against the opposite extremes of a cannibalistic interpretation (the accidents remain
real, not an illusion) or of a merely symbolic interpretation (the substance is changed from that of bread and

wine to that of the body and blood of Christ) of the Eucharist.

The definition of the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which concerns what is changed, not how the
change occurs, is given in the following words of the Council of Trent, quoted in paragraph 1376 of the
Catechism of the Catholic Church: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he
was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this
holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change
of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole
substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly
and properly called transubstantiation."
The Eucharist is given to Catholics who wish to receive either at Mass or outside of Mass. This is called the
administration of Holy Communion. When it is given at Mass, it may be given under one kind (usually the
host), or under both kinds (both the host and the consecrated wine, referred to by Catholics as the Precious
Blood). Regular use of Communion under both kinds requires the permission of the bishop, but bishops in
some countries have given blanket permission to administer Holy Communion in this way. The ordinary
ministers of Holy Communion are Bishops, Priests and Deacons, the latter traditionally ministering the
chalice. Members of the laity may also be commissioned as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion,
but only where there is a necessity.
The hosts are kept in a tabernacle after the celebration of the Mass, so that they can be brought to the sick
and dying outside the time of Mass, and also so that the Eucharistic presence may be worshipped and
adored. On occasions, the Eucharist is exposed in a monstrance, so that it may be the focus of prayer and
adoration.
[edit]
Eastern Christianity: True Sacrifice and Objective Presence but Pious Silence on the Particulars
Main article: Divine Liturgy
The Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox Churches and the Assyrian Church of the East agree with
the Roman Catholic Church that Christ is really, fully, uniquely, and permanently present in the Eucharistic
elements, and that, in the Divine Liturgy, the one sacrifice of Christ is made present; and that the exact
means by which the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ, through the work of the Holy
Spirit, is a mystery. They are not particularly interested in the precise moment the change occurs, although
this "change" or "fulfillment" of the bread and wine is usually identified with the Epiklesis. As in the
Roman Catholic Church, the change is regarded as permanent, and any of the consecrated elements, or
"gifts," that remain at the end of the Divine Liturgy are normally consumed by a priest or deacon.
Gifts reserved for the communion of the sick are specially consecrated on Holy Thursday, or at other times
as needed, and are not simply leftovers from the previous Divine Liturgy. Since the Eucharistic gifts are
regarded primarily as food, Eucharistic adoration is unknown outside the Liturgy itself, except among those
Orthodox Christians who worship according to a Western Rite.
[edit]
Anglicans/Episcopalians: Real Presence with Opinion
The historical position of the Anglican Communion is found in the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1571, which
state "the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ"; and likewise that "the Cup of
Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ" (Articles of Religion, Article XXVIII: Of the Lord's
Supper). The fact that the terms "Bread" and "Wine" and the corresponding words "Body" and "Blood" are
all capitalized may reflect the wide range of theological beliefs regarding the Eucharist among Anglicans.
However, the Articles also state that adoration, or worship per se, of the consecrated elements was not
commanded by Christ and that those who receive unworthily do not actually receive Christ but rather their
own condemnation.
Anglicans generally and officially believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but the specifics

of that belief range from transubstantiation, sometimes with Eucharistic adoration (mainly AngloCatholics), to something akin to a belief in a "pneumatic" presence, which may or may not be tied to the
Eucharistic elements themselves (almost always "Low Church" or Evangelical Anglicans). The normal
range of Anglican belief ranges from Objective Reality to Pious Silence, depending on the individual
Anglican's theology. A small minority, as in any church, reject the doctrine of the Real Presence altogether.
The classic Anglican aphorism with regard to this debate is found in a poem by John Donne: "He was the
Word that spake it; He took the bread and brake it; And what that Word did make it; I do believe and take
it."
Anglican belief in the Eucharistic Sacrifice ("Sacrifice of the Mass") is set forth in the response Saepius
officio of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to Pope Leo XIII's Papal Encyclical Apostolicae curae.
Anglicans and Roman Catholics declared that they had "substantial agreement on the doctrine of the
Eucharist" in the Windsor Statement on Eucharistic Doctrine from the Anglican-Roman Catholic
International Consultation and the Elucidation of the ARCIC Windsor Statement.
[edit]
Lutherans - the Sacramental Union: "in, with, and under the forms"
Lutherans believe that the Body and Blood of Christ are "truly and substantially present in, with and under
the forms" of the consecrated bread and wine (the elements), so that communicants eat and drink both the
elements and the true Body and Blood of Christ Himself (cf. Augsburg Confession, Article 10) in the
Sacrament of Holy Communion. The Lutheran doctrine of the Real Presence is more accurately and
formally known as "the Sacramental Union." This theology was first developed in the Wittenberg Concord.
It has been called "consubstantiation" by some, but this term is rejected by Lutheran churches and
theologians as it creates confusion with an earlier doctrine of the same name.
For Lutherans, there is no sacrament unless the elements are used according to Christ's institution
(consecration, distribution, and reception). This was first formulated in the Wittenberg Concord of 1536 in
the formula: Nihil habet rationem sacramenti extra usum a Christo institutum ("Nothing has the character
of a sacrament apart from the use instituted by Christ"). As a consequence of their belief in this principle,
some Lutherans have opposed in the Christian Church the reservation of the consecrated elements, private
masses, the practice of Corpus Christi, and the belief that the presence of Christ's body and blood continue
in the reliqu (what remains of the consecrated elements after all have communed in the worship service).
This interpretation is not universal among Lutherans. The consecrated elements are treated with respect,
and in some areas are reserved as in Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Anglican practice, but Eucharistic
adoration is not typically practiced. To remove any scruple of doubt or superstition the reliqu traditionally
are either consumed or poured into the earth, except that a small amount may be kept for delivery to those
too ill or infirm to attend the service. In this case, the consecrated elements are to be delivered quickly,
preserving the connection between the communion experienced by the ill person, and the communion of
the rest of the congregation.
Lutherans use the terms "in, with and under the forms of [consecrated] bread and wine" and "Sacramental
Union" to distinguish their understanding of the Lord's Supper from those of the Reformed and other
traditions. More liberal Lutheran churches tend to practice open communion, inviting all who are baptized
to participate. Conservative Lutheran churches such as the Confessional Lutherans are more likely to
practice closed communion (or "close communion"), restricting participation to those, who are more or less
in doctrinal agreement with them. This might involve the formal declaration of "altar and pulpit
fellowship," another term for eucharistic sharing coupled with the acceptance of the ministrations of one
another's clergy.

Methodism: presence as "mystery"

The followers of John Wesley have typically affirmed that the grace of Christ is experienced via his real
presence in the sacrament, but have allowed the details to remain a mystery, rejecting the doctrine of

transubstantiation (see "Article XVIII" of the Articles of Religion, Means of Grace). In 2004, the United
Methodist Church more clearly defined its view of the sacrament and its belief in the Real Presence in an
official document entitled This Holy Mystery.
Calvinist Reformed: spiritual feeding, "pneumatic" presence
Many Reformed Christians, particularly those who follow John Calvin, hold that Christ's body and blood
do not come down to inhabit the elements, but that "the Spirit truly unites things separated in space"
(Calvin).
Following a phrase of Augustine, the Calvinist view is that "no one bears away from this Sacrament more
than is gathered with the vessel of faith". "The flesh and blood of Christ are no less truly given to the
unworthy than to God's elect believers", Calvin said, "but those who partake by faith receive benefit from
Christ, and the unbelieving are condemned by partaking. By faith (not a mere mental apprehension), and in
the Holy Spirit, the partaker beholds God incarnate, and in the same sense touches him with hands, so that
by eating and drinking of bread and wine Christ's actual presence penetrates to the heart of the believer
more nearly than food swallowed with the mouth can enter in."
Calvin specifically rejected adoration of the Eucharistic bread and wine as "idolatry", however. The
elements may be disposed of without ceremony; they are unchanged, and as such the meal directs attention
toward Christ's bodily resurrection and return.
[edit]
Zwinglian Reformed: no Real Presence
Main article: Memorialism
Some Protestant groups see Communion (also called the Lord's Supper or the Lord's Table) as a symbolic
meal, a memorial of the Last Supper and the Passion in which nothing miraculous occurs. This view is
known as the Zwinglian view, after Huldrych Zwingli, a Swiss leader during the Reformation. It is
commonly associated with Baptists and the Disciples of Christ.
Some of the Reformed hold that Calvin actually held this view, and not the Spiritual feeding idea more
commonly attributed to him; or that the two views are really the same.
[edit]
Summary of views
Because Jesus Christ is a person, theologies regarding the Eucharist involve consideration of the way in
which the communicant's personal relationship with God is fed through this mystical meal. However,
debates over Eucharistic theology in the West have centered not on the personal aspects of Christ's
presence but on the metaphysical. The opposing views are summarized below.
For more details on this topic, see Real Presence.
Transubstantiation the substance (fundamental reality) of the bread and wine is transformed in a way
beyond human comprehension into that of the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ, but the
accidents (physical traits, including chemical properties) of the bread and wine remain; this view
is held by the Roman Catholic Church and many Anglicans, especially in Anglo-Catholic circles.
"In, with and under the forms" - the body and blood of Jesus Christ are substantially present in, with
and under the substance of the bread and wine, which remain. This is the view held by most
Lutherans, and some Anglicans. Some refer to this view as consubstantiation, but many Lutherans
reject this term.
Objective reality, but pious silence about technicalities - the view of all the ancient Churches of the
East, including the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian Church of the East
as well as perhaps most Anglicans. These, while agreeing with the Roman Catholic belief that the
sacrament is not merely bread and wine but truly the body and blood of Christ, do not usually
employ the "substance" and "accidents" terminology, preferring not to scrutinize the technicalities

of the transformation.
Real Spiritual presence also called "pneumatic presence" - not only the spirit, but also the true body and
blood of Jesus Christ (hence "real") are received by the sovereign, mysterious, and miraculous
power of the Holy Spirit (hence "spiritual"), but only by those partakers who have faith. This view
approaches the "pious silence" view in its unwillingness to specify how the Holy Spirit makes
Christ present, but positively excludes not just symbolism but also trans- and con-substantiation. It
is also known as the "mystical presence" view, and is held by most Reformed Christians, such as
Presbyterians, as well as some Methodists and some Anglicans, particularly Low Church
Reformed Anglicans. See Westminster Confession of Faith, ch. 19. This understanding is often
called "receptionism." Some argue that this view can be seen as being suggestedthough not by
any means clearlyby the "invocation" of the Anglican Rite as found in the American Book of
Common Prayer, 1928 and earlier and in Rite I of the American BCP of 1979 as well as in other
Anglican formularies:
And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us, and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe
to bless and sanctify, with thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine; that
we, receiving them according to thy Son our Savior Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his
death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood.
Symbolism - the bread and wine are symbolic of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and in partaking of
the elements the believer commemorates the sacrificial death of Christ. This view is also known as
"memorialism" and Zwinglianism after Ulrich Zwingli and is held by several Protestant
denominations, including most Baptists.
Suspension - the partaking of the bread and wine was not intended to be a perpetual ordinance, or was
not to be taken as a religious rite or ceremony (also known as adeipnonism, meaning "no supper"
or "no meal"). This is the view of Quakers and the Salvation Army, as well as the
hyperdispensationalist positions of E. W. Bullinger, Cornelius R. Stam, and others.

4.

Ritual and liturgy

The Agape feast

The Agape feast was the Eucharistic celebration of the early Christians. While centered on the ritual of the
bread and wine, it also included various other ritual elements, including elements of the Passover seder and
of Mediterranean funerary banquets, also termed Agape Feasts. Agape is one of the Greek words for love,
particularly applied to selfless love. Such meals were widespread, though not universal, in the early
Christian world.
This service was apparently a full meal, with each participant bringing a contribution to the meal according
to their means. Perhaps predictably enough, it could at times deteriorate into merely an occasion for eating
and drinking, or for ostentatious displays by the wealthier members of the community. This was criticized
by St. Paul in the New Testament (cf. 1 Cor 11:20-22). Because of such abuses, and the increased
ritualization of the feast the Agape gradually fell into disfavor, and after being subjected to various
regulations and restrictions, it was definitively dropped by the Church between the 6th and 8th centuries.
Many Christians, however, after celebrating the Eucharist, now routinely participate in a sharing of light
refreshments and conversation in an informal ritual that is functionally an Agape. This post-Eucharistic
gathering is often called "fellowship hour" or "coffee hour" and is regarded by many clergy as a
particularly opportune time for engaging adults in Christian education.
Today some contemporary Christians participate in Agape meals on rare occasions, to experience this
historical form of the Eucharist. Others, particularly among the House Church movement, practice the love
feast weekly as the observation of the Lord's Supper--a full meal provided by and shared among the
members. The bread and wine are taken as part of the meal, either at the end or the meal may be opened
with the bread and ended with the wine.
[edit]

Eastern Christianity
Main article: Divine Liturgy
Among Eastern Christians, the Eucharistic service is called the Divine Liturgy. It comprises two main
divisions: the first is the Liturgy of the Catechumens which consists of introductory litanies, antiphons and
scripture readings, culminating in a reading from one of the Gospels and often, a sermon; the second is the
Liturgy of the Faithful in which the Eucharist is offered, consecrated, and received as Holy Communion.
Within the latter, the actual Eucharistic prayer is called the anaphora (Greek:, "offering" or "lifting up"). In
the Byzantine Rite, two different anaphoras are currently used: one is attributed to St. John Chrysostom,
and the other to St. Basil the Great. Among the Oriental Orthodox, a variety of anaphoras are used, but all
are similar in structure to those of the Byzantine Rite. In the Byzantine Rite, the Anaphora of St. John
Chrysostom is used most days of the year; St. Basil's is offered on the Sundays of Great Lent, the eves of
Christmas and Theophany, Holy Thursday, Holy Saturday, and upon his feast day (January 1). At the
conclusion of the Anaphora the bread and wine are held to be the Body and Blood of Christ.
Conventionally this change in the elements is understood to occur at the Epiklesis (Greek: "invocation") by
which the Holy Spirit is invoked and the consecration of the bread and wine as the Body and Blood of
Christ is specifically requested, but since the anaphora as a whole is considered a unitary (albeit lengthy)
prayer, no one moment within it can be readily singled out.
[edit]
Roman Catholicism
See Mass and Divine Liturgy.
[edit]
Protestantism
This section is a stub. You can help by adding to it.
[edit]
Anglican
In the Episcopal Church in the United States of America (ECUSA), the Eucharist is designated as the
principal service of the Church. The service for Holy Eucharist is found in the Book of Common Prayer for
each national church in the Anglican Communion. The Anglican Church holds the Eucharist as the highest
form of worship, the Church's main service. Daily celebrations are the now the case in most cathedrals and
many parish churches, and there are few churches where Holy Communion is not celebrated at least once
every Sunday. The nature of the ritual with which it is celebrated, however, varies according to the
churchmanship of the individual parish.
See Book of Common Prayer and Ritualism.
This section is a stub. You can help by adding to it.
[edit]
Lutheran
The Lutheran Eucharistic service is similar in form to the Roman Catholic and "high" Anglican services.
Administration of the bread and wine varies between congregations. The bread can be a thin wafer, or
leavened or unleavened bread. The wine or grape juice may be administered via a common cup (the

"chalice"), or through individual cups that may be either prefilled or filled from the chalice during the
communion. Intinction is acceptable, but rarely used. Some congregations that use wine make grape juice
available for those who are abstaining from alcohol, and some will accommodate those with an allergy to
wheat or grapes.
[edit]
Reformed/Presbyterian
This section is a stub. You can help by adding to it.
[edit]
Minimalist
The elements of the Lord's Supper are most commonly unleavened bread and wine[3]. In traditions in
which temperance movements have had strong influence, grape juice is substituted for wine. The term
"grape juice" is usually not used in services; instead terms such as "unfermented wine," "wine," "the fruit of
the vine," or simply "the cup" are used. Teachers from such movements often assert that , the Greek
word which is used in the New Testament, and which is usually understood as meaning "wine", may mean
"either fermented or unfermented wine", a claim unknown prior to the temperance movement. A few
Holiness bodies, as well as the Mormons, substitute water for wine.
[edit]
Jehovah's Witnesses
Jehovah's Witnesses commemorate Christ's death as a ransom or propitiatory sacrifice by observing The
Lord's Evening Meal, or Memorial, each year on Nisan 14 according to the ancient Jewish calendar. They
believe that this is the only celebration commanded for Christians in the Bible. In support, they often quote
Jesus' words: "'Keep doing this ... in remembrance of me.' For as often as you eat this loaf and drink this
cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives." (1 Corinthians 11:25, 26, NWT) Of
those who attend the Memorial a small minority worldwide will partake of the eating of the unleavened
bread and the drinking of the wine. (For statistics of the number of partakers in relationship to nonpartakers, see Jehovah's Witnesses (Membership))
Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a small minority, called the "anointed," can partake of the bread and
wine. (see Doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses (Salvation)) Those who actually partake are generally
considered to be among the "anointed," though Jehovah's Witnesses believe that some of them may be in
error.
The celebration of the Memorial of Christ's Death proceeds as follows: In advance of the Memorial,
Jehovah's Witnesses invite anyone that may be interested to attend this special night. The week of the
Memorial is generally filled with special activity in the ministry , such as door-to-door work. A suitable
hall, for example a Kingdom Hall, is prepared for the occasion. The Memorial begins with a song and a
prayer. The prayer is followed by a discourse on the importance of the evening. A table is set with wine and
unleavened bread. Jehovah's Witnesses believe the bread stands for Jesus Christ's body which he gave on
behalf of mankind, and that the wine stands for his blood which redeems from sin. They do not believe in
transubstantiation or consubstantiation. Hence, the wine and the bread are merely symbols (sometimes
referred to as "emblems"), but they have a very deep and profound meaning for Jehovah's Witnesses. A
prayer is offered and the bread is circulated among the audience. Only those who are "anointed" partake.
Then another prayer is offered, and the wine is circulated in the same manner. After that, the evening
concludes with a final song and prayer.
It is common for the bread and wine to be passed and have no partakers.
[edit]

5.

Open and closed communion

Main articles: Open communion and Closed communion

See also: Full communion
Christian denominations differ in their understanding of whether they may receive the Eucharist together
with those not in full communion with them. Closed communion was the universal practice of the early
Church. The famed apologist St. Justin Martyr (c. 150) wrote: "No one else is permitted to partake of it,
except one who believes our teaching to be true...." For the first several hundred years of Church history,
non-members were forbidden even to be present at the sacramental ritual; visitors and catechumens (those
still undergoing instruction) were dismissed halfway through the liturgy, after the Bible readings and
sermon but before the Eucharistic rite. The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, used in the Byzantine
Churches, still has a formula of dismissal of catechumens (not usually followed by any action) at this point.
The ancient Churches, such as the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox exclude non-members from
Communion under normal circumstances, though they may allow exceptions, e.g. for non-members in
danger of death who share their faith in the reality of the Eucharist and who are unable to have access to a
minister of their own religion. Many conservative Protestant communities also practice closed communion,
including conservative Lutheran Churches like the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin
Evangelical Lutheran Synod. The Mennonites and the Landmark Baptist Churches also practice closed
communion, as a symbol of exclusive membership and loyalty to the distinctive doctrines of their
fellowship.
Most Protestant communities practice open communion, including some Anglican, Reformed, Evangelical,
Methodist, and more-liberal Lutherans (such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the
Church of Sweden). Some open communion communities adhere to a symbolic or spiritual understanding
of the Eucharist, so that they have no fear of sacrilege against the literal body and blood of Christ if
someone receives inappropriately. Others feel that Christ calls all of his children to his table, regardless of
their denominational affiliation. Many churches that practice open communion offer it only to baptized
Christians (regardless of denomination), although this requirement is typically only enforced by the
recipients' honesty.i
[edit]
6.

Alleged association with pre-Christian theophagy

Some writers have expounded the theory that an idea of theophagy (eating one's god), or at least of feeding
on the life-force of a mystical entity, was characteristic of the central rites of some Greco-Roman and NearEastern mystery religions. Claiming that the acts and ordinances of Jesus and his apostles were
memorialized in that context, they suggest that the mystical benefits that Christianity attributes to the
Eucharist are associated with those allegedly proclaimed by proponents of animal sacrifices and of
cannibalism among these mystery cults, and contend that the Eucharist can be seen as translating the
vestiges of ancient animal sacrifice and/or ritualistic cannibalism into the current age.
The first Christians were either Jews themselves or "the God-fearing" (Gentiles who attended Jewish
synagogue services but held back from becoming proselytes; cf. Acts of the Apostles 13:16, 26).
Christianity thus began among people who would reject any idea of eating actual human flesh and drinking
blood of any kind, who avoided pagan mystery cults, and who would completely exclude a cannibalistic
interpretation of their "eating this bread and drinking this cup" (1 Corinthians 11:28), a rite which they
nevertheless believed brought them into true relationship with the body and blood of Christ. This First
Letter to the Corinthians, written as early as the year 57, shows that the custom of celebrating the Eucharist
dated from the very beginning of Christianity, when Christianity was still an entirely Jewish phenomenon,
as the Acts of the Apostles, which was written later, also states. Other writers therefore argue that the
practice arose from the reenactment by these very first Christians of something that Jesus did and said at his
last supper, what has been called "a unique form of Table fellowship". And while, by the time of the
writing of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, Christianity was beginning to spread among people of whom
some may have been former adherents of mystery cults and may have attached to the rite meanings not
originally associated with it, they maintain that there is no reason to suppose that the Jewish Paul shared

such ideas.

B.

Practice:

Theissen sees the building of what he called the 'semiotic cathedral' in the wider context of a development
of a whole 'ritual sign language' of which the birth and development of primitive Christian religion takes
shape in the most simplistic narrative of Mark until a visible autonomy of Christianity as a religious system
begins to emerge in John. The basic elements for him are baptism and the Eucharist, which in the light of
the sacrificial interpretation of the death of Christ, became invested with the necessary weight and power to
be able to replace the traditional 'sign system.' A close scrutiny shows that his proposal is a feasible
hegemonic structure. We also need to point out that although the Christian 'sign system' was largely
metaphorical, a literal aspect of the ritual of the shared meals gradually developed in 'conceptual
correspondence' with the traditional rituals becoming a 'new form of religious rite.' This aspect is present
only in germ in the NT but is well articulated in most of the post-NT early Christian writings from about
the end of the first century onwards.
The NT, specifically the Pauline and Lukan narratives directly link the Eucharist with the Last Supper. The
imperative 'do this' bears a liturgical connotation and it may be specifically cultic. The anamnetic injunction
and the Passover setting also reveal a profound theological agenda. Despite the differences in the wordings
and emphasis, an intricate interweaving of three hermeneutical features: the Christ event, the Hebrew
Scriptures, and a cultic conceptual correspondence undergird the theology of the narratives. It is interesting
to note that all these three factors, i.e. the death of Christ, the scriptures (particularly the Passover typology
drawing mainly on the relevant Exodus pericope and the 'new covenant' motif from Jeremiah 31:31), and a
liturgical framework drawing on traditional cultic concepts, betray sacrificial language. This suggests one
important conclusion: that the growth towards an autonomous religious entity was greatly shaped by a
conceptual framework deeply steeped in 1) the Hebrew Scriptures, 2) temporal and contextual environment
but as continually reshaped by a third factor 3) a christocentric hermeneutic through which the old concepts
were constantly refilled with new meanings. I shall very briefly mention how these factors were used in the
building of a ritual system to which the Eucharist became central.
3.1 Context oriented use of cultic concepts
It is not clear how early the first Christians' realised the ultimate soteriological significance of the death of
Christ. The book of Acts indicates a burst of evangelistic activity only after the Pentecost. The first
recorded sermons do not seem to emphasis the death of Christ as much as it is keen in explicating his
identity as the promised messiah and that salvation can only be found in the name of Jesus. The resultant
community reflects the urgency with which the gospel was preached, devoting all their time in meeting
with one another and sharing what they had perhaps in anticipation of the expected imminent return of the
messiah. The 'breaking of bread,' one of the many things that they did together, seems to be a normal
sharing of meals with no special ritual dimension to it. This is more so in the light of the fact that they, after
all, continued temple worship. We observe a different scenario with the Gentile converts. Discouraged from
participating in the Pagan cults and with no access to the Jewish worship, this must have spelt a new crisis
for them. In a world saturated with sacrifices it must have been difficult for them accepting or coming into
terms with worship without sacrifices.
Sacrifice been the principle means of atonement in the ancient world and more or less synonymous with
worship, it is not in the least surprising that the gentile converts sort after communion with other gods,
despite accepting the all-sufficiency of Christ's redemptive name. Theissen aptly summaries their dilemma:
"As they separated from their old cults, they could no longer sacrifice in the framework these had provided.
But at the same time, since they were uncircumcised, they had no access to the Jewish sacrificial cult in the
temple. The first Gentile Christians probably hoped that one day the temple would be open to them and
that then they too could take part in Jewish sacrificial worship." [19] We know that this hope was never
realised. Paul could have stepped in to provide his churches with a functional equivalent in the practice of
the Eucharist, to meet the need of a ritual dimension of the new faith, but also to dissuade his converts from
returning to the sacrificial cult of idol worship, i.e. the 'double communion' of which he speaks in his first

Corinthian correspondence. The origin of the use of sacrificial interpretation with regard to the Eucharist
can indeed be traced back to Paul with a fair degree of certitude.
ustin Martyr writing in the mid second century also employs the OT cult as a hermeneutical framework to
interpret the Eucharist. He taught that while the OT rituals sets a typological pattern, the Christian
sacrifices fulfils and brings the old to completion. He specifically singles out the OT offering of minha and
writes that, "the offering of fine flour that was prescribed for those cleansed of leprosy was a prefiguration
of the bread of the Eucharist." Irenaeus similarly using the OT as the model for the Christian rite writes that
the difference between the Christian sacrifice of the Eucharist and the OT offerings "is one of species, not
genus." [43] For him, the Eucharist is the sacrifice of the 'new covenant.' The general use of the OT model
shows how the Eucharist took the place of the traditional sacrifices, becoming a 'functional equivalent' for
the new religion. A great need to emphasis the continuity arose to counteract accusations of human
innovations. The Hebrew Scriptures proved a great source for the justification of a practice, which
increasingly become the central rite of the Christian worship. Beside these typological references Mal 1: 10
-14 as earlier mentioned, perfectly met the need. The text reads: "From the rising of the sun to its setting
my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering
[LXX -??s?a ?a?a??, 'pure sacrifice']; for my name is great among the nations says the Lord of hosts."
This OT prophecy has generally been accepted, in the words of Rowan Williams as, the 'roots of a
metaphor' for the early Christians' Eucharistic sacrifice. [44] Williams assumes that the Fathers' fulfilmentinterpretation of Malachi's 'pure sacrifice,' provided the early Christians with a metaphor for their sacrificial
language, which came to be applied to the Eucharist. He is not alone in assuming that the early Christians'
understanding of Eucharistic sacrifice was metaphorical or that Malachi's prophecy provided the thought
form and the language in which the practice came to be expressed. E.M.B. Green, for example, in answer to
the question of how the Fathers came to use sacrificial terms for their Eucharist, asserts that the precedent
for such a language is lacking in either what Jesus taught or the NT, and that: "the fons et origo of the idea
was a text in Malachi, which was widely regarded as a prophecy of the Eucharist in the second and third
centuries." [45] This argument easily overlooks the fact that this prophecy came only to be applied to what
through repeated practice had become ritualised replacing traditional sacrifices.
The passage was indeed a scriptural proof text, which became handy only when a distinctive practice of
ritual system was in place. It is interesting that its use only begins to appear at a time when Christianity
seem to have separated itself from its Judaic root [46] and began to define itself as a distinct 'religious
group.' The first direct quote is found in the Didache, it is alluded to in Clement's letter to the Corinthians,
and reproduced verbatim by all leading second and third century writers including Justin, Irenaeus,
Tertullian and Cyprian of Carthage. It seems likely that the text was not part of the raw material for the
building of the 'semiotic cathedral' but a scriptural resource, which was appealed to, to justify the end of a
process. Clearly the 'roots' or the source of the Eucharistic sacrificial language was in the context. The
Christians' milieu and conceptual framework naturally influenced the language in which they expressed
what they did in the Eucharist, but this had to be justified or authenticated in the light of the scripture.
3.3 The Death of Christ
Given that Christ was the key subject of early Christians' belief and discourse, it was only a matter of time
before the practice of the Eucharist came to be interpreted in the light of the Christ event. The question of a
perpetual sacrifice and the ephapax claim of the epistle of Hebrews may not have been a problem for a long
time. It is, indeed, only with time that we see how the sacrifice of the Eucharist increasingly became linked
with the sacrifice of the cross. The earliest documents, for example, the Didache, actually lacks any
reference to the death of Christ in its Eucharistic prayers. This fact also makes it plain that the Luke-Paul
narratives are the only explicit Eucharistic texts of the so-called institutional narratives. If Paul, as I pointed
out, influenced the transformation of the social meals held in his churches into becoming a sacrificial
communion meals, it is likely that the anamnestic injunction, and the whole Last Supper connection, must
have been as a result of a conscious theologising which provided the emergent practice with an aetiological

framework, and therefore, a theological justification and authority.

From the beginning of the second century onwards, it seems to be commonly accepted that the offerings of
the church, including both spiritual prayers and material oblations through the offerings of the Eucharist,
provided the means of participation in the one ultimate sacrifice of Christ. Ignatius of Antioch, martyred
some time towards the end of the second decade of the second century, explicitly links the Eucharist with
the sacrifice of Christ, not that Christ is offered in the Eucharist but that the act of the Eucharist provides a
salvific unity through participation in the death of Christ. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus notably reproduce the
words of institutions, and both seem to follow Paul in their theological thoughts if not in exact wordings. In
this connection, Justin emphasises the anamnestic function of the Eucharistic sacrifice but also appeals to
the incarnation as a model to interpret what happens in the Eucharist, whereas the resurrection becomes the
central focus for Irenaeus.
Important to note for our purpose is that the christological interpretation only seems to arise at a secondary
level of development. The basic or primary hermeneutical framework is provided by the early Christians'
Sitz im Leben, or actual context. It was the Hebrew Scripture and the traditional conceptual framework that
first and foremost shaped the evolution of the Eucharist into becoming a functional equivalent fulfilling a
ritual dimension of the new religion. Justin, for example, appeals to Eucharistic practice in his argument
against the charges of atheism. He argues that the Christians do offer sacrifices in the Eucharist, and that
therefore, they are not atheists. The argument clearly draws on the traditional concept that sacrifice was
more or less synonymous with worship. Irenaeus also emphasises the materiality of the Eucharist, drawing
on parallels of first fruit offerings of the traditional sacrifices to refute the Gnostics' denial of humanity of
Christ. It is, however, in bringing it into relationship with the Christ event that a distinctive Eucharistic
theology seems to emerge. Its role, for example, in the divine economy of salvation gets clarified, and that
its effectiveness as a ritual power is greater than that of the traditional rituals, which it replaces, because of
its link with the ultimate and all-sufficient sacrifice of Christ.ii
2.

Jewish viewpoint of Communion The Passover

The term Pesach (Hebrew: " ( or, more exactly, the verb "pasch )Hebrew: ) is first mentioned in the
Torah account of the Exodus from Egypt (Exodus 12:23). It is found in Moses' words that God "will pass
over" the houses of the Israelites during the final plague of the Ten Plagues of Egypt, the killing of the firstborn. On the night of that plague, which occurred on the 15th day of Nisan, the Jews smeared their lintels
and doorposts with the blood of the Passover sacrifice and were spared.
There is some debate about the exact meaning of the verb pasch ( ) as it appears in Exodus. The
commonly held assumption that it means "he passed over", stems from the translation provided in the
Septuagint ( in Ex. 12:23, and in Ex. 12:27). Judging from other instances of the
verb, and instances of parallelism, a more faithful translation may be "he hovered over, guarding." Indeed,
this is the image used by Isaiah by his use of this verb in Is. 31:5: "As birds hovering, so will the Lord of
hosts protect Jerusalem; He will deliver it as He protecteth it, He will rescue it as He passeth over" (

) .
The term Pesach also refers to the lamb or kid which was designated as the Passover sacrifice (called the
Korban Pesach in Hebrew). Four days before the Exodus, the Jews were commanded to set aside a lamb or
kid (Exodus 12:3) and inspect it daily for blemishes. During the day on the 14th of Nisan, they were to
slaughter the animal and use its blood to mark their lintels and doorposts. Up until midnight on the 15th of
Nisan, they were to consume the lamb. Each family (or group of families) gathered together to eat a meal
that included the meat of the Korban Pesach while the Tenth Plague ravaged Egypt
Korban Pesach
When the Holy Temple was standing, the focus of the Passover festival was the offering of a
lamb or kid (the Korban Pesach, lit. "Pesach sacrifice," also known as the "Paschal Lamb"). Every
family (or, if the family was too small to finish eating the entire offering in one sitting, group of
families) was required to partake of one (Numbers 9:11) such animal on the night of the 15th of

Nisan (Exodus 12:6). The offering could not be slaughtered while one was in possession of
leaven (Exodus 23:18). It had to be roasted (Exodus 12:9) and eaten together with matzo and
maror (Exodus 12:8). One had to be careful not to break any bones from the offering (Exodus
12:46). None of the offering could be left over until morning (Exodus 12:10, 23:18).
Only Jews were permitted to partake of the Korban Pesach. Men and women were equally
obligated. An apostate could not eat from it (Exodus 12:43), nor a (non-Jewish) hired worker
(Exodus 12:45). An uncircumcised male was also restrained from eating from it (Exodus 12:48).
People in a state of ritual impurity could not offer it, except when a majority of the congregation
was in such a state (Talmud Pesachim 66b). The offering had to be made before a minyan of 30
(Pesachim 64b). Levites recited Hallel while the offering was made.
If one missed the opportunity to eat the Korban Pesach, he or she could make it up one month
later on the night of the 15th of Iyar (Numbers 9:11), a day which is known as Pesach Sheini
("Second Pesach"). Just as on the first Pesach night, one must not break any bones from the
second Paschal offering (Numbers 9:12) or leave meat over until morning (Numbers 9:12).
Today, in the absence of the Temple, the mitzvah of the Korban Pesach has reverted to being a
symbolic food placed on the Passover Seder Plate. It is typically represented by a roasted shank
bone during the Passover Seder, which is mentioned and pointed to during the Seder ritual.
Ashkenazic Jews have a custom of not eating lamb or goat during the Sedar in deference to the
absence of the Temple. Many Sephardic Jews, however, have a custom of eating lamb or kid on
iii
Passover
1.

10th of Nissan Day of preparation

2.

14th of Nissan- Passover

The first thing to look at, is the date of Passover. From the scriptures we see that Passover begins at twilight
(the time between sunsets and darkness) on the fourteenth day of the first month of the Hebrew calendar.
This month is known by the names Abib or Nisan. In the Bible, days begin not at midnight, but at sunset or
evening (Genesis 1:5; Leviticus 23:27, 32).
"On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the LORD'S Passover" (Leviticus 23:5).
"Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year. You may take it from the sheep or from the
goats. Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month. Then the whole assembly of the
congregation of Israel shall kill it at twilight. . . . And thus you shall eat it: with a belt on your waist, your
sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. So you shall eat it in haste. It is the LORD'S Passover "
(Exodus 12:5-6,11).
"Let the children of Israel keep the Passover at its appointed time. On the fourteenth day of this month, at
twilight, you shall keep it at its appointed time. According to all its rites and ceremonies you shall keep it.
So Moses told the children of Israel that they should keep the Passover. And they kept the Passover on the
fourteenth day of the first month, at twilight, in the Wilderness of Sinai; according to all that the LORD
commanded Moses, so the children of Israel did" (Numbers 9:2-5).
"On the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of the LORD" (Numbers 28:16).
A.

The Meaning of the Old Testament Passover

The Old Testament Passover is a memorial to God passing over the houses of the children of Israel when
He killed the firstborn of man and beast in Egypt, during the night of the fourteenth. The Passover is not a
memorial to the exodus of Israel from Egypt.
1.

Slaying of the first born - Judgement

" For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of
Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD. Now
the blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over
you; and the plague shall not be on you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt. So this day shall be
to you a memorial; and you shall keep it as a feast to the LORD throughout your generations. You shall
keep it as a feast by an everlasting ordinance " (Exodus 12:12-14).
2.

Slaying of the Passover Lamb

" Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel and said to them, Pick out and take lambs for yourselves
according to your families, and kill the Passover lamb. And you shall take a bunch of hyssop, dip it in the
blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin. And
none of you shall go out of the door of his house until morning. For the LORD will pass through to strike
the Egyptians; and when He sees the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, the LORD will pass over
the door and not allow the destroyer to come into your houses to strike you. And you shall observe this
thing as an ordinance for you and your sons forever. It will come to pass when you come to the land which
the LORD will give you, just as He promised, that you shall keep this service. And it shall be, when your
children say to you, What do you mean by this service? that you shall say, It is the Passover sacrifice of the
LORD, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt when He struck the Egyptians and
delivered our households. So the people bowed their heads and worshiped " (Exodus 12:21-27).
3.

The Fifteenth Day of the First Month

A.

The date

The Feast of Unleavened Bread begins on the fifteenth day of the first month of the Hebrew
Calendar. The first and the seventh days of the feast are Sabbath days. No regular work is to be done and a
holy convocation or assembly is to take place. Leavened bread products are avoided and not eaten
throughout the week long festival. They are replaced with unleavened bread.
" And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the LORD; seven
days you must eat unleavened bread. On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do
no customary work on it. But you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD for seven days.
The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it. " (Leviticus 23:68).
" And on the fifteenth day of this month is the feast; unleavened bread shall be eaten for seven days.
On the first day you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no customary work. . . . And on the
seventh day you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no customary work. " (Numbers 28:17-18,
25).
So you shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, for on this same day I will have brought your
armies out of the land of Egypt. Therefore you shall observe this day throughout your generations as
an everlasting ordinance. In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall
eat unleavened bread, until the twenty-first day of the month at evening. (1) For seven days no leaven
shall be found in your houses, since whoever eats what is leavened, that same person shall be cut off
from the congregation of Israel, whether he is a stranger or a native of the land. You shall eat nothing

leavened; in all your dwellings you shall eat unleavened bread. (Exodus 12: 17-20).
B.

The Fifteenth Day of the First Month is the Exodus

Israel left Egypt during the night of fifteenth day of the first month. They began leaving Egypt at twilight,
24 hours after killing the Passover lambs.
" These are the journeys of the children of Israel, who went out of the land of Egypt by their armies
under the hand of Moses and Aaron. Now Moses wrote down the starting points of their journeys at
the command of the LORD. And these are their journeys according to their starting points: They
departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the day after the
Passover the children of Israel went out with boldness in the sight of all the Egyptians. For the
Egyptians were burying all their firstborn, whom the LORD had killed among them. Also on their
gods the LORD had executed judgments. Then the children of Israel moved from Rameses and
camped at Succoth. " (Numbers 33:1-5).
" Observe the month of Abib, and keep the Passover to the LORD your God, for in the month of
Abib the LORD your God brought you out of Egypt by night. " (Deuteronomy 16:1).
" But at the place where the LORD your God chooses to make His name abide, there you shall
sacrifice the Passover at twilight, at the going down of the sun, at the time you came out of Egypt. "
(Deuteronomy 16:6).
C.

The Night to be Much Observed

Israel was to observe or celebrate their departure from Egypt each year. This celebration was to occur, on
the anniversary of their exodus from Egypt. The celebration began after sundown, at the beginning of the
fifteenth day of the first month. This was the time of day Israel began to leave Egypt (Numbers 33: 1-3;
Deuteronomy 16:1, 6).
" Then the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men
on foot, besides children. A mixed multitude went up with them also, and flocks and herds--a great
deal of livestock. And they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they had brought out of
Egypt; for it was not leavened, because they were driven out of Egypt and could not wait, nor had
they prepared provisions for themselves. Now the sojourn of the children of Israel who lived in Egypt
was four hundred and thirty years. And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty
years--on that very same day--it came to pass that all the armies of the LORD went out from the land
of Egypt. It is a night of solemn observance to the LORD for bringing them out of the land of Egypt.
This is that night of the LORD, a solemn observance for all the children of Israel throughout their
generations. " (Exodus 12: 37-42).
Traditionally this night is known as The Night to be Much Observed. This is based upon the King James
translation of Exodus 12:42:
"It is a night to be much observed unto the LORD for bringing them out from the land of Egypt: this
is that night of the LORD to be observed of all the children of Israel in their generations."
Israel was to remember the day on which they left Egypt. Unleavened bread was eaten for seven days, from
the beginning of fifteenth to the end of the twenty-first day of the first month, in remembrance of the
exodus from Egypt.
" And Moses said to the people: Remember this day in which you went out of Egypt, out of the house of
bondage; for by strength of hand the LORD brought you out of this place. No leavened bread shall be
eaten. On this day you are going out, in the month Abib. And it shall be, when the LORD brings you

into the land of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Hivites and the Jebusites,
which He swore to your fathers to give you, a land flowing with milk and honey, that you shall keep
this service in this month. Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day there
shall be a feast to the LORD. Unleavened bread shall be eaten seven days. And no leavened bread shall
be seen among you, nor shall leaven be seen among you in all your quarters. And you shall tell your son
in that day, saying, This is done because of what the LORD did for me when I came up from Egypt. It
shall be as a sign to you on your hand and as a memorial between your eyes, that the LORD'S law
may be in your mouth; for with a strong hand the LORD has brought you out of Egypt. You shall
therefore keep this ordinance in its season from year to year " (Exodus 13: 3-10).
" You shall eat no leavened bread with it; seven days you shall eat unleavened bread with it, that is, the
bread of affliction (for you came out of the land of Egypt in haste), that you may remember the day in
which you came out of the land of Egypt all the days of your life. " (Deuteronomy 16:3).
" Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. On the first day you shall remove leaven from your
houses. For whoever eats leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that person shall be
cut off from Israel. On the first day there shall be a holy convocation, and on the seventh day there
shall be a holy convocation for you. No manner of work shall be done on them; but that which
everyone must eat--that only maybe prepared by you. So you shall observe the Feast of Unleavened
Bread, for on this same day I will have brought your armies out of the land of Egypt. Therefore you
shall observe this day throughout your generations as an everlasting ordinance. In the first month, on
the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread, until the twenty-first day
of the month at evening. For seven days no leaven shall be found in your houses, since whoever eats
what is leavened, that same person shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he is a
stranger or a native of the land. You shall eat nothing leavened; in all your dwellings you shall eat
unleavened bread. " (Exodus 12:15-20).
D.

Deliverance from Slavery

When God brought Israel out of Egypt, He was delivering them from slavery.
"I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that you should not be their
slaves; I have broken the bands of your yoke and made you walk upright." (Leviticus 26:13).
" And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you
out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God
commanded you to keep the Sabbath day. " (Deuteronomy 5:15).
" Then you shall say to your son: We were slaves of Pharaoh in Egypt, and the LORD brought us out
of Egypt with a mighty hand. " (Deuteronomy 6:21).
" You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed
you; therefore I command you this thing today. " (Deuteronomy 15:15).
" But you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you
from there; therefore I command you to do this thing. " (Deuteronomy 24:18).
4.

17th of Nissan First Fruits

3.
Communion through Jewish eyes
Why is Passover important to Christians

The fundamental idea of Christianity is the Incarnation, that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us"
(John 1:14). It is this belief that God became human (Jesus), was crucified (dying substitutionary death,
paying the price for sin, as "our Passover, sacrificed for us" 1Corinthians 5:7), and rose on the third day,
that distinguishes Christianity from other faiths. Jesus Christ is seen as the center of Christianity, and any
discussion of the Christian passover must be informed by a discussion of the Christian Jesus.
The importance of the passover to Christianity is demonstrated by the fact that the Christian communion
was established by Jesus in The Last Supper. Before his friends the apostles (John 15:15) knew he was to
be crucified, he established the communion eating the bread and drinking the wine in remembrance of him
and his sacrifice. He said, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you" (Luke 22:20).
The New Testament of the Bible explicitly states many titles and roles to Jesus. Most of those were
accomplished when he was crucified during the Passover. The man Jesus, according to the Bible, is the
Great High Priest (Hebrews 4:14) who lives forever to interceed (Hebrews 7:25) before the throne of God,
whose sacrifice of himself on the cross is sufficient (Ephesians 5:2) both for the forgiveness of sins
(Revelation 1:5) of those who trust him (Romans 4:22, 10:9), and sufficient for the imputation of his
perfect righteousness before God to those who love and obey him. Jesus, the Christian Messiah, is also
called the "Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29 ).
[edit]
What is the Meaning of Passover?
Some Christians believe that it is not Jesus who is a picture of the Passover, but the Passover that is a
picture of Jesus. The external ritual of sacrifice instituted in the Old Testament by God is a precursor of the
larger things that were to come in Jesus. The holy bible explicitly states that the killing of animals does not
end sin, and therefore it must be repeated, and the ritual intercession of a human priest in a man-made
temple does not end the need for intercession and so year after year new intercessions must be made
(Hebrews 10). It goes on to say that Jesus offered the one sacrifice that was acceptable to God, and that he
lives forever as a high priest so there is no other priest needed.
A Christian view is that the Passover, as observed by ancient Israel, is a type of the true Passover Sacrifice
of God that was to be made by Jesus. The ancient Israelite Passover was the commemoration of the
Israelites' physical deliverance from bondage in Egypt, Passover represents for some Christians a spiritual
deliverance from the slavery of sin (John 8:34) and is, since Jesus' death, a memorial of the sacrifice that
Jesus has made for mankind. Also, in the same way the Israelites partook of the sacrifice by eating it that
night, Christians partake of the sacrifice of Jesus by eating the symbols of his body and blood, the bread
and wine.
[edit]
Christians celebrations of Passover
Observances differ between groups of Christian believers. Some differences between observing groups are:
Some follow the instructions that Jesus gave to his disciples at the time of his Last Supper before he was
crucified, and share a "communion" meal. In the communion, the unleavened bread is used to represent
Jesus' body (Eastern Christianity insists on leavened bread, though), and wine represents his blood of the
New Covenant. These are a symbolic substitute for Jesus as the true sacrificial Passover "Lamb of God."
In some traditions, the ceremony is combined with washing one another's feet, as Jesus did to his disciples
the night that he suffered (John 13:5-14).
Other Christians celebrate the Passover exactly as Jesus did: like the Jews celebrate it. They roast and eat
lamb, bitter herbs, and the unleavened Matza

.iv

Most Christians think Easter (as a Christian festival) has been partly derived from Passover (as Jewish
festival). They claim the Easter is not the same as Passover. "The commemoration of the death of Christ
was called the pascha staurosimon or the Passover proper. The commemoration of the resurrection was
called the pascha anastasimon, and afterwards Easter" (Schaff, Philip; History of the Christian Church; ch.
5). Samuele Bacchiocchi writes, "Most Christians today observe Easter-Sunday instead of the Biblical
Passover. The two feasts are seen as being essentially the same, the latter being the continuation of the
former. In reality, however, the two feasts have different dates, meanings, and origin" (From Sabbath to
Sunday; ch. 2).
In the early second century, the Church at Rome began celebrating the day of Jesus' resurrection on the
Sunday following the Passover of the 14th of Nisan (Abib). The observance grew in importance for the
majority of Christians, eventually overshadowing the Apostolic Passover tradition (as referred to by the
bishop of Smyrna, Polycarp), although many small groups throughout the world have held to the Apostolic
tradition.
In England, the resurrection celebration became known by the title of Easter. Bede claimed it was derived
either from the name of a local pagan fertility goddess, Eostre (hence, the egg and bunny symbols), or else
from the English month name Eostremonat. However, in most languages and cultures, the Easter
celebration bears a name derived from the Hebrew word for "Passover".
Some Historic Passover Date Issues
Most Christians who keep Passover are considered to be Quartodeciman as they keep Passover on the 14th
of Nisan. Apollinaris and Melito of Sardis were both 2nd Century writers that wrote about the Christian
Passover.
Apollinaris, wrote, "There are, then, some who through ignorance raise disputes about these things (though
their conduct is pardonable: for ignorance is no subject for blame -- it rather needs further
instruction...)...The fourteenth day, the true Passover of the Lord; the great sacrifice, the Son of God instead
of the lamb, who was bound, who bound the strong, and who was judged, though Judge of living and dead,
and who was delivered into the hands of sinners to be crucified, who was lifted up on the horns of the
unicorn, and who was pierced in His holy side, who poured forth from His side the two purifying elements,
water and blood, word and spirit, and who was buried on the day of the passover, the stone being placed
upon the tomb" (Apollinaris. From the Book Concerning Passover. Translated by Alexander Roberts and
James Donaldson. Excerpted from Volume I of The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Alexander Roberts and James
Donaldson, editors); American Edition copyright 1885. Copyright 2001 Peter Kirby).
Melito's Peri Pascha (or Homily on the Passover) is perhaps the most famous early document concerning
the Christian observation of Passover. Here are some excerpts, "For indeed the law issued in the gospelthe
old in the new, both coming forth together from Zion and Jerusalem; and the commandment issued in
grace, and the type in the finished product, and the lamb in the Son, and the sheep in a man, and the man in
God...For at one time the sacrifice to the sheep was valuable, but now it is without value because of the life
of the Lord. The death of the sheep once was valuable, but now it is without value because of the salvation
of the Lord. The blood of the sheep once was valuable, but now it is without value because of the Spirit of
the Lord. The silent lamb once was valuable, but now it has no value because of the blameless Son. The
temple here below once was valuable, but now it is without value because of the Christ from above...Now
that you have heard the explanation of the type and of that which corresponds to it, hear also what goes into
making up the mystery. What is the passover? Indeed its name is derived from that event"to celebrate the
passover" (to paschein) is derived from "to suffer" (tou pathein). Therefore, learn who the sufferer is and
who he is who suffers along with the sufferer...This one is the passover of our salvation".
Polycrates of Ephesus, was a late 2nd Century leader who was excommunicated (along with all
Quartodecimen) by the Roman bishop Victor for observing the Christian Passover on the 14th of Nisan and
not switching it to a Sunday resurrection celebration. He, Polycrates, claimed that he was simply following
the practices according to scripture and the Gospels, as taught by the Apostles John and Philip, as well as
by church leaders such as Polycarp and Melito of Sardis.
These 2nd Century Quartodeciman Christians kept a Passover ceremony, with the bread and wine

symbolizing Jesus as being the lamb of God, while those who advocated Sunday appeared to change the
Passover into more of a resurrection holiday.
It is important to note that the Christian Passover ceremony, which includes the bread and wine, proclaims
the Lord's death, not specifically his resurrection. Paul confirmed this when he wrote, "For as often as you
eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes" (1Corinthians 11:26).
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, "In fact, the Jewish feast was taken over into the Christian Easter
celebration."

How did Jewish Passover customs come to be connected with Christian Passover customs?
Jewish Passover customs came to be connected with Christian Passover customs because the early
Christians were in fact, Jews who kept the observances of all the Jewish festivals and on the same
dates in the Jewish calendar as the Jewish people celebrated them. The early Christians substituted
traditional Jewish symbolisms and interpretations for the Passover Seder or festive meal and the
Passover holiday as a whole with their own version of symbolisms and interpretations. In the New
Testament, instructions are given concerning observing the Passover festival. These instructions are
found in I Corinthians 5:7-8: Purge out therefore the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, as
you are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast
(of unleavened bread, which always followed Passover, since in the Hebrew Bible the Passover of
Egypt festival was originally a combination of two pre-Passover of Egypt festivals observed by early
Middle Eastern peoples: a one-day festival of sacrificing a paschal lamb followed by a seven-day
festival of eating unleavened bread)". Initially, Easter was celebrated on the same day as the Jewish
Passover due to Jesus being crucified on the day of the Jewish Passover on the 15th day of Nissan in
the Jewish calendar. It was only during the ecumenical council of Nicea in 325 C.E. that the
patriarchs of the Roman Church decided that Easter would always fall on the first Sunday after the
first full moon of spring (the vernal equinox), no sooner than March 21st (meaning the first full moon
appears on or after March 21st, the vernal equinox) and no later than April 25th. For Orthodox
Christians who refer to Easter as "Pascha" or "Pashka" or the "Orthodox Easter", there is an
agreement with the Roman church concerning when Easter should be celebrated, meaning on the
Sunday following the first full moon after the spring or vernal equinox, but with the exception that
Pascha or Pashka always occurs on the first Sunday after the Jewish Passover because the the
gospels say Jesus died the day after eating the Passover Seder and rose from the dead on the
following Sunday. Furthermore, when it comes to calculating the dates of Easter and Pascha or
Pashka, there are differences between followers of the Roman church and followers of the Orthodox
church. Followers of the Roman church calculate the dates of Easter based on astronomical
occurrences that generally happen between March 21st and April 25th each year. Furthermore,
followers of the Roman church (later split into Catholics and Protestants) use the Gregorian calendar
to fix the date of Easter, introduced by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, while followers of the Orthodox
Christian church use the pre-Gregorian calendar, known as the Julian calendar, introduced by the
Roman Emperor Julius Caesar in 45 B.C.E., to calculate and fix the date of Pascha or Pashka.
Orthodox Christians also base their calculations on key decisions made in the First Ecumenical
Council of the Church in 325 C.E., held in the ancient city of Nicea located in Asia Minor (now
Turkey). So Easter for followers of the Roman Church occurs no sooner than March 21st and no
later than April 25th while Pascha or Pashka for Orthodox Christians according to the Julian
calendar - and keeping in mind that it always occurs on the first Sunday following the Jewish
Passover - occurs no sooner than April 4th and no later than May 8th. In other words, Orthodox
Easter (or Eastern Orthodox Easter or Pascha/Pashka) is the Sunday following the first full moon
after the vernal equinox and following the completion of the full eight days of the Jewish Passover, as
calculated from the Julian calendar. An exception is if the first full moon after the vernal equinox
actually falls on the first Sunday, then Pascha or Pashka must occur on the following Sunday. These
differences in calenders and calendrical calculations usually make Orthodox Easter or
Pascha/Pashka fall either one, four, or five weeks after the Easter of the Roman or Western
churches, although there are years when both dates may fall on the same day. Although in the 1920's,
most Orthodox churches in Eastern Europe, including the Greek and Romanian Orthodox churches,
adopted the Gregorian calendar used by the Roman or Western Churches (with the exception of the
Russian Orthodox Church and a few other Orthodox churches), to keep unity with their Orthodox
brethren in countries such as Russia, Orthodox churches that switched to the Gregorian calendar
decided to keep one very important observance -- Pascha or Pashka -- under the Julian calendar so
that all Orthodox Christians would celebrate their greatest holy day on the same Sundayv

The Meaning of the New Testament Passover

The New Testament Passover is a memorial of the death of Jesus Christ as the true Passover
Lamb. We eat the broken bread and drink the wine in remembrance of the sacrifice of His beaten
body and shed blood. This sacrifice makes possible the forgiveness of our sins. By partaking of
the Passover symbols of bread and wine, we are proclaiming our continual faith in Jesus'
sacrifice.
A.

Biblical references:

1.

Gospel acounts

" So they went and found it just as He had said to them, and they prepared the Passover. When
the hour had come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him. Then He said to them, With
fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; . . .. And He took bread,
gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, This is My body which is given for you; do
this in remembrance of Me. Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the
new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you. " (Luke 22:13-15, 19-20).
" So the disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover. When
evening had come, He sat down with the twelve.. . . And as they were eating, Jesus took bread,
blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, Take, eat; this is My body. Then He
took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink from it, all of you. For this is My
blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say to you, I will
not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My
Father's kingdom. " (Matthew 26:19-20, 26-29).
" So His disciples went out, and came into the city, and found it just as He had said to them; and
they prepared the Passover. . . . And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it,
and gave it to them and said, "Take, eat; this is My body. Then He took the cup, and when He
had given thanks He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And He said to them, This is My
blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many. Assuredly, I say to you, I will no longer drink
of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God." (Mark 14:16, 2225)
2.

N.T accounts

"Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened.
For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us." (1 Corinthians 5:7).
" The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, Behold! The Lamb of God who
takes away the sin of the world " (John 1:29)!
" Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your
aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as
of a lamb without blemish and without spot. " (1 Peter1:18-19).
" For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same
night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said,
Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me. In the same
manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This

do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me. For as often as you eat this bread and drink
this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes." (1 Corinthians 11:23-26).

B.

The ordinance:

1.

The Bread:
a.

Afikomen

When the meal is finished, the hostess clears the dishes. Now it's time for the search for the aphikomen (the
buried half- matzoh). This is done by the children, who make a game of it. Adults call out clues, "You're
getting close," etc. (Of course, they all saw the host hide it, so the contest is only ritual.) The youngest is
usually allowed to find it, and receives a gift. The host breaks off olive-size pieces of matzoh from the
aphikomen and distributes them to all. They each eat it, in a reverent manner. Sometimes there is a
blessing,
"In memory of the Passover sacrifice, eaten after one is sated." (This is the point during the Last Supper at
which Jesus broke the bread and passed bits to His disciples; however, Jesus added the significant words
given in Luke 22:19),
b.
MYSTERY OF THE APHIKOMEN It's fascinating that this age-old Passover
ceremony is rich in so many details, and each one has a deep significance. In response to the ritual
questions, each one is explained in terms of its historical origin and meaning. And yet, one of the main
features of the feast is not well understood by most Jewish participants. They refer to the three matzohs in
the matzoh tash as the Unity; but there is no agreement on what is united. And no one seems to have any
idea why the middle one is broken, buried, and later brought back up. Some rabbis teach that these
represent Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; others say they portray the unity of worship -- priests, Levites and
congregation; still others say they stand for the crowns of learning, priesthood and kingship. But there's no
explanation for breaking and hiding the middle one. Christians have a better explanation; it involves the
"bread of heaven," spoken of in John 6:32-59.
a verse that is very holy to the Jews is the shemah of Deuteronomy 6:4-9, "Hear, O Israel: the
LORD thy God is one LORD. And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And
thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children ... and thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and
they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on
thy gates." That word "one" in the Hebrew is echad, meaning a composite oneness, not just the number
one. It's the same word used in Genesis 2:24, where Adam and Eve are said to be "one flesh," and in
Ezekiel 37 to describe the two sticks becoming one. Here it is describing the unity of God the Father, God
the Son, and God the Holy Spirit -- the three persons of the Godhead, acting as one. This is the true
meaning of the unity of the three matzohs in the matzoh tash. And which of these is the middle one? That is
obviously God the Son -- Jesus the Messiah, our Lord. Let's see how He could be represented by a piece of
unleavened bread. Read John 6:32-59. Verse 35 says
c.

"This is my body which is given for you."

The host now takes the third cup of wine, "the cup of redemption," or "the cup of blessing," and offers the
main table grace blessing. (In Jewish tradition, the main blessing comes after the meal.) Then they all drink
from the third cup. At the Last Supper, this is the place referred to in Luke 22:20,
The New Testament Meaning of the Night to be Much Observed

As Israel was in bondage and slavery in Egypt, so we were in bondage and slavery to sin. Freedom from
the bondage of sin comes through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. During the New Testament Passover service
we remember and commemorate the death of Jesus Christ which makes spiritual freedom possible. During
The Night to be Much Observed we are celebrating our freedom and deliverance from spiritual Egypt, sin.
The eating of unleavened bread through out the coming week is a reminder of our freedom and deliverance
from sin, and it is a continual reminder that once out of slavery we should not return to it.
As the Israelites were slaves to the Egyptians, we were slaves of sin.
" Jesus answered them, Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. " (John
8:34).
Leaven represents sin. Unleavened bread represents righteousness.
" Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Therefore
purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed
Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor
with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. " (1
Corinthians 5:6-8).
The Connection Between Romans 6, Passover and The Night to be Much Observed
When baptized, we share in the death of Jesus by being "baptized into His death." When we partake of the
Passover each year, we also share in the body and blood (the death) of Jesus Christ.
" What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall
we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into
Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? " (Romans 6:1-3)?
On The Night to be Much Observed Israel began their new life by walking out of Egypt (Joshua 5:6; Judges
11:16). In like manner, this night pictures the beginning of our walk in the newness of life. A life
committed to walking in obedience to God.
" Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised
from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. " (Romans
6:4).
The Night to be Much Observed is a time to remember our freedom from the slavery of sin, just as Israel
received freedom from slavery in Egypt.
" For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the
likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of
sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been
freed from sin. " (Romans 6:5-7).
But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of
doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of
righteousness. I speak inhuman terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you
presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so
now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness. For when you were slaves of sin,
you were free in regard to righteousness. What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are
now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now having been set free from sin, and having
become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. For the wages of
sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 6:17-23).
The whole Feast of Unleavened Bread (Leviticus 23:6-7), starting with The Night to be Much Observed, is

a reminder that we are dead to sin, it should no longer control our lives. A Christian going back to sinning,
after being set free from it, is like those Israelites who once freed from Egyptian slavery, wanted to return
to it (Numbers 14:1-4).
" Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having
been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that
He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also,
reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Therefore do
not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. And do not present your
members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from
the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not have dominion
over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not
under law but under grace? Certainly not! Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves
slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of
obedience leading to righteousness? " (Romans 6: 8-16).vi
2.

The Wine:

a.
"Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new testament in my
blood, which is shed for you'."

B.

The Ordinance Of The Lord's Supper

(Matthew 26:26-29, 1Cor. 11:25,26)

Section I - Different Ways of Observing
1. Transubstantiation
The Roman Catholic teaching that the elements used in the Lord's Supper actually become the literal
flesh and blood of Jesus.
Decreed by Pope Innocent III in the year 1215 (This Is The Catholic Church, Knights of Columbus,
page 15).
The teaching that Christ is received in the taking of Holy Communion (Christ and His Church, Knights
of Columbus, page 5).
This is due to a misunderstanding and misapplication of Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20 and John
6:54-56 (which see). Some things are literal, some are figurative. Sometimes the difficulty is in knowing
which is which. In these passages, e.g. Mark 14:24, "This is my blood of the new testament, which is
shed for many," Jesus cannot be talking about his literal blood, for it had not yet been shed! So it is
evident he was talking figuratively. The Lord's supper is figurative not literal. It is a picture; a remembrance
of Him. Just like Baptism is a figure or picture of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.
2. Consubstantiation
The Lutheran and Anglican teaching, which is quite similar to transubstantiation except that the elements
used co-exist with the literal flesh and blood of Jesus.
3. Open Communion

Fostered by a belief that the Church is universal.

Anyone who is saved may partake.
4. Close Communion
A Baptist universal church
All saved Baptists may partake
5. Closed or Restricted Communion
Fostered by the Bible teaching that the Church is both local and visible.
That both ordinances delivered to the Church are Church ordinances.
Therefore the only possible teaching is that only members of a particular local visible church may
partake, and even then, only provided they meet the scriptural requirements.
This is the only scriptural way of observing the Lord's Supper.

Section II- The Scriptural Requirements

1. A PROPER SUBJECT
A saved person (Heb 13:10).
Scripturally Baptized (Matt 28:20).
A member of the particular local church, in good standing, not under discipline (Matt 26:20).
An orderly walk devoid of offense to his fellow church members.
Participants must examine themselves (1Cor 11:28), so before we partake of the Lord's Supper, we
should examine ourselves as to whether:
We be in the faith (2Cor 13:5)
We have been scripturally baptized
We are in good fellowship with the church, our Pastor, and each member
Our life is orderly
We are partaking for the right purpose

2. A PROPER PURPOSE (1Cor 11:24-26)

It is commanded, "This do ye..."
It is a memorial, "This do ye... in remembrance of me"
It has an evangelistic aspect to it, "ye do shew the Lord's death"
It is prophetic, "Till he come"; and He is coming.

3. A PROPER ADMINISTRATOR
Only a New Testament church has the authority to administrate the ordinances (1Cor 11:22,23).
Paul commits the Lord's Supper into the charge, not of the body of officials, but of the whole church.
The Lord's Supper, as a church ordinance, is to be administrated by the church to its members through
one of its members whom the church has appointed.
Inasmuch as it is a church ordinance, to be observed in the local body, it is no reflection upon any
individual from another church, nor upon any other church, to restrict the observance of the supper
to members of that particular church only.

4. A PROPER MODE
The elements are the "bread" and the "cup".
The bread is to be unleavened bread.
The cup is to be the pure "fruit of the vine" (Matt. 26:29, Mark 14:25).

Section III - The Controversy over "The Cup"

Twinbrook Hills Baptist Church has always used pure unfermented grape juice in the Lord's Supper. The
reason we do is not due to the temperance movement, nor is it to avoid the appearance of evil (who is going
to buy the wine, and where?), nor is it to avoid association with the Roman Catholic church. The reason we
use pure unfermented grape juice is that we believe it is the proper element and is in fact what Jesus gave
His disciples in the upper room when He instituted His memorial supper.
Read Matthew 26:27-29; Mark 14:23-25; Luke 22:17,18
In these three passages concerning the institution of the Lord's supper, Jesus uses the term "fruit of the
vine." In Paul's references in 1Cor 10:16 and 11:25-28, He uses the term "cup." The Holy Spirit was careful
not to use the word "wine" in these five passages. Let's find out why.

THE USAGE OF THE WORD "WINE"

1. The word "cup" is a figure of speech for something to drink. The term "fruit of the vine" is a figure of
speech for the extract of the grape. The symbolism is that of being crushed, so that it might be poured out.
It is to picture the blood of Jesus as it flowed from His body on the cross.
2. While the word "wine" is used throughout the Bible, it is not used in any reference to the Lord's
Supper.
3. The Hebrew word "yayin", and the corresponding Greek word "oinos"; as well as the Latin word
"vinum", and the English word "wine" are generic words. They designate the juice of the grape in all of its
stages.
4. In "Bible Wines, Or The Laws Of Fermentation" (pp 62,63), author William Patton says:
"Here then, are four generic words, yayin, oinos, vinum, and wine, all expressing the same generic idea, as
including all sorts and kinds of the juice of the grape. Wine is generic, just as are the words groceries,
hardware, merchandise, fruit, grain, and other words... But the misery and delusion are that most readers of
the Bible, knowing of no other than the present wines of commerce, which are intoxicating, leap to the
conclusion, wine is wine all the world over - as the wine of our day is inebriating, therefore the wine
mentioned in the Bible was intoxicating, and there was none other."
5. Advocates of wine for the Lord's Supper say that only fermented "wine" is pure. But the scriptures
declare otherwise... During Israel's wilderness trek it is said, "Thou didst drink the pure blood of the
grape" (Deut 32:14), which can be nothing else but the juice of the grape. This is proven from Gen 49:11:
"Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in

wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes." This indicates that the "pure blood of the grape" is found in
the vine, not in the vat.
6. Another reason given for using fermented wine is that it was used at the Passover which was celebrated
just before the Lord's Supper was instituted. You may be surprised to learn that wine was never made a part
of the Passover by divine command or even by example. That some Jews used fermented wine in the
Passover may be true, but that does not prove that Jesus or His disciples used it. It was never commanded
to be used, and to assume that Jesus used it is pure supposition. Many folks assume without proof that
fermented wine was part of the Passover.
6. Another reason given for using fermented wine is that it was used at the church at Corinth. "Were they
drunk on grape juice?" it is asked. Answer: The Greek word Methuei, it is true, sometimes means
inebriated, but also often has no other meaning than satiated or full. In 1Cor 11:21, this word is obviously
used in contrast with "hungry", and so must mean only "satiated". The majority of the church, being of the
poorer sort, and not having abundance to eat as the rich did, would be separated from them, and a schism
thereby be created in the church, in which case the Lord's Supper could not be rightly observed.
However, even if we grant that these were drunken, it proves nothing as to the character of the "cup" used
in the Lord's Supper, for the drinking which produced the drunkenness, if there was such, was done at a
feast before the observance of the Lord's Supper.
Let me say again; in the five passages concerning the Lord's supper, Jesus uses the term "fruit of the vine",
Paul uses the term "cup." The word "wine" is not used.
The Absolute Prohibition of Proverbs 23:29-31
"Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds
without cause? who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed
wine. Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it
moveth itself aright."
One cannot read this passage without coming to the conclusion that God is speaking of something He
loathes as an article for human consumption. There is no suggestion that it is a good thing He has given us
to enjoy. It is viper's poison (v32).
When Lot and his family were fleeing Sodom, they were told not even to look back at the city. So there is a
wine that we are not even to look at. This is because if we gaze at something attractive, it is the first step
toward partaking. Pastor I. D. Riddick always said, "It's not the first look at a pretty girl in short shorts that
is sin, it's the second look."
The prohibition of Proverbs 23:29-31 is not properly explained in any other way than total. In verse 29 we
have a reference to redness of eye as a result of drinking. Since there was no other word in the ancient
languages in which the Bible was written for alcohol or for alcoholic beverages, what is more natural than
that some characteristic of the result of drinking should be used to designate such beverages? It could be
called red-eye (as it was in the old western movies), referring to the blood-shot eyes of drinkers.
The Hebrew Word Yayin (Commonly Translated Wine)
Yayin is in Biblical Hebrew the appropriate word for the unfermented juice of the grape. But of course it is
also appropriate for the fermented juice of the grape. This dual use of the same word is similar to that of the

English word "cider" (either alcoholic or non-alcoholic).

Yayin is assumed by many people to be always an alcoholic drink. This is a mistake which has led to much
confusion.

Isaiah 16:10 "The treaders shall tread out no wine in their presses." Notice where the "wine" is. It is
in the press. Now what do you put in the press? Grapes. What comes out of the press? Grape
juice.... (non-alcoholic).

Proverbs 3:10 "Thy presses shall burst out with new wine." Notice again that this "wine" can only be
pure unfermented grape juice.

Isaiah 65:8 "New wine is found in the cluster." WHAT DID HE SAY? The Lord said "WINE is
found in the cluster." Well where do we find the cluster? On the vine. And God calls it "wine."

What does this prove? Well for one thing, it proves that the word "wine" does not always mean alcoholic
wine. Many times it means pure unfermented grape juice. And we have already seen that only unfermented
grape juice is considered by God as pure (Deut 32:14).
The Wedding at Cana
Some folks like to use the wedding feast at Cana for an example of how Jesus Himself miraculously made
wine from water, and they assume that the wine was alcoholic. Considering the prohibition of Proverbs
23:29-31, and having seen that the word wine means both alcoholic and non-alcoholic, why assume that the
wine had to be alcoholic. To do so makes the Lord Jesus to put an intoxicating drink to the lips of his
neighbors in clear violation of scripture.
"Woe unto him that giveth his neighbor drink" (Hab 2:15)
I don't believe that my saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, would in His first public miracle, violate scripture
and make fermented, alcoholic wine, to be served to his neighbors and friends. I don't believe it for a
second. I believe that the "wine" that Jesus created was the sweetest grape juice ever to caress the human
palate, and as Brother B. H. Hillard said in 1942 when my father was saved, was a "heavenly ambrosia".
My father asks, "Could not have Jesus with superhuman rapidity, produced that marvelous conversion of
water into the best tasting grape juice ever?"
As for the wedding feast at Cana described in John 2:1-11, it is clear that Jesus was righteously indignant at
His mother for her suggestion in verse 3 that He do something about the wedding party's running out of
wine. He said to her, "what have I to do with thee?" Why did He use such strong language? We must
understand that the stern words were brought forth by the circumstances which our Lord observed. People

at the wedding party were already intoxicated.

Stephen M. Reynolds in "Alcohol And The Bible" says:
"The situation appears to have been as follows: The wedding party had been indulging in cheap, foul
tasting wine, made perhaps partly from diseased grapes, and having a high alcoholic content. The people
were drunk and were behaving in a manner which moved to righteous indignation our Lord who was and is
absolutely pure of mind and body. His mother's sorrow that the party had run out of that sort of wine and
her implied suggestion that He provide more of the same caused Him in righteous sorrow to speak stern
words to her which have much puzzled Bible commentators."
"He would not have blamed her for not knowing that His hour had not yet come if by this expression He
meant the time for performing His first miracle. The reason for His indignation must be sought elsewhere.
His time had not yet come (and never would come) to create an intoxicant, but the time had come, as He
immediately demonstrated, to perform His first miracle."
"The non-intoxicating drink which our Lord created was recognized by the governor of the feast, who
because of his responsibilities had surely not become drunk, as the best wine (grape juice), seeming to have
come from the very best grapes. He therefore said to the bridegroom, "thou hast kept the good wine until
now." This he said as a connoisseur of choice vintage without regard to alcoholic content." vii
I agree with Mr. Reynolds' comments.
Paul's Admonition To Timothy
In 1Tim 5:23 the apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, "Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy
stomach's sake and thine often infirmities." Was Paul telling Timothy to drink alcoholic wine for his
stomach ache? It is well known that alcohol does nothing good for the stomach.
Doctors take people with serious digestive problems off of alcohol. But since there is non-alcoholic wine
(pure grape juice), we conclude that this is the wine Paul was recommending to Timothy.
There is medical literature on the medicinal value of grape sugar. Ernest Gordon wrote in "Christ, the
Apostles and Wine":
"No better medicine for Timothy's stomach and chronic infirmities could have been recommended by Paul
than the juice of the grape."
Miscellaneous Observations
The whole Bible, studied in its entirety, enjoins total abstinence from intoxicants except possibly as a
narcotic medicine under special conditions. We have not even looked at Noah, who got drunk and fell into
sin that brought a curse upon an entire race of people.
We have not even looked at Lot who got drunk and committed incest with his daughters.
There are many cases such as these where drunkenness has led to sin and sorrow. And as the longest
journey begins with the first step, the road to alcoholism and drunkenness begins with the first drink. I

firmly believe that God would have us to never take that first drink, regardless of the reason.
In Conclusion
Let me say again; In the five passages concerning the Lord's supper, Jesus uses the term "fruit of the vine",
Paul uses the term "cup." The word "wine" is not used.
Perhaps because the word "wine" might suggest to some an intoxicant, Jesus preferred to use another term
less suggestive of alcohol. In fact, the words "fruit of the vine" really excludes alcohol. By using the words
"fruit of the vine," Jesus excluded from valid communion all but the juice of the grape.
1Cor 11:2 "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when
I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."
We have seen that "new wine" is found in the cluster of grapes hanging on the grape vine (Isa 65:8). We
have seen that the juice or "blood of the grape" is pure. We have seen that Jesus, to avoid confusion, did not
use the word "wine", but instead to emphasize that the element is pure unfermented grape juice, used the
term "fruit of the vine."
The only conclusion is that we are to use pure unfermented grape juice in the Lord's Supper. That is what
Twinbrook Hills Baptist Church has always used, is using now, and will continue to use until Jesus comes,
and we drink it new with Him in His Father's kingdom

C.

TIMING OF EVENTS OF CRUCIFIXION WEEK

1) On the chart below, the shaded areas represent hours of darkness; the open boxes represent daylight
hours. Jewish days always begin and end at sunset -- the beginning of darkness. Remember the creation
days in Genesis 1 -- they're called "the evening and the morning." To the Jew, evening meant the early
hours of darkness. The phrase "between the evenings" meant daylight hours. Our present, non-Jewish, days
always begin and end at midnight -- the middle of darkness.
2) Exodus12:6 says the Passover lamb should be kept penned up until Nisan 14, then killed "in the evening"
(KJV) or "between the evenings" (Hebrew). This would be in the afternoon toward the end of Nisan 14.
Josephus said this was done between the 9th and 11th hours of the day, that is, between 3 and 5 PM. This
would be on our Thursday afternoon.
3) Exodus 12:7,8 says that, for that first Passover, they were to put the blood on the top and both sides of
their doorways, then eat the flesh that night (during the first part of Nisan 15). Therefore the Last Supper
must have been on Thursday night.
4) Exodus 12:12,29 says that God killed the first-born of all Egyptians at midnight that night (Nisan 15). Thus

the actual Passover Day is Nisan 15 -- the day after the lamb was killed.
5) Jesus was arrested a few hours after His Last Supper (a Passover meal), was tried during the night, and
was crucified at about 9 AM the next day. This was on Nisan 15 (Passover Day), which would be on our
Friday. He was on the cross from 9 AM until 3 PM (see Mark 15:25,34).
6) The day He was crucified was a "day of preparation" for the Sabbath, that is, a Friday (see Mark 15:42).
They had to put His body in a tomb quickly, before sundown, else it would be during the Sabbath, when
burial was forbidden. This couldn't have been the day of preparation for the Passover, because Mark 14:12
says that's when the two disciples set up the upper room for the Passover feast.
7) Early in the morning after the Sabbath was past, on the first day of the week, that is Sunday, the women
came to complete the burial anointing (see Mark 16:1). But He was not in the tomb -- He had risen from the
dead!

8) Jews always counted a fraction of a day as one day. Thus He was in the grave for three days from Friday
afternoon until Sunday morning. The short portion of Friday, plus all of Saturday, plus part of Sunday added
up to three days. These were Nisan 15, 16, and 17.
9) Exodus 12:3 says that the Passover lamb was to be selected on Nisan 10, and was to be kept penned or
checked for blemishes until Nisan 14. This gives a good analogy for the date of Jesus's Triumphant Entry
into Jerusalem, which was on the first day of the week, Sunday, Nisan 10

Footnotes
: Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24-25
: cf. Pope Benedict XVI (2006). Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 275, USCCB.,
and Catholic Church (200). Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1328-1332, Second Edition. ISBN
0385508190.
e.g., see Graves, J. R. (1928). What is It to Eat and Drink Unworthily, Baptist Sunday School
Committee. ASIN B00087HTF4.
[edit]
References
1963 edition of The New Saint Joseph: First Communion Catechism, Baltimore Catechism
Anderson, S. E. The First Communion
Chemnitz, Martin. The Lord's Supper. J. A. O. Preus, trans. St. Louis: Concordia, 1979. ISBN 0-57003275-X
Dix, Dom Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. London: Continuum International, 2005. ISBN
0826479421
Elert, Werner. Eucharist and Church Fellowship in the First Four Centuries. N. E. Nagel, trans. St.
Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1966. ISBN 0-570-04270-4
Felton, Gayle. This Holy Mystery. Nashville: Discipleship Resources, 2005. ISBN 088177457X
Father Gabriel. Divine Intimacy. Rockford, IL: Tan Books and Publishers, Inc., 1996 reprint ed. ISBN
0895555042
Grime, J. H. Close Communion and Baptists
Jurgens, William A. The Faith of the Early Fathers. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1970. ISBN
0814604323
Kolb, Robert and Timothy J. Wengert, eds. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000. (ISBN 0800627407)
Lefebvre, Gaspar. The Saint Andrew Daily Missal. Reprint. Great Falls, MT: St. Bonaventure
Publications, Inc., 1999.
Macy, Gary. The Banquets Wisdom: A Short History of the Theologies of the Lords Supper. (2005,
ISBN 1878009508)
McBride, Alfred, O.Praem. Celebrating the Mass. Our Sunday Visitor, 1999.
Nevin, John Williamson. The Mystical Presence: A Vindication of the Reformed or Calvinistic Doctrine
of the Holy Eucharist. 1846; Wipf & Stock reprint, 2000. ISBN 1579103480.
Oden, Thomas C. Corrective Love: The Power of Communion Discipline. St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1995. ISBN 0-570-04803-6
Sasse, Hermann. This Is My Body: Luther's Contention for the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the
Altar. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2001. ISBN 1579107664
Schmemann, Alexander. The Eucharist. St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1997. ISBN 0881410187
Stoffer, Dale R. The Lord's Supper: Believers Church Perspectives
Stookey, L.H. Eucharist: Christ's Feast with the Church. Nashville: Abingdon, 1993 ISBN 0687120179
Tissot, The Very Rev. J. The Interior Life. 1916, pp. 347-9.
Wright, N. T. The Meal Jesus Gave Us
i

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/eucharist
http://www.martynmission.cam.ac.uk/CEucharistpage1-3.htm
iii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passover
iv
ideb
v
http://the-jewish-passover.tripod.com/customs.html
ii

vi
vii

http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/passntbo.html
http://www.twinbrook.net/view/?pageID=8173