J
Juxtaposer
Guest
I know the title almost sounds blasphemous. Sorry about that. This is just something that I’ve been thinking about lately. Since Christ is present in the Eucharist, did Jesus consume Himself at the Last Supper?
- Status
F
Funky_Cedars
Guest
although the gospels aren’t super clear, i think there is a certain implication that He did.
Mark says ‘they all drank from’ the cup (14:23, emphasis mine). in Luke 22:15-16, J tells the diciples how eargerly He has looked forward to eating this Passover with them. since He was about to become the perfect pascal lamb, to my mind, that seem’s a pretty good indication that He ate Himself at that last Passover.
also, knowing how many graces are available to us human within the Eucharist, i’m inclined to think He’d have taken advantage of them.
Mark says ‘they all drank from’ the cup (14:23, emphasis mine). in Luke 22:15-16, J tells the diciples how eargerly He has looked forward to eating this Passover with them. since He was about to become the perfect pascal lamb, to my mind, that seem’s a pretty good indication that He ate Himself at that last Passover.
also, knowing how many graces are available to us human within the Eucharist, i’m inclined to think He’d have taken advantage of them.
A
Apologia100
Guest
Actually, read Matthew 26:26-30. Jesus broke the bread and gave it to his disciples. He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them… He then said “I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my father.” There is no indication that Jesus either ate or drank.
F
FenianMan
Guest
Omission is not the same as denial. While we in the West have no particular tradition that Christ received Holy Communion at the Last Supper in the East, at times even in the formulae of consecration, it is explicitly expressed that Christ received Himself. More to the point, you can’t argue Matthew to disprove Mark. The accounts are clearly different, but ommission doesn’t equate to denial. Just a thought.
T
theodorro
Guest
Excuse me if you will not understand all what I want to say, I hadn’t studdied English for 3 years.
I talked with a jew about The Last Supper of Jesus (Pessah/Passover supper), he said that in the jewish/hebrew tradition (which is like our Sacred Tradition), at the Passover supper, is to drink wine and eat unleaved bread for three times.
First the youngest member asks the older one: “why do we celebrate this?” and then the old member tells the story of the Passover (Exodus), after that, the same question and again the old member tells the Passover sotry, and the third time is the same.
Jesus drank wine and ate the bread first and second cup, the third time, he said to me, that Jesus gave to them[Apostels] to drink his Blood and to eat His Body, He created the Eucharity only at the third chalice of wine and the third bread.
I talked with a jew about The Last Supper of Jesus (Pessah/Passover supper), he said that in the jewish/hebrew tradition (which is like our Sacred Tradition), at the Passover supper, is to drink wine and eat unleaved bread for three times.
First the youngest member asks the older one: “why do we celebrate this?” and then the old member tells the story of the Passover (Exodus), after that, the same question and again the old member tells the Passover sotry, and the third time is the same.
Jesus drank wine and ate the bread first and second cup, the third time, he said to me, that Jesus gave to them[Apostels] to drink his Blood and to eat His Body, He created the Eucharity only at the third chalice of wine and the third bread.
D
dominicsavio
Guest
peace be with you!
i am no expert on this but i would have to think that He did receive the Eucharist. in our Mass, the priests have to consume Him and i would be willing to bet that the one celebrating Passover meals had to partake of it too. it was a Passover meal and He would have been required to partake of it. so i would say in all likelihood, He did.
i am no expert on this but i would have to think that He did receive the Eucharist. in our Mass, the priests have to consume Him and i would be willing to bet that the one celebrating Passover meals had to partake of it too. it was a Passover meal and He would have been required to partake of it. so i would say in all likelihood, He did.
D
Dr.Colossus
Guest
:bible1: “Amen, I say to you, I shall not drink again the fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” Mark 14:25
:bible1:“I tell you, from now on I shall not drink this fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father.” Matthew 26:29Mark clearly suggests that Christ has just taken the Cup, as He says “I shall not drink again”. In Matthew, Christ says “I shall not drink this fruit of the vine”, referring specifically to His Blood. From these verses I would conclude that Christ had just taken the consecrated wine.
:bible1:“I tell you, from now on I shall not drink this fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father.” Matthew 26:29Mark clearly suggests that Christ has just taken the Cup, as He says “I shall not drink again”. In Matthew, Christ says “I shall not drink this fruit of the vine”, referring specifically to His Blood. From these verses I would conclude that Christ had just taken the consecrated wine.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
Scott Hahn discussed this on one of his Scripture Matters radio shows. I seem to remember him saying there were normally four instances during the Passover meal when you drink, rather than three, but I’m not sure. Anyway, Jesus refused the last time, saying he would not drink until the coming of his kingdom. Dr. Hahn suggested the vinegar that was shoved at him at the end of the crucifixion was that final drink, as Christ was at that moment establishing his kingdom.
This is an interesting idea, but after a quick scan through the different Gospel accounts, I can’t find where Jesus was taking these earlier sips.
D
Dr.Colossus
Guest
That’s an interesting idea, but I always considered my previous quote from Matthew as discounting that. Christ refers to “*this *fruit of the vine”, which seems to separate it from regular wine.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
I just remembered another thing Dr Hahn said about this. When Jesus said “It is finished,” the Latin uses a form of the word “consummate.” The name of the final cup, or drink, at the Passover ceremony is the cup of consummation, or something similar.
This is all I recall, but it obviously raises the issue of whether “consummate” derives from Greek and/or Aramaic, and if not, whether the word Jesus spoke is related to the Passover term in the local language.
A Google search for “cup of consummation” finds discussion about this from several Protestant sites.
This is all I recall, but it obviously raises the issue of whether “consummate” derives from Greek and/or Aramaic, and if not, whether the word Jesus spoke is related to the Passover term in the local language.
A Google search for “cup of consummation” finds discussion about this from several Protestant sites.
J
Juxtaposer
Guest
Funky Cedars:
Are you implying that Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, was in need of grace? He’s the distributor of the stuff!
I think that verses like Mark 14:25 and Matthew 26:29 have something very important to say. What else could He have meant other than He wouldn’t eat Himself during Passover? He is clearly the vine in this verse, just as He explicitly says in John 15:5. He is the vine, we are the branches. The vine feeds the branches, just as the Church is fed through the Eucharist. However, what then did He mean when He said, “until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father”? Does that mean that Jesus will start taking communion after the second coming? I suppose we could then get into Aristotelian logic and say that Jesus meant that He wouldn’t drink consecrated wine the Passover night and wouldn’t drink regular wine until on the cross. I think this is what Hahn would have to do in order for this passage to make sense. Now this is just getting too overboard, but I’d hate to play the mystery card. Any thoughts?
Funky Cedars,
Are you implying that Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, was in need of grace? He’s the distributor of the stuff!
I think that verses like Mark 14:25 and Matthew 26:29 have something very important to say. What else could He have meant other than He wouldn’t eat Himself during Passover? He is clearly the vine in this verse, just as He explicitly says in John 15:5. He is the vine, we are the branches. The vine feeds the branches, just as the Church is fed through the Eucharist. However, what then did He mean when He said, “until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father”? Does that mean that Jesus will start taking communion after the second coming? I suppose we could then get into Aristotelian logic and say that Jesus meant that He wouldn’t drink consecrated wine the Passover night and wouldn’t drink regular wine until on the cross. I think this is what Hahn would have to do in order for this passage to make sense. Now this is just getting too overboard, but I’d hate to play the mystery card. Any thoughts?
O
OhioBob
Guest
Hahn’s premise (from “The Fourth Cup”) is that the entire passion of Christ was a continuation of the passover seder that began in the upper room. As mentioned above, when he took the vinegar from the sponge and said “it is finished” he was alluding to the fourth cup of the Jewish seder and the “finishing” of the passover with Christ as the lamb of sacrifice.
It’s an interesting book, however, I understand it to be Dr. Hahn’s personal theory which he acknowledges as a unique approach. I know that there is quite a bit of evidence back and forth both in support of, and in opposition to his theory.
While no one is obligated to agree with Dr. Hahn’s premise, it does provide another way to reflect upon the sacrifice of Christ and the significance of the Mass.
With regard to the interpretation of Matthew and Mark, I tend to read those passages as Christ offering the bread and cup to the others after his consecration but not consuming them himself. I don’t think that the Church has defined those passages specifically on the issue.
Blessings.
It’s an interesting book, however, I understand it to be Dr. Hahn’s personal theory which he acknowledges as a unique approach. I know that there is quite a bit of evidence back and forth both in support of, and in opposition to his theory.
While no one is obligated to agree with Dr. Hahn’s premise, it does provide another way to reflect upon the sacrifice of Christ and the significance of the Mass.
With regard to the interpretation of Matthew and Mark, I tend to read those passages as Christ offering the bread and cup to the others after his consecration but not consuming them himself. I don’t think that the Church has defined those passages specifically on the issue.
Blessings.
D
dream_wanderer
Guest
hmm…I suppose the view could be taken that He consumed the meal to be united with us the same way He was united with us in baptism?
I don’t know…just a thought.
dream wanderer
I don’t know…just a thought.
dream wanderer
F
Funky_Cedars
Guest
no, but i’m not denying His humanity, either. He was wearing flesh when He hung on that cross for me. God Incarnate couldn’t die, or even just sweat blood, for that matter. but J did both cause He was man as well as God. i read Luke 22:14, an angle strengthening Him in His agony, as effectively being Daddy dispensing graces to assist Him in His trial. not that He necessarily ‘needed’ them, but Daddy loves His little boy more than i can understand, (just like He loves me more than i ever will) and so would have done everything possible to help Him out.
thanks for listening, love and peace, terry
- Status