Did Jesus use unleavened bread?

[ConstantineTG]

Is there any historical records saying that the early church used unleavened bread?
I’m in a discussion with a friend from Byzantine Orthodox, and he keeps saying that according to what is written in their church, the early church had always used leaven one. Though I haven’t had a chance to ask in which documents it is written. With this reason, he said that it was the Latin Church who betrayed the orthodox faith by using unleavened bread.

The Catholic Church view is leavened or unleavened doesn’t matter. Just follow the liturgical traditions of your Rite. So as Catholics we shouldn’t be concerned with the question which bread Jesus used at the Last Supper. If you’re in a Byzantine Catholic parish, its leavened. If you are in a Roman Catholic parish, its unleavened. Not sure about the Orientals, but when I attended a Chaldean Holy Qurbana, they used the same unleavened hosts used in RC parishes.

To add, in cases of extreme necessity, a RC priest can celebrate Mass with leavened bread. Say if you are in a cruise ship in the middle of the ocean and ran out of unleavened hosts. The RC Church sees leavened bread as illicit during normal celebrations, but not invalid.

I wonder what the Byzantine view is? Can anyone share if unleavened bread can be used in the Divine Liturgy in rare and extreme circumstances?

 

[dvdjs]

Is there any historical records saying that the early church used unleavened bread?
I’m in a discussion with a friend from Byzantine Orthodox, and he keeps saying that according to what is written in their church, the early church had always used leaven one. Though I haven’t had a chance to ask in which documents it is written. With this reason, he said that it was the Latin Church who betrayed the orthodox faith by using unleavened bread.

There are some scholarly works that find evidence for Latins prescribing the use of unleavened bread ca. the ninth century. Prior to that time, evidently, unleavened bread was used. Some Orthodox polemicists have taken those canons to mean that only unleavened bread was used. But I have not seen any documentation for that claim; just a faulty inference drawn from the 9th century canons.

The innovation in this matter was clearly on the part of the Byzantines, and it was one of theology not practice. In earlier times, the use of leavened or unleavened bread was part of tradition, not theology. It was elevated to theology in the course of conflicts with the Armenian church; in the course of this division of peoples, variations in practice were raised to the level of shibboleth. Then, with some innovative theology they were raised to doctrine, then dogma and heresy. When the political situation later warranted it, this charge of heresy was levied against the Latins. Especially in view of all of the EO complaints against the Latins for dogmatizing everything, their raising the issue of azymes is very odd.

 

[rben20]

For the sake of the question (never mind the byzantine or latin traditions) Jesus more than likely used unleavened bread as that was the bread used for the Jewish Passover. Jesus instituted the sacrament of the Eucharist at the Last Supper which He held in private in light of the Jewish Passover before His Crucifixion.

 

[nectarios]

Peace and blessings to all of you.

Looking through all of these posts on this thread it is clear that there are different tradition view points. Some of the information presented is very note worthy, in that the bread used by Yeshua was without doubt unleavened. Yeshua, apposed the traditions of the pharisees, and never violated any commands which came from the laws of Moses. I was among the Nazarene Israelite movement for a while and have studied all of these things in great detail, and surprisingly they disagree among themselves also. In all of this thread Ghostly, you have hit it right on. It is not conjecture nor false doctrine to state that chamatz (Leaven) was removed throughout all of Israel for the Commanded Feast. If Yeshua, used leavened bread then he went against the Heavenly Father.

Peace to you all

 

[nectarios]

Ghosty,

What you are relying on is mere speculation. We do not know what bread Christ used at the passover. If you rely on this sort of pseudo-logic, then we would have to say Christ never healed anyone on the Sabbath, since it would have been forbidden to work on the Sabbath - Christ would have never summoned Moses and Elijah upon the mount, because it would have been against the law to summon the dead (necromancy) - Christ would have never spoken to the samaritan woman, for a Jewish man to speak to a woman (let alone a Samaritan woman) without the presence of her husband or male relative would go against the culture of his time.

I am offended by the way this was presented. Matt. Mk. nor Lk accounts of the Transfiguration say absolutely nothing about Yeshua summoning.

If you know about Jewish culture and customs you know that Yeshua was apposed to Talmud traditions of the pharisees that made the Law of Moses of no use. It is forbidden for an Israelite to stand by and let a hurt person remain that way without help no matter what, even on the sabbath. The Samaritans are Israelites, it was man made rules to not associate with them. Yeshua while here in flesh was sent to Israelites. It was the Apostles that came to us Gentiles.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Personally, I’ve no doubt but that our Lord used leavened bread at the Mystical Supper. The arguments about Him following Jewish tradition etc. are fine, but He, as only He could, altered those traditions for the New Israel He was inaugurating.

I attended two lectures by RC theology profs who also maintained that not only did our Lord use leavened bread, but that the Christian West used it in its Eucharists in the early centuries of the Church.

But as Fr. Prof. John Meyendorff (+memory eternal!) once said about the discussion surrounding the use of “azymes,” after the Consecration, there is no longer ANY bread on the Altar - only the Most Holy and Most Pure Body and Blood of OLGS Jesus Christ.

That the various Churches use both leavened and unleavened bread should never be a point of argument - the former emphasizes the Eastern focus on Christ’s Resurrection and the latter on His atoning Death.

I say let’s leave it at that.

Alex

 

[nectarios]

Personally, I’ve no doubt but that our Lord used leavened bread at the Mystical Supper. The arguments about Him following Jewish tradition etc. are fine, but He, as only He could, altered those traditions for the New Israel He was inaugurating.

No argument from me, I have studied on this topic of Jewish customs and Yeshua would have to keep all the commands in order to be the Lamb of God. He did not come to take away but to make complete and fulfill.

I attended two lectures by RC theology profs who also maintained that not only did our Lord use leavened bread, but that the Christian West used it in its Eucharists in the early centuries of the Church.

I have seen scholars disagree in so many areas, so both sides of this topic hold to which ever one each of us in the faith heard. I am one that does not always trust scholars and seeks to find out for myself. (Prov 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out.) I do not even agree with every point the scholars say whom are for unleavened. Just being honest, and humbly add I am not a know it all on this.

But as Fr. Prof. John Meyendorff (+memory eternal!) once said about the discussion surrounding the use of “azymes,” after the Consecration, there is no longer ANY bread on the Altar - only the Most Holy and Most Pure Body and Blood of OLGS Jesus Christ.

I am very familiar with Fr. Meyendorff and I agree with this. Well quoted, brother.

That the various Churches use both leavened and unleavened bread should never be a point of argument - the former emphasizes the Eastern focus on Christ’s Resurrection and the latter on His atoning Death.

I say let’s leave it at that.

Alex

As stated before in this thread, that both Western and Eastern will use the other if it is the only thing available, makes for it being our partaking of OLGS. I agree this should not be divisive point nor area of argument.

Peace of Yeshua be with you
Nectarios Marko

 

[ConstantineTG]

But why stop at the Last Supper? Any question what bread Jesus used at the Road to Emmaus? How about the Apostles? Is unleavened bread widely available in the 1st century around the Mediterranean? Remember they do not travel with anything on them as instructed by Jesus. And even if they were to bring some unleavened bread, travel takes days under the hot sun. Bread would have been ruined or they would have ended with not enough bread.

Its probable that the Apostles used whatever bread is available, be it leavened or unleavened.

 

[Aramis]

But why stop at the Last Supper? Any question what bread Jesus used at the Road to Emmaus? How about the Apostles? Is unleavened bread widely available in the 1st century around the Mediterranean? Remember they do not travel with anything on them as instructed by Jesus. And even if they were to bring some unleavened bread, travel takes days under the hot sun. Bread would have been ruined or they would have ended with not enough bread.

Its probable that the Apostles used whatever bread is available, be it leavened or unleavened.

Unleavened flat loaves actually keep better when travelling than do leavened ones. Less difference in the desert… but also, unleavened is easier to eat after a week of travel than is leavened. The combination of moisture, softer shell, and easier eating for the bugs make unleavened thick hard crackers the ideal travel breads.

Dry bits of cracker have been found in ancient tombs, still perfectly edible. Seeds from inside the pyramids have in fact been grown. Just have to keep out the bugs and moisture.

Most people of the era would know this; it was an essential part of preserving foods to dry them out, and unleavened bread is easier to dry out.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

No argument from me, I have studied on this topic of Jewish customs and Yeshua would have to keep all the commands in order to be the Lamb of God. He did not come to take away but to make complete and fulfill.

I have seen scholars disagree in so many areas, so both sides of this topic hold to which ever one each of us in the faith heard. I am one that does not always trust scholars and seeks to find out for myself. (Prov 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out.) I do not even agree with every point the scholars say whom are for unleavened. Just being honest, and humbly add I am not a know it all on this.

I am very familiar with Fr. Meyendorff and I agree with this. Well quoted, brother.

As stated before in this thread, that both Western and Eastern will use the other if it is the only thing available, makes for it being our partaking of OLGS. I agree this should not be divisive point nor area of argument.

Peace of Yeshua be with you
Nectarios Marko

Peace of Yeshua to you, my Brother! Your words of blessing are just that - a great blessing!!

Alex

 

[dcointin]

Off-topic, but artos doesn’t mean “leavened bread”, it means “bread”. The same word is used in the Septuagint for unleavened sacrificial bread.

What’s more, there was no leavened bread around at the time of the Last Supper; even if it occurred the night before Passover, all leavened bread would have beend destroyed, locked away, or given to Gentiles the day before Passover, as per Jewish religious practice. There’s no plausible way for the Last Supper to have used leavened bread.

As for the topic, look at pictures of Chartes Cathedral, or Notre Dame, or the Sistine Chapel, or any of the countless architectual and artistic masterpieces found in Europe and even in the U.S. in some places. I don’t think architecture should be a deciding factor between Churches, but in my experience the Latin and the Byzantine tradition are quite equal in beauty and artistic expression.

Peace and God bless!

I’m fortunate to live in St. Louis which has the Cathedral Bascilica, which uses Romanesqe architecture on the exterior, and Byzantine in the interior, and it’s absolutely amazing. The Catholics have actually out done us in our own architecture!