ON BEING EUCHARIST TO ONE ANOTHER: An exploration of a Last Supper ritual By Jack Mostyn and Tom Draney
What does it mean to be eucharist to one another? Is it only a pious phrase? How is it different from just being nice, a little more pleasant or patient with each other? These questions and others like them press on us particularly at this time when vocations are in sharp decline in the first world, and we must ponder the meaning of our lives in religion.
It is obvious that we can be good to one another in many ways and on different levels. We can treat someone well because we want to ask a favor of them, or we can just have an altruistic urge when we are having a wonderful day and want to share our joy. Being eucharist for one another, however, must mean more than that. The Eucharist itself is a sign which signifies that we are beyond the natural order and somehow tapped into the realm of the Divine. What being eucharist to one another means can perhaps be best seen in examining the history and meaning of the Last Supper in the light of modern scholarship.
This means re-examining some basic concepts; Most of us were taught as children that the Last Supper was a Paschal meal and that we are redeemed by the death of Jesus. Most scholars today say that the Last Supper was not a Passover meal, but a “chaburah” meal, a meal based on fellowship. This makes a huge difference in our understanding of the Eucharist; for example, we could just as well speak of the Meal of the Mass as the Sacrifice of the Mass.
The Nicene Creed skips from the birth of Jesus to the death, omitting entirely His life, but it can not be that his life had no meaning, no redemptive value. We must be redeemed by the life and death of Jesus, for death is a part of life and can not be separated from it. Do we not also believe that life will continue after death? As the Preface of the Funeral Mass said: “Life is changed, not taken away.” Keeping this broader view in mind, let us look at the Last Supper, the institution of the Eucharist.
Chaburah-The Jewish Ancestor of the Eucharist
Jesus no doubt had many meals with his disciples during his public ministry. It was the common Jewish custom for people who shared some common interest or work to eat together regularly in a ritualized meal known as the chaburah. This would resemble the breakfasts or lunches that Kiwanis and Rotary clubs have today; men (and women) come together because they have developed a common interest, a ministry of sorts, and a fellowship around it.
Jesus took this fellowship meal and introduced a new dimension to the relationship of the people at the table. By His enigmatic words “This is my body which is for you; do this for the recalling of me,” and later after the meal was finished, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, whenever you drink it, for the recalling of me” Jesus announced that the kingdom of God was in discipleship, and in the “re-membering” of Him at that kind of meal.
In the Jewish culture, eating together, sharing a meal, was an important sign of sharing companionship; this, of course, was why Jesus was condemned for eating with sinners and tax collectors. Like all formal Jewish meals, the chaburah was governed by symbolic rituals.. Before a chaburah started formally, there could be “relishes” or appetizers as men gathered. Once the members sat down to eat, the company was considered complete and late-comers were not welcomed. Each member poured his own wine, which symbolized life itself, and blessed it for himself. The presider or host then started the meal with a blessing prayer, and broke bread, giving each member a fragment of it. This symbolized their existence as a group, all being recipients of God’s goodness. After they had eaten and talked about the topic of interest, the host performed the “cup of blessing” ritual; he said the prayer of blessing, took a sip of the wine, and passed the cup around for all to do likewise. This gesture was seen as the drinking of blood to strengthen and recommit them all to the purpose of the chaburah that had been highlighted in the conversation during the meal. The ritual was common to all formal meals, including the Passover supper, but the context to the meal was different.
Some questions about the chaburah and its relationship to Passover
But wasn’t the Last Supper a Passover meal?
The three synoptics describe it as such, but St. John’s gospel says it was on the night before the Pasch. The Greek Orthodox Church has always held to St. John’s account, and because of that, their communion bread is not the unleavened bread of the Passover.. There are many internal problems with the synoptics placing the Last supper on the Eve of Passover, some related to the time-frame and others to the purity laws which would have been in effect (e.g. Jewish leaders saying they did not want to enter the palace so they could observe the coming Passover, Simon of Cyrene traveling on the feast day) Scholars today seem to agree that John had it right. .
How did it happen that the synoptics placed it as the Paschal meal?
The first disciples had no idea that the service they celebrated as the Last Supper was a sacrifice. None of the disciples in the NT were called priests. They were Jews and went to temple regularly where their historic need to worship God in sacrifice was satisfied. It was after they were expelled from the synagogues and the temple was destroyed in A.D.70 and the small Christian churches included many gentiles that the realization of the sacrificial aspect of the meal came to the fore. The evangelists, who were recording the preaching of earlier Christians, none of whom were eye witnesses, absorbed the Paschal meal/sacrifice relationship into their narrative because it went along with their need to explain the emerging meaning of the Lord’s Supper as a sacrifice at that period in the development of the Church, some fifty years or sixty years after the event.
What were the differences in the two formal meals?
As stated earlier, their structure was very similar. The essence of our Eucharistic service was there in both: the breaking of bread and the cup of blessing, although they were separated by the meal itself. The difference was that in the prayers of the Passover meal the emphasis would have been on the history of God delivering the nation; in the chaburah, on the kingdom of God and the meaning of discipleship, the covenant community. The difference in the connotation of the two meals is significant. In the chaburah “Do this in memory of me....” can be seen as referring to more than “transubstantiation;” it can mean as well “Come together as disciples…continue as community”. Also, if the meal were a Paschal meal, it would be repeated once a year; as a chaburah, it would be held frequently.
Did a chaburah meal have any element of sacrifice?
There was the element of sacrificing themselves for the group, as a father or mother may sacrifice themselves for their children, not by laying down on an altar, but by laying down their life in loving service. As was said earlier, Jesus redeemed us by his life and his death, which was part of his life. The new covenant he proclaimed included a new type of sacrifice, something more than the pouring out of blood, be it animal or human, on an altar. Redemption was an act of love based on the life and death of Jesus. It might be well to remember that the Franciscans under John Duns Scotus, taught that Jesus’ life and death flowed out from God’s love, not from anger. If there had been no original sin, God would have come to be one of us out of love alone.
Would the chaburah ritual diminish the importance or meaning of the Mass?
It definitely does not. Just as the chaburah led to the Lord’s Supper which developed into the Mass, it is a marvelous preparation for the Mass. It makes us more aware that the Eucharistic liturgy is something that we do, not merely attend or hear. The Church is essentially a community, and the realization of this in a parish setting is often difficult, many people not knowing each other, etc. Most Christians in the First World at least, live in large cities where life is impersonal and families fragmented by the demands of schools and business. Rituals in the home would be one of the greatest blessings to the Church today; it would be going back to our roots as Christians and also emphasizing the meaning of the priesthood of the laity. We do not see this ritual as a “communion service” or something to have when a priest is not available. It would be a celebration of the meaning of family, fraternity, and discipleship, and a reminder that a Christian life is an offering to God in itself. What better preparation could there be for celebrating the Eucharist as a parish community?
Why is the ritual of chaburah particularly appropriate for Brothers?
During his life time here on earth, Jesus was a teacher and preacher. He did not administer sacraments. With the exception of the Eucharist, the sacraments were all signs recognized and used by the Jewish people; the Risen Christ in His church developed these signs and they are the work of the priesthood. The chaburah meal is how his disciples experienced the presence of Christ during his public ministry. We share in that dimension of his ministry, so the chaburah could be most appropriate and meaningful for Brothers. When we are eucharist to one another, we are the People of God living in the Mystical Body of Christ.
Present Congregational Practices
There are a number of practices throughout the congregation that nurture in a eucharistic way the heart of being brother to one another. One is the weekly review that many communities have embarked upon. Herein the members of the community share with one another the events of the previous week where they have felt they have encountered the Mystery Called God, or where they felt most affected by their contact with the poor. Members have the opportunity to describe without cross talk or interruption their experiences. This experience enables each member of the community to catch a glimpse of the often hidden reality of another member of the community. Sometimes this sharing ends in a prayer or just silence. This is not unlike what the apostles experienced in their group.
A second practice that is taking place at the present time is the “Share” groups. These groups are made up of men of different communities who gather once a month to speak in confidence to one another. It seems that because of the high degree of confidentiality and trust that has developed in these groups men are being freed to share many of the realities of their lives that they would not ordinarily share. Much help and challenge is given and received within the session. The experience of acceptance and community or feeling that one is not alone in this valley of tears is one of the many consequences of these groups. In this way they resemble the chaburah groups of the ancient times.
There are other practices such as the gatherings of men who have done the God in the Now retreats, and those that have initiated ritual services of prayer which already use bread and wine as symbols. Some communities strive for a focus point for each day’s prayer. They use questions such as: “How has God surprised you today? Where did you find Jesus today? How have you experienced poverty?” The focus is discussed at the evening meal- which is a wonderful setting for a chaburah ritual.
Suggested Ritual, Based on Chaburah, For Nurturing “On Being Eucharist to One Another”
From the examples stated above and others it seems clear that the Holy Spirit is moving us to some from of deeper sharing with one another. Developing the ritual for this type of sharing meal could start with one of the five or with others that are in practice already. Or, an entirely new one can be designed. Either of these two strands is suitable as beginning. The following is one untested format for Brothers to chew on and adapt as seen fit.
1. The group of purpose gathers in a suitable place preferably one with a round table that fits all. The size of the round table would limit the size of the group. Perhaps three is the smallest and twelve is the largest number possible. As in the original, “relishes” or pre-prandials are made available as the group comes together so they can relax a bit, share in conversation, and shed the cares of the day.
2. Once seated at the table each pours a portion of wine (or grape juice where appropriate) for himself and blesses it himself. This is the symbol of that each life, each person, is sacred to God and important in itself. Life is a gift to be appreciated and blessed.
3. The blessing and breaking of the bread by the person presiding is next. A fragment is distributed to each person and some prayer is said about how everyone present shares in the brokenness of our own nature and is part of the brokenness of the world’s society. This can also serve as a reminder of the Emmaus event or of Christ’s promise to be there where two or three are gathered in His name. The prayer at this time could also reflect the current events in the life of the community.
4. The meal itself is the opportunity for men to talk about and share some focused thoughts and feelings about some aspect of their life in community, ministry, or spiritual journey. It would be contrary to the whole purpose of the ritual to have the conversation focus on sports, politics, or the usual areas of table conversation. No doubt some or many will find it difficult to share their thoughts, so it might be helpful to have the host offer some ideas or topics to be presented to start the conversation. The host brings this portion of the meal to a closure by initiating the Cup of Blessing.
5 The host/presider pours a cup of wine and offers a prayer which thanks God for His blessings and prayerfully recounts a little of the history of the group, the Congregation and the Church in that locale. It is part of the remembering of who we are. It is an effort to connect our present work with the past, and above all with the saving presence of Christ in the present. When the prayer is over, he takes a sip from the cup and passes the cup around for all to do likewise. This is the symbol of our recommitment to each other, to being eucharist to each other and to the people we serve.
6. A closing hymn can be sung or played. An appropriate short psalm of thanksgiving could be recited.
Possible Hurdles to Overcome
The biggest hurdle will probably be the unfamiliarity with this type of ritual. Most of us older Brothers were brought up on a more subjective form of piety. Rosaries, novenas, private prayers to the saints, etc, have their place, but do not usually lend themselves to a lively interactive communal dimension. Vatican II emphasized the priesthood of the laity, but it is still difficult for many of us to feel comfortable presiding and participating actively in such rituals. Rituals seem like priests’ work. But if our lives hold any sacred meaning, we Brothers in community, and lay people in their homes, must have the right and power to make meaningful rituals to draw out that meaning. We just have to move forward with this if we mean to be serious about being eucharist to one another. It might help us to remember that the Paschal meal originated as a family meal, not a temple service.
Conclusion
Let us return again to the opening questions: What does it mean to be eucharist to one another? How is it different from being nice, a little more pleasant or patient with others?
If we truly believe that we are part of the Mystical Body as the people of God, then we share in the meaning of Christ’s life and his death. There is more to our “normal” life than appears on the surface. There is the dimension of the Divine. That is easy to say, but difficult to keep in our hearts as we go through life day after day. A ritual is meant to capture and emphasize the meaning of some aspects of life.
If the Eucharist is the “remembering of Christ and His passion,” then the Last Supper was not the first Eucharist, because the Lord was still present and had not consummated his life and love on the Cross. It was the last chaburah, a meal to celebrate the discipleship and fraternity of the followers of Jesus. If we also celebrate this ritual, we are not playing priest or trying to invent a new communion service. We are ritualizing in our communities the reality we profess.
Resources
An excellent source for prayers that could be used in the ritual is “Blessing Prayers” by George Wilson, S.J., Treehaus Communications, P.O. Box 249, Loveland, Ohio 45140
Bibliography
Dix, Dom Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy, Dacre Press, London
Brown, Raymond E., “Priest and Bishop,” Missionary Society of St. Paul
Websites
www.magma.ca/~stmarks/manual.html
www.godsfriends.org/Vol10/No3/HolyFood.html
www.scandalon.co.uk/mark/mk14v12-26.html
www.andrewmarr.homestead.com/files/firstsupper.html
www.theophoretos.hostmatrix.org/christianity.html
APPENDIX OF COMMENTS
Jack, Judith Bruder was the leader of a Taize prayer group in NYC which I belonged to. Thought you would find this interesting. Judith writes:Of course, this makes perfect sense to me. I came to the Eucharist as a 48 year old Jewish woman. It was instantly recognizable and familiar to me as a Sabbath meal --- but not as a Passover seder. I've never changed my mind about that, but received wisdom was always that it was the Passover. I don't have your facts. I'm just going by intuition and recognition. Do you know that there are still some congregations (usually in Reconstructionist Judaism, I think), that name themselves Chavurah (Chavurot, plural). Chaver is a companion, as you suggest. I've usually seen it with a v, but no matter. From some years ago, it has also seemed to me that there were TWO Eucharists or two forms of Eucharist. One is that initiated at the Last Supper (and why wouldn't it be the night before Passover?), which became historically the ritual, the one repeatable by an operator who repeats the form. But the other (which I have to tell you is more powerful for me) I named the Emmaus Eucharist. And there are no operators who have control over it, it happens when Jesus is present at the meal, and somehow is recognized, generally in vanishing! One can't dictate it, it is a grace. Guess that's why it can’t readily be incorporated into organized ritual.
I also enjoyed reading what you have included specifically for congregations of Chaverim, like your own congregation. It seems so simple, like, why would they have any trouble with this? But anything radically new is suspect, and worse. So good luck to you.