Origin of the Eucharist

[11] Even before the Church "went public" after the conversion of Constantine the Great in the second decade of the fourth century, it was clear that the Eucharist was a central part of Christian life and worship.

The supper at Emmaus (Luke 24:28–35) is reminiscent of the Book of Judges: the vocation of Gideon and the prophecy made to Manoach and to the barren woman of the birth of Samson.

[17] These prefigurations and their realization shed light on the sacrificial nature of the Last Supper: on one hand, the Eucharist shows the paradoxical nature of this breaking of the bread which attests to a presence while keeping it invisible to the eyes of the two disciples; on the other hand, the sacrifice makes it possible to recognize the one who has manifested himself: it is at the moment when Jesus gives thanks, breaks the bread and gives it to the disciples of Emmaus that they recognize him.

[14] In the New Testament there are four accounts of the institution of the Eucharist, the earliest by St Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians[20] which links it back to the Last Supper and three in the Synoptic Gospels in the context of that same meal.

Jones, writing in 1978, comments "Many scholars [...] have returned to the support of the longer text",[31] and the same position was taken by the majority of editors of the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament.

[37] Criticizing what he had heard of their meetings, at which they had communal meals, one paragraph in Paul's response reminded them about what he asserted he had "received from the Lord" and had "passed on" about Jesus' actions and directives at his Last Supper.

[40] The letters of Paul and the Acts of the Apostles make it clear that early Christianity believed that this institution included a mandate to continue the celebration as an anticipation in this life of the joys of the banquet that was to come in the Kingdom of God.

The theology is as follows: the bread and wine are transformed into the Flesh and Blood of Jesus; they are the pure sacrifice spoken of by Malachi (1:11) and the Eucharistic prayer itself is both a thanksgiving for creation and redemption and an anamnesis (Greek for 'memorial') of the passion (and possibly the incarnation).

According to the overwhelming consensus among scholars, the section beginning at 10.1 is a reworking of the Birkat hamazon, the prayer that ends the Jewish ritual meal.

In his debate with gnostics who favored an immaterial religion, the former affirms: "Whenever, then, the mixed cup and the bread that has been made receive the word of God, the Eucharist becomes the body of Christ, and by it the substance of our flesh is nourished and sustained".

The consecration of the Eucharistic species is done with the words of 1 Corinthians 11: "For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, 'This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;' and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, 'This is My blood;' and gave it to them alone.

[65] They therefore try to decide where the distinct components of the later rite originated by examining possible cultural elements, both Jewish and Hellenic, which already existed in the period under study.

"[67] On the other hand, Bruce Chilton suggests that six different ways of celebrating what Christians came to call the Eucharist can be found in the New Testament, and can locate each of these in its own specific socio-religio-political setting.

This would seem to make irrelevant a number of time-honored scholarly approaches, fundamental to which were, first, the "literally true" vs. "literary fictions" debate, and, second, the assumption that there was a unified line of development from the established Eucharist of later centuries back close to the time of the historical Jesus.

Syrian Christians could celebrate a Eucharist of bread and wine with absolutely no hint of Passover meal, Last Supper or passion symbolism built into its origins or development.

[74] Paul's references in this letter to unleavened bread, Christ as the "paschal lamb," and mention of the "cup of blessing," similar to the ancient Mishnah Pesahim instructions on celebrating the Passover meal, suggest Jewish influence (see 1 Corinthians 5:7; 10:16; 11:23).

Crossan maintains that table fellowship was central to Jesus' ministry in that was infamous for violating codes of honor to eat freely with outsiders, termed "sinners and tax collectors" in the Gospels.

"[78] In a 2002 analysis[80] in the Biblical Theology Bulletin, Michael J. Cahill surveyed the state of scholarly literature from some seventy cited sources, dating from the 1950s to the present, on the question of the likelihood of a Jewish Jesus proposing the drinking of blood in the Eucharist.

[81] After examining the various theories that have been suggested, he concludes: The survey of opinion, old and new, reveals wide disagreement with a fundamental divide between those who can accept that the notion of drinking blood could have a Jewish origin and those who insist that this is a later development to be located in the Hellenistic world.

What both sides share is an inability to proffer a rationally convincing argument that can provide a historical explanation for the presence of this particular component of the Eucharistic rite.

W. D. Davies draws attention to the fact that Dalman also argued that the Pauline version of the institution arose in a gentile environment to eliminate the difficulties presented by the more direct Markan form (246).

On the other hand, I have earlier argued that previous suggestions supporting the non-Jewish source have been vitiated by vague generalities or by association with inappropriate pagan rituals.

The Johannine Supper, Ratcliff has suggested,[82] was the Jewish ordinance known as Kiddush, the details of which involved the leader of the mixed-sex ceremony taking a cup of wine, sanctifying it by reciting a thanksgiving blessing, and passing it around.

The chaburah (also 'haburah', pl 'chaburoth') is not the name of a rite, rather it was the name of a group of male friends who met at regular intervals (weekly for Dix) for conversation and a formal meal appurtenant to that meeting.

By the 2nd century BC, Jesus Ben Sirach described Jewish feasting, with numerous parallels to Hellenic practice, without disapproval.

[93] Parallel to the religious duties to god and state, "the Hellenic world also fostered a number of 'underground' religions, which countless thousands of people found intellectually and emotionally satisfying.

[101] In the chapter "Totem-Sacrifices and Eucharists" of his 1920 book Pagan and Christian Creeds, Edward Carpenter advanced the theory that the Christian Eucharist arose from an almost universal practice of a tribe occasionally eating the animal that it identified with, a practice that he saw as developing into ceremonial eatings of shared food by lamas in Nepal and Tibet, ancient Egyptians, Aztecs, Peruvians, Chinese and Tartars.

"[102] By the time of the Roman conquest, Jews practiced festive dining in essentially the same form as the Greeks, with a dinner (deipnon) followed by the symposium proper, where guests drank wine and enjoyed entertainment or conversation.

It is in this sense that the term was originally used in connection with the common meal of the early Christian community, at which the 'blessing' or 'thanksgiving' had special reference to Jesus Christ.

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 of the type criticised by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:20–22.