I had a fascinating discussion on the Eucharist with Father Ben via email,
and I just figured it wouldn't hurt to just cut and paste them here.
ME:
Father Ben,
After I read your signs document it reminded me of some things I came
across when I was studying sacramental theology concerning why the
Eucharist is repeatedly celebrated, and why the elements are important.
I hope you enjoy some of this. :)
One thing that fascinated me was the idea that Christ is the high priest,
in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5:6). For a long time I wondered:
Why does Hebrews always mention so often that Jesus is a high priest in the
order of Melchizedek? Eight times it showed up in the book, but then I
noticed Melchizedek was mentioned in Psalm 110...which is a Psalm of David.
And so God tells David that David would be a priest forever (Psalm 110:4).
From a messianic perspective, it looks like a direct prophesy about Jesus.
It's generally accepted that David typologically points to Christ, but
there was this once time where he wore Jewish vestments (fine linen & an
ephod) when the ark of the covenant was returned ot Jerusalem (1 Chronicles
15:27-28). To my knowledge, this was something levitical priests
exclusively wore (Exodus 28:4)! So David's actions appear to depict a king
doing priestly activity. In fact I suppose 1 Chronicles 15 can be looked
at as a liturgical event, depicting the glory of the LORD entering
Jerusalem! In fact I'm beginning to see some typological implications!
Anyway, since David is a king and appears to act like a high priest, David
is perhaps emulating liturgical activity of priest-king, Melchizedek (Heb
7:1). I suppose this makes sense out of what David must've though when he
was called a priest in the order of Melchizedek? (i.e. Psalm 110:4)
As mentioned earlier, Jesus is also called this so many times in Hebrews.
Then in Hebrews 8:3 mentions how Christ 'has to offer something' since
every high priest offers something. So I wondered what Jesus offered, and
the answer I found was in Genesis 14:18:
"Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out *bread* and *wine*. He was
priest of God Most High" (Gen 14:18)
So things began to make sense: Since Christ is forever a high priest in
the order of Melchizedek, he does what Melchizedek did: offer bread and
wine, but in Christ's case, it's forever! (Hebrews 7:3) This would suggest
that soda and crackers don't suffice, meaning the elements are important,
and that Christ's bread and wine ministry is repeated over and over unlike
protestants who perform the Eucharist about 4 times a year. The difference
I see is that protestant communions seem like funeral rites, while for
liturgical Christians, they're understood like wedding feasts! The
differences are quite extreme! And I love how both Catholics and Orthodox
teach that the Eucharist is in fact the marriage supper of the lamb (Rev
19:9)! Revelation makes so much sense from a liturgical viewpoint. It's
absolutely beautiful =)
BEN:
Good thoughts! Thanks!
All kings of Jerusalem, since Melchizedek, are priests of God Most High by
virtue of being king of Jerusalem. There is one theory (which I like) that
Melchizedek was actually Noah's son, Shem. If you trace the relevant
chronologies, you see that Shem was still alive during the lifetime of
Abraham which would also explain quite a bit, including the passing on of
the pre-flood stories of Genesis from Shem to Abraham and then down to Moses
who wrote them all down. It would also explain why Abraham honored him and
gave him the tithe. And, as the writer of Hebrews points out, this
priesthood predates the Aaronic priesthood.
Solomon also functioned as priest in dedicating the Temple. Another king of
Jerusalem, however, tried to function as priest and was condemned for it,
so, even though they were all technically priests, they didn't all function
that way.
In order for Christ to offer himself as the sacrifice for our sin, he needed
to function as a priest. It seems that details of law and legitimacy matter
to God because Jesus, as a member of the tribe of Judah, even though a
descendent of David, was not a priest until he became king of Jerusalem
which happened on Palm Sunday when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey colt
and was proclaimed king by the people--again, meeting the Old Testament
requirements. So, then He could act as the High Priest and offer himself
for our sins.
By the way, if you read Leviticus, etc. you will see that the whole burnt
offering for sin (Christ's death on the Cross as that) was also accompanied
by the communion sacrifice and thank offering of bread and wine. Jesus did
it all in offering Himself once for all as a sin offering that is never to
be repeated, never needs to be, and in giving us the thank offering in His
Body and Blood which we are to do repeatedly as our thanksgiving to him and
as the sign of His new covenant with us. (This is the sacrifice of the Mass,
not the sacrifice for sin as Protestants often think which is why it IS to
be repeated.) The widely understood concept that the memorial is either to
honor what Christ did or to remind us is erroneous. Scripture teaches very
clearly that this is to remind God! Our doing it is to take to ourselves
the salvation which Jesus purchased for us by offering Himself for our sins
and we demonstrate to the Father that we are under that Blood as the
Israelites were under the blood of the Paschal lamb so long ago in Egypt
(which is commemorated by Jews today--Passover) which is why the Elevation
is important. (Again, a Protestant error in thinking that the Elevation is
about worshipping the Host--it's not (some Catholics also make this
mistake), it's showing God the Father that we are under the Blood, quite
literally.) Jesus truly did it all, fulfilling the Law and wrapping it all
up very neatly! Praise be to God for His great love and to the Son for
buying our salvation with His blood and the Holy Spirit through whom we can
enter into and receive it! Amen!
ME:
Thanks for the response!! It was very fascinating, especially about
Melchizedek possibly being Shem. I also heard a similar claim but wasn't
sure of the basis for it :)
Also, does scripture actually say that Jesus had to enter Jerusalem and be
proclaimed as king by the people to be crowned king? In other words, was
proclamation necessary for Christ to be king?
And does scripture mention how the thank offering would continue even
through the New covenant?
The communion service appears to have bread and oil, but I see no reference
to wine. I'm referring to Lev 7:12-13. Or are you referring to a different
passage? Anyway, I particularly love how it says 'thanksgiving' since Jesus
seems to point to this ritual when he institutes the eucharist.
BEN:
Here are some answers to your questions.
There is no "law" per se described in the Bible about how to make a person a
king; however, there are definitely patterns that we see and actions which
clearly indicate at least two requirements. All through the Bible, both OT
and NT, we see that anointing with oil is a basic preliminary step. Also
the word "messiah" or in Greek, "christ", means "anointed." The other
requirement is a proclamation by the people--an acceptance of the king's
authority. Following this, there might be a crowning, which would be the
third step.
The first king of Israel was Saul who was anointed by Samuel then later
became king when the people proclaimed him to be so (1 Sam. 9-10). Later
on, Samuel anointed David to be king in place of Saul but he did not
actually become king until much later when he was proclaimed king, first of
Judah then, seven years later, of all Israel (1 Sam 16, 2 Sam 2 & 5). At
this point, David was not king of Jerusalem, just Israel. He then captures
Jerusalem from the Jebusites and makes it his capitol situated between
Israel and Judah and his own city, "the City of David" not part of any
tribal distribution so that no tribe could lay claim to a superior place
among the twelve tribes of Israel.
The bit about riding into Jerusalem comes into play with Solomon's
succession of David in 1 Kings 1. Here we see that Adonijah tried to set
himself up as king but didn't succeed to get the people's acclamation (vs.
39). After that, the Bible generally just says that one king followed
another unless there was some special change or usurpation involved such as
Jehu's rebellion in 2 Kings 9 & 10 or Joash's coronation in 2 Kings 11
where, again, the people's proclamation is critical. This carries over into
the Gospel account of Jesus entering Jerusalem and finally upon his return
at the end of the age--anointing, proclamation, rule. By the way, Jesus'
anointing was done by Mary in John 12 where Jesus connects it with His
burial but we also see it being for His kingship.
Concerning the thank offering continuing. The Scriptures don't really say
such in so many words but what they do state clearly is that the offering
for sin is completed in Jesus crucifixion and is not to be repeated. An
offering for sin is no longer needed but we are commanded to continue
offering thanks. Indeed, the word Eucharist means "Thanks". There were
four things that Jesus always did and passed on to us in the
Eucharist--check it out in the Gospels. He TOOK bread, GAVE THANKS, BROKE,
DISTRIBUTED.
Yes, oil is offered with grain--usually mixed together which is what you do
when you make bread. We include olive oil in making our communion bread.
The oil has many wonderful meanings in Scripture. Where you see the wine
and grain (bread) being offered together is usually in conjunction with a
sin offering. It is sometimes referred to as a communion sacrifice. At
other times, we see it being shared without a sin offering as when Abraham
brought out bread and wine before Melchizadek. Wine and bread together were
also associated with the Passover from the beginning. See Exodus 29:38 and
following, Lev. 23:10ff, Num 15 and 28.