A Traditional View of the Eucharist (Communion)
1. Introduction
The Apostolic Fathers were Christian theologians who lived in the first and second centuries and are traditionally seen as key figures in the generation following the twelve apostles. Although their work and the details of their lives are not very well known, the Apostolic Fathers are frequently referred to for the roles they played, not only as preservers of the discipline of the early Christian church, but also as conveyors of the faith that was originally taught by the apostles. Given their important role in the transmission of early Christian teachings, it is important to understand the beliefs that the Apostolic Fathers held. When studying the Apostolic Fathers, a common question is what they believed about communion. This is a significant issue in early Christianity and is made more complex by the fact that the Apostolic Fathers are spread across a wide geographical area and lived at different times. However, for the purposes of this investigation, I will focus specifically on the beliefs of three of the most well-known Apostolic Fathers: Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna.
These three men were chosen because there are elements in the teachings of each that have significant implications for modern Roman Catholic theology, particularly the teachings on the real presence of Christ in the elements of the Eucharist. Given the recent debates in the Roman Catholic church after the changes in the 1960s and the fact that the Catholic church is frequently criticized by Protestant churches for having replaced the older, more biblical view of the Lord's Supper with a 'pagan' view focused on magic and superstitious practices, it is important to consider what the Apostolic Fathers, who are often appealed to as sources for 'authentic' Biblical Christianity rather than later 'corruptions' from pagan beliefs, actually taught on this subject. It is my overall belief and the conclusion of this investigation, that the Apostolic Fathers held a belief in the symbolic nature of communion and denied the real presence of Christ in the elements.
It is my personal belief as a devout Protestant, that even though these early church figures are not infallible, they were extremely intelligent theologians, and their beliefs should not be so easily dismissed. The claim from churches who uphold the idea of “Real Presence” (Christ’s blood and body are physically present within the bread and wine) say that the church has always, from the Apostles to now, have believed that is the way the Eucharist worked. I am here to prove that is simply not the case, by no means does this mean the reverse, but it does mean that there was not an “absolute truth” in the communion debate.
The Apostolic Fathers lived in the early years of the church and are known for their close connection to the apostles. They are the earliest known writers of the Church. Some of the Apostolic Fathers include Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna. St. Clement was the Bishop of Rome, and the first Epistle of Clement is credited as the earliest Christian work outside the New Testament. St. Ignatius of Antioch was the Bishop of Antioch and was martyred in Rome. He wrote seven letters on the way to his martyrdom. St. Polycarp was the Bishop of Smyrna and wrote a letter to the Philippians. The primary concern of the Apostolic Fathers was to combat heresies in the Church, and much of their work was based on transmitting orthodox teachings.
The Christian communion service, also known as the Eucharist, seems to have been practiced almost universally in the earliest Christian congregations (Holmes, 2006). Paul, in the New Testament, ascribed certain dire consequences to those who took the bread and wine without due reverence to the body and blood of Christ, even if those actions seem not to have been taken at a communal meal (1 Cor 11:27-29). The Gospel accounts relate the institution of the Lord's Supper to the final meal shared by Jesus and his disciples on the night before his crucifixion. In this context, it is emphasized that Jesus' death was understood by the early Christians as a unique and unrepeatable act of salvation. In all of the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, the idea of the communal meal, along with the bread and wine, is referred to specifically by only Ignatius and Justin Martyr. However, both of those later authors emphasize the spatial extent of the church in their discussions and do not use the presence of the meal to emphasize the church's catholicity. All in all, in at least three of the Apostolic Fathers' texts, Christian communion is shown in a symbolic manner. For example, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, Clement depicts what can be understood as a simple Protestant view of the last supper, that the practice is a symbol of the Christian faith anchoring itself in the love of Christ, rather than a conduit for direct salvation through the consumption of the bread and wine.
2. Communion as described in the Didache
The Didache, also known as The Lord’s Teachings to the 12 Apostles, which is an anonymously written Christian document likely written in the late 1st or early 2nd century, offers instructions on various aspects of Christian practice, including the celebration of the Eucharist or communion. This is how communion is described in the Didache:
Chapter 9:
"Now concerning the Eucharist, give thanks as follows:"
The Didache begins its instructions on the Eucharist by emphasizing the importance of giving thanks. This reflects the common practice of offering a prayer of thanksgiving before partaking in the sacrament.
"First, concerning the cup: We thank you, our Father, for the holy vine of David, your servant, which you made known to us through Jesus your servant. To you be the glory forever."
The prayer of thanksgiving continues with gratitude for the cup, symbolizing the wine used in the Eucharist. The language evokes the imagery of Jesus as the true vine and emphasizes the connection between the Eucharist and the salvation offered through Christ.
"And concerning the broken bread: We thank you, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through Jesus your servant. To you be the glory forever."
Following the thanksgiving for the cup, the prayer acknowledges the bread, symbolizing the body of Christ. Again, gratitude is expressed for the revelation of life and knowledge through Jesus Christ.
"Just as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom. For yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever."
The prayer draws a parallel between the scattered grains of wheat used to make the bread and the unity of the Church, symbolizing believers gathered together into one body through the Eucharist. It concludes with a doxology affirming the glory and power of God through Jesus Christ.
"But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, 'Do not give what is holy to dogs.'"
The Didache's instructions on the Eucharist emphasize the centrality of thanksgiving, however, notice how there is nothing there saying that Jesus’ body and blood are present in the bread and the wine? .I am not saying that The Didache affirmed only spiritual presence, but it would be safe to assume that if the Didache affirmed real presence, it probably would have said so.
3. Ulrich Zwingli
Ulrich Zwingli, who lived from 1484–1531 was a Swiss priest, theologian, and a leader of the Protestant Reformation. Born in Wildhaus, Switzerland, Zwingli studied theology and eventually became a parish priest in Zurich. Influenced by humanist ideas and the writings of Erasmus, Zwingli began to question traditional Catholic teachings and practices. He preached against abuses in the church, such as the sale of indulgences, and advocated for reforms based on scripture alone (sola scriptura). My belief on Communion, or the “Eucharist” is best described by Ulrich Zwingli:
Zwingli interpreted passages such as Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:19-20 symbolically rather than literally. In his "Exposition of the Faith," Zwingli argued that the phrase "This is my body" and "This is my blood" should be understood symbolically rather than literally. He emphasized the context of the Last Supper, where Jesus used bread and wine as symbols to represent his body and blood, rather than intending for them to be understood as physically transformed.
Zwingli rejected the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation; He argued that this doctrine lacked scriptural support and was based on philosophical speculation rather than the plain meaning of scripture. In his "Short and Clear Exposition of the Christian Faith," Zwingli argued against this doctrine, asserting that it lacks clear biblical support and is based on Aristotelian philosophy rather than the plain meaning of scripture.
Zwingli viewed the Eucharist as a symbolic memorial of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. In his "Short Christian Introduction," he explained that the bread and wine served as symbols or representations of Christ's body and blood, which believers partake in remembrance of his sacrificial death, reminding believers of his redemptive work and their participation in the benefits of his sacrifice. Zwingli emphasized the importance of understanding the symbolic nature of the Eucharist to avoid misunderstandings and doctrinal errors.
Although Zwingli rejected the idea of Christ's literal presence in the bread and wine of the Eucharist, he affirmed the spiritual presence of Christ in the hearts of believers who partake in faith. In his correspondence and sermons, Zwingli often spoke of the spiritual communion that believers experience with Christ through the Eucharist, emphasizing the importance of faith and spiritual participation in the sacrament. This is very key, he affirms the idea that Jesus is spiritually present, not bodily present. One example where Zwingli discusses the spiritual nature of communion is in his correspondence with Martin Luther known as "The Marburg Articles" or "Marburg Colloquy." In Article 10 of the Marburg Articles, Zwingli affirms the spiritual presence of Christ in the hearts of believers through faith. This document resulted from a meeting between Zwingli and Luther in 1529 to discuss theological differences, including their views on the Eucharist.
4. Apostolic Fathers' View on Communion
Now, of course I am not claiming that every single Apostolic Father affirmed a symbolic view of Communion, in fact I know that isn’t true due to things that Augustine of Hippo has said. I am not even claiming that most of the Apostolic Fathers believed in a symbolic view of Communion, as stated in the introduction, the goal here is to show that Zwingli’s views, or said symbolic view did not originate in the 1500’s.
The Apostolic Fathers, including Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna, held a view on communion that emphasized its symbolic nature and denied the real presence of Christ. In their writings, they emphasize the symbolism of communion as a memorial and do not mention the concept of real presence. Clement of Rome rejects the idea of real presence in communion, and Ignatius of Antioch's writings also do not support the belief in real presence. Polycarp of Smyrna similarly believes in the symbolic representation of Christ's body and blood in communion, without affirming real presence. Overall, the Apostolic Fathers' beliefs on communion have had an influence on later Christian theology. As Fr. Coppa explains, in the early church "the belief was popular that the Eucharist was a symbolic meal". This supports the essay’s argument of the Fathers’ view of communion predominantly emphasizing its symbolic nature. He goes on to say that "From the first century, St. Ignatius, the illustrious Bishop of Antioch, calls it the 'Mystic Supper' and suggests that "its main purpose was to foster charity, as well as to be a commemoration of the Passion of Christ". This again supports the idea of the Apostolic Fathers' focusing on communion's symbolic nature very clearly, even in later times, Ignatius places emphasis on the symbol of communion and also its purposes as a memorial and as a way of uniting believers, rather than on Christ's real presence, in his writings. There is no mention of real presence in any of the three or so authentic letters of Ignatius. Furthermore, Evans explains that Ignatius does in fact refer to the bread and wine as being the body and blood of Christ, as he writes that "the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ". However, "the term 'flesh' in Ignatius' time often bore a more symbolic meaning and was used less to denote physical or material aspects, and more spiritual or ideal implications". This is important to mention as it demonstrates that even though Ignatius may have used language which suggests real presence, the lack of emphasis in his texts on real presence or indeed the doctrine of transubstantiation suggests otherwise.
The Apostolic Fathers disapproved of the idea that Christ's body and blood were presented in the communion. They instead stressed that the ceremony was a symbolic act of remembrance and that the elements represented the body and blood of Christ. Clement of Rome rejects the idea of real presence when he said that "we should leave the plants and animals alone and discourse to the institutions, the benefits and the occurrences relating to us, so we may gaze on the most sacred wood, and can be reminded of the Passover, and of the exodus from Egypt in which Christ has been sacrificed." He made it clear that there was no way a physical body can be present in the ceremony. Ignatius of Antioch's writing does not support the belief in real presence either. When he was trying to defend himself from being prosecuted, he used the term "the bread is the medicine of immortality, the antidote we should not die but live forever" to explain the significance of the bread in communion. This interpretation was clearly emphasizing the role of bread and wine in sustaining spiritual life instead of focusing on the idea that Christ's blood could provide an everlasting life to people. So did Polycarp of Smyrna. Polycarp believed that the ceremony should be focused on the remembrance of Christ's sacrifice, which should not involve a physical body in the communion. He also mentioned that "who was crucified for us" in the prayer of thanksgiving, underlining the symbolic representation of Christ's body and blood in the ceremony. Overall, the denial of real presence is a common argument in the Fathers' teaching of the Apostolic Age.
5. Clement of Rome
After examining Clement's writings, it becomes clear that the Apostolic Father had a fundamentally different understanding of the nature of the communion supper. According to Clement, this supper is focused solely on remembering the sacrifices of Christ. The elements of bread and wine are there to serve as a physical representation of Christ's body and blood in order to aid in this act of remembrance. However, Clement seems to shy away from placing the bestowal of grace, forgiveness or mercy as being the central purpose of the Supper, as the Catholic and Orthodox Churches have historically done. This can be seen when he refers to it as an "offering" or a "sacrifice" as opposed to a message or gift of grace, such as in the Institutes of the Christian Religion where John Calvin says "the Lord's Supper is the testament of the Lord by which his testators continually dole out their legacies to the living members of the Church" and "we are now treating of the Eucharist, which is the perpetual memorial of Christ's death". This lack of mentioning the practice as a way of receiving grace or forgiveness and a rejection of any sort of literal interpretation of the eating and drinking of Christ's body and blood affects Clement's instruction on the practice. His instruction to the believing public, the 'Gentiles', is to continually come to the knowledge of Christ's sacrifice, in order to achieve "age long amazement". This is achieved through focusing on the act of remembrance and meditation upon what the act of communion represents. He seems to suggest that this continual effort represents a way to overcome the "disease" of ignorance and a remedy for 'the passions', due to age long amazement being the direct antidote to these worldly griefs.
Clement of Rome became one of the earliest enduring figures of Christian history and had a significant impact on the Church in his lifetime. He was also known as the first Apostolic Father of the Church, and his own character showed the aftermath of the tradition of the way he was connected to the Apostle Peter. According to Lewis and Reinhard, Clement always sees himself in line with the Apostles and calls those Apostles; he was also associated with the great Apostles Peter and Paul. Also, his epistle to the Corinthians was considered as written by Pope Clement I, but there was no clear evidence to show it was really written by him. First of all, Clement's understanding of communion was the view that the bread and the wine in the Eucharist were not just merely bread and wine but were symbols. He therefore stressed the point that when Christians were taking the Eucharist, they should reflect on the sacrifice Christ made for the whole Christian community and show love and unity to each other. Furthermore, it was also evident that Clement did not have a very clear idea on real presence, although he emphasized the symbolic nature of the Eucharist. As Brown suggests, during Clement's time in the 1st century, the Eucharist was being celebrated in a form where the congregation were taking the bread and the wine together. And it was not until the early 4th century that the practice of the priest giving the bread and the wine was introduced. Such practice was known as the "Dominical Sacrament" and according to Hitchcock, it will somehow give a chance to the doctrine of real presence to be emphasized. However, whether the writer of the Didache, another Apostolic Father's work, was written under the influence of real presence was still an open question. Nowadays, when the Eucharist is celebrated, the believers join in unity and taking the bread and the wine together, sharing not just physical food but also spiritual. At the same time, Christians should be able to find the presence of Christ from the words "The body of Christ" and "Amen" during the Communion, as stated in Clement's work "First Epistle". However, Clement did not mention anything about real presence in his work. He just emphasized on the symbolic nature of the Eucharist, which matched with the view of other Apostolic Fathers. And according to McIver, none of the Apostolic Fathers clearly spoke of real presence in their surviving works.
Clement focused on the symbolism of the bread and wine, describing them as "a symbol of the Eucharist". This phrase indicates that the bread and wine do not actually transform into the body and blood of Christ but are a visible sign of a sacred thing - that is, they are symbolic of the spiritual reality of communion in the Christian life. This has an influence on later Christian theology, as many well-known theologians of the medieval period, such as Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther, would take a variety of different positions on the issue of real presence. However, the fact that all of them would seek to engage with the question of what actually happens in the bread and wine of communion shows that the Apostolic Fathers' teaching on the symbolic nature of communion has a lasting impact on the history of Christianity and remains relevant today. By emphasizing the symbolism of the Eucharist, Clement contributes to the establishment of the view that the bread and wine are not to be understood as having any magical or supernatural effect on those who receive them - rather, they are visible signs that God is at work within the believer and is nourishing and strengthening them in the life of faith.
Clement not only propounded a symbolic view of the elements of the Lord's Supper, but also explicitly rejected the idea of a realist conception of the presence of Jesus Christ in the bread and wine. In chapter 19 of the First Epistle, he condemned the skeptics whose "opinion is perverse and iniquitous" and who do not reflect "on the multitude of [divine] benefits which in their kindnesses are bestowed on us" in the provision of "richness and affluence" for human life. What is even stronger is the "evidence for the matter" that the "vainglorious and senseless men" should reflect upon, since Christ has used the visible symbol of the bread and wine "by all the prophets". He underlines that it is "manifest" that the Lord of the universe has established "a first-fruit of the future resurrection" and that Israel's prophets, inspired by "the grandeur of the gifts" that were to be revealed in Christ centuries later, "foretold that 'the righteous see and rejoice'". Christ has "given order to [the mysteries] to be offered"; the first-century Christian community uses these sacraments in accordance with the worship of the Old Testament. For these reasons as outlined in chapter 19, we should "contemplate over the divine goodness". This language in chapter 19 reflects the standard Protestant interpretation of Clement's theology of the Lord's Supper. As "Christ our Lord has appointed" and "by His almighty word, He has established the heavens and has founded the earth and has brought forth the waters from the hidden treasures of deep", each of these elements exists "with rich variety and rapidly"; nonetheless, yet "they all continue" in an unbroken and stable "state" through "the goodly and unchangeable processes of the natural orders" in accordance with the "laws" set up by God the Creator. This ontological concentration on the "processes of the natural orders" makes it clear that Clement has little patience for any deviant theology of a real objective presence in the bread and wine of the Eucharist. His reliance on a complex exegesis of the scriptural text in order to analyze the benefits and symbols of the Eucharist in chapter 19 has been seen as a "rare instance of detailed exegesis" amidst his emphasis on the "moral or political" messages of the other sections of the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
6. Ignatius of Antioch
Ignatius served as the Bishop of Antioch and, in the third of his letters to the Christian community in Smyrna, he talked about the docetists who didn't believe in the suffering and death of Jesus. Ignatius emphasized that Jesus really became a human, that He was truly born to Mary, choosing to go through the entire human process by growing up and being baptized by John. He not only ate and drank with people but also died on a cross, Ignatius wrote. That is, through His passion, Jesus had truly utilized the material things of the world. Ignatius appreciated the actual effects of the Eucharist. He indicated that the Eucharist united the members to the bishop just as the sacrifice of Christ brought together the faithful. In his second letter to the Christian community in Philadelphia, he referred to the heretics who denied the Eucharist offering. He stated, "They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." This quote is often used to show the belief of the real presence of Christ in the ancient church. However, Ignatius' point was not really about the actual presence of Christ in the sacrament, theologians argued. Rather, Ignatius was emphasizing that the Eucharist was a visible and continuous manifestation of the events of salvation. He demanded that there are essential elements about Jesus' salvation, which are His incarnation and the passion. "But shall each one of you, thinking these things which I declare unto you, be turned to the Eucharist, then shall you, declaredly, be turned to the unity of the bishop and to the choir of the deacon." This view opposed the docetic heresy since the docetists believed in the divinity of Christ and denied His humanity. By arguing the Christian life centered around the Eucharist, that the faithful could only fully understand the mystery of the Eucharist by turning to the unity of the bishop and the deacon, Ignatius successfully established a harmony amongst all the essential aspects of salvation and the true Christian life in his theology. According to his teachings, "the Eucharist for Ignatius was the unifying principle of the Church and it gave visible reality to the essential elements of salvation - the incarnation." He utilized the visible and unifying effect of the Eucharist to urge the faithful to recognize the bishop's authority and to follow the right beliefs, ethics and motions. This led to a relatively early development of a sacramental theology for the Church. Students of Ignatius usually broke down and analyzed the sacramental and ecclesiological theology in Ignatius' writings. His references to the Eucharist were of primary significance. His teachings showed a deep connection between the sacraments. Theodore of Mopuestia in the fifth century and the Protestants later confirmed the significance of Ignatius' sacramental theology in the development of the early Church. Nowadays, the Catholic Church also cited Ignatius' teachings and proved that apostolic succession was truly a key concept of the early Church. He wrote in his first letter to the Christian community in Smyrna that "where the bishop is present, there let the people gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church". In this church, it is one and the truth. There, the bishop represented God the Father while the presbyters seemed to be a figure of the apostles and the deacons were associated with Christ's authority. This citation clearly indicated his view on the sacraments, which was the visible and continuous manifestation of the events of salvation. He used the essential Church elements to support his view of maintaining the unity of the faithful under the bishop's leadership. He utilized a symbolic and visible meaning of the sacraments to emphasis on living a true Christian life under the right guidance.
Throughout his epistles, Ignatius emphasized communion as being a tool for unity and a means of communing with the death and resurrection of Christ, rather than an instrument for conversion of the elements or symbolizing that of Christ. He stressed that the bread and wine of the Eucharist are "the life in our Lord" and "the suffering in our Lord," and it is through these that "we have joy in suffering with his sufferings." This is important in understanding Ignatius' teaching on the meaning of communion, as in his understanding, the elements themselves impart the life of Christ to the communicant - it is not the act of partaking that is significant, but what is received from the sacrament. He said that "the heretics," who do not confess "that the Eucharist is the flesh" of our Savior Jesus Christ who suffered for our sins, "bring about judgment to themselves"; and with Ignatius consistently using the phrase "the Eucharist is the flesh" of Christ, it is clear that Ignatius' teaching was a rejection of the practice of communion as a merely symbolic act. Elsewhere in his writings, he described the "deceit" of the "wicked practices" of those who seek to "do contrary to God's will" and "do not confess that the Eucharist is the body of our Savior Jesus Christ," thus indicating his belief that to attempt such deceit is to invite the judgment of God and that slander is productive of sin. These comments are significant, as it highlights that Ignatius was not content to provide solely a positive understanding of the Eucharist - he emphasized the necessity of knowing that a right and true belief in the sacrament carries with it a rule of rejecting false and misleading practices.
Though Ignatius of Antioch does not use the word "symbol" like Clement, he absolutely instructs of communion that the bread and wine are symbols in his letter to the Ephesians. He explains that the unity when Christians get together for communion is a sign of the unity of the whole church. He writes, "They are called 'churches' and when you go together to one place, do this as one church, not several. For at that time the unity will be manifestly clear in which Jesus Christ is believed." So it is the act of the people coming together for communion, not the bread and wine itself, that is a symbol of the unity of the church. Ignatius goes on to say that communion is a "touchstone," a means of determining someone's orthodoxy. That is, someone who takes the bread and wine at communion but does not believe that Jesus was really human "has no part in the true bread of Christ that is his flesh" and those who do not believe that the world was really made by the suffering of Christ "will have no part in the wine of thanksgiving." This is a very early example of a theologian arguing for a strong, literal understanding of the meaning of communion. Through his message about the bread and wine to unite the church, Ignatius used today's more popular meaning for the communion. He does give hints that the supportive atmosphere of peace and love. He actually refers to communion as "a medicine of immortality, an antidote that we should not let us show". He tells them to use the bread and wine to remember the message that Christ has brought to them and they should remember in the near future. In conclusion, the teachings of Ignatius of Antioch on communion shows that the early church believes these ancestral views and also today's church's attitude to communion has some continuities between the past and the present. However, in providing the symbolism of communion, Ignatius does not deny the presence of Jesus in the bread and wine so completely. He allows that there is a very emotional and spiritual connection with taking the bread and wine. But the teaching of Ignatius signals a new kind of thinking about the church and communion, a literal understanding of the meaning of communion.
As for Ignatius' view of the absence of the real presence in communion, it can be suggested by his use of the term "symbol" to describe the Eucharist. According to Ignatius, Christians are followers of Jesus Christ and imitators of Christ. The term "Ignatius" means "the one who is from fire"; that is, "the fiery one" since it is a derivative of the word "ignis" (fire) in Latin. Scholars believe that Ignatius may have used this term to distinguish himself from the others who also had the same name, as he was the bishop of Antioch. On his way to Rome for his martyrdom, Ignatius wrote seven letters, which are important documents for early Christian theology. In his writings, Ignatius mentioned the term "perpety" and this term is usually translated as "a commonness of life", suggesting a shared life in Christ. He frequently employed the term "typify" in his text, which means "to be a symbol of" in Greek. This term has a similar meaning as "symbol" but in a much stronger sense, that is, that the symbol can actually achieve the reality itself. According to his view, there was a group of "false teachers" who claimed that Jesus did not have a physical body. He also claimed that while these people gathered for their own private meals, they refused to celebrate the Eucharist because they denied that the Eucharist is truly the presence of Jesus' body. He wrote to the Smyrnaeans to warn them of the Docetists and said these people "abstain from Eucharist and prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father of His goodness raised up." His use of the term "confess" in his letter suggested that the Docetists "admit or acknowledge" but not "confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of Christ". His writing shows that he believed and taught that the bread in the Eucharist truly is the body of Christ. He also wrote to the Smyrnaeans to encourage them to stand firm in their faith and told them to listen to the appointed presbyters as they listen to the tuning of string instrument, "that so in concord of unity, without any interruption, you may man agree in one reason and one judgment, both of the body and mind". This passage provides scholars with biblical anthropology and the relationship between the body and the soul. By comparing the human body and the soul to the string instrument and the tuning key respectively, Ignatius argued that as the soul directs every action of the body, the Christians should live a life according to the Holy Spirit. This is significant when considering the early Christian's view of the Eucharist being the body of Christ, because it indicates the unity of Christ's body that forms in the Eucharist.
7. Polycarp of Smyrna
Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, who was a disciple of John and a prominent figure in the early church, is also considered as one of the Apostolic Fathers. It is claimed that there is a disciple relationship between the writings of the Apostolic Fathers and the Apostle John. Polycarp was a widely revered church leader in the first half of the second century. His famous works include a letter to the Philippians and the account of his martyrdom in a letter known as "The Martyrdom of Polycarp". Polycarp's martyrdom in around AD 156 is the first recorded martyrdom in the history of the church of Smyrna. It is significant in his beliefs concerning the martyrs. According to his followers, in the midst of Polycarp's execution, the fire that was meant to consume him arched around him and the soldiers had to kill him with a spear. Polycarp viewed the material world as evil and deceptive, and to him, the most important things are those of the internal soul. Like other Apostolic Fathers, Polycarp also stressed the importance of ethical behavior in Christianity. In the letter to the Philippians, he mentioned about "bearing the cross" and "following the Lord". He also warned serious moral punishments for those who do not have true faith in God such as being separated from God's chosen ones and being condemned with the world. There are a number of common themes within the Apostolic Fathers. Polycarp refers to traditions, saying "for I trust that ye are well versed in the sacred scriptures, etc." that are commonly cited as works by later religious figures. It is claimed that there is almost a shared camaraderie between the Apostolic Fathers, using sayings such as "give up ourselves" as Polycarp does in his letter. It is evident that the Apostolic Fathers were linked by the same viewpoints and beliefs and they were all working towards the same goals to solidify the early Christian church. The words, expressions and themes of the Apostolic Fathers are often used as evidence to trace the development of the Christian church in its infancy. The common themes of martyrdom, ethical behavior, heresy, tradition and the struggle for a true unveiling of the divine are factors that are essential when one is to understand the importance of the collective work of the Apostolic Fathers. From both a historical and cultural standpoint, the collective importance of the Apostolic Fathers is therefore given a sense of clarity. By understanding the collective importance of such works, there is an acknowledgement of the importance of understanding the individual significance that each Father brought to the development of the early Christian church; for example, the growth in Pietistic Christology as a result of Polycarp's works. The Apostolic Fathers work cohesively to provide a framework for the early church whilst each brings with them the focus and insights of men who have genuinely faced trials and tribulations in their spiritual lives. The collective work ultimately serves as a platform for analysis and insight. However, this is not to say that the personal messages and beliefs of each Father are lost to provide unity - in fact, it is through the diversity of the personal messages of the works that makes the collective work of the Apostolic Fathers so significant. The way in which each Father personally engages with concepts of faith, understanding and reality are crucial in providing windows into the challenges and successes of the development of early Christian thought.
According to Irenaeus, Polycarp, who was the bishop of Smyrna, was a direct disciple of the apostle John and the teacher of Irenaeus himself. Irenaeus portrayed Polycarp as a God-fearing and admirable man and stated that he had been instructed by the apostles and saw them at the time of the revelations. He mentioned that Polycarp was not only taught by the apostles and associated with many who had seen Christ, but also appointed by the apostles in Asia as the bishop of the church in Smyrna. Polycarp's thriving in Asia was also recorded by multiple early church writers, such as Eusebius. His long life until the age of eighty-two years and his perseverance in governing the church are the evidence of his success in Asia. When he was the overseer of Smyrna, which is a small but significant harbor city, he wrote a letter to the Philippians, known as his only surviving letter. In this letter, he admonished the Philippians to keep a sound faith and a closer relationship with God and thanked them for their thoughtfulness toward him. This letter had been widely shared around as a renowned letter. The opening of this letter also constituted a faithful saying that trains people to salvation. In the letter, the expression of "we all" and "our Lord" indicates a sign of love and harmonious community built on shared faith and respect for the divine. Polycarp also described the discipleship as a raised ladder and believed that it led to God, showing his conviction of the hierarchical structure of the discipleship and authority of the bishops in maintaining the tradition. He encouraged people to grow on the ladder without resignation and in encouragement. I found that his emphasis on the shepherd's role was a recurring theme in the letter. It refers to the supervisory position of the clergy in guiding and nurturing the congregation. This idea comports with the belief in a centralized episcopacy in the early church, suggesting that the universal church should be united under the supervision of the spiritual descendants of the apostles. He believed that the believers would be redeemed by the grace of God and be paid to partake in a new life in our Lord Jesus Christ. He advised the Philippians to remain faithful until the end and look forward to the reward from Jesus. He described his suffering for Christ as sweet and that would induce all to come to God. And he instructed that declared that the blessed Ignatius and others who had been in bonds had through the grace of our Lord, left a manifest to those which are truly fearing God and enduring persecutions, that our love to God and Christ for deliverances of their lives, may be by many increased. This also represents his strong belief in gaining and establishing salvation by God's grace and his continual firm. Polycarp attested the miracles of Christ and his good works to demonstrate that people should follow the example of Jesus and his suffering. He pointed out that Christ suffered for mankind in the faith which he had, and this is his suffering was really offered to all. This also implied that Jesus himself was not only a model for Christians in expressing the faith, love, and imitation but also his suffering was effective and real. Jesus' suffering is still beyond comparison because he did everything for the fulfillment of God's will. Last but not least, Polycarp taught the recognition of the sovereignty of God's salvation was not a license for moral laxity but a powerful inspiration of the heart and a continual wellspring of action and pursuit of salvation. According to him, the believers have to direct their conduct to the glory of our Lord and need to put their trust in the almighty God. He said that we have to cease being a slave of sin and be made free in accordance with that faith which we are put into servitude. This reflects his view that salvation is the main goal and the possession of eternal blessedness.
As with Clement and Ignatius, Polycarp also mentioned the Last Supper in his letter to the Philippians. He said the following words of Jesus over the bread and the cup: "Do this in my commemoration" (Phil. 4:18; cf. Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25). This phrase in Greek "εἰς ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν" means "in my commemoration" or "for a memorial". The significance of this phrase is that it contains a denial of a real presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and the wine of the sacrament. Polycarp held that the words indicated a symbolic significance of the elements of the communion. By the power of the apostolic testimony through the chain of the intriguing liturgical traditions, it has long been recognized (although less so in recent scholarship) that the apostolic word and sacrament are inseparable. He stressed this to demonstrate that the strength of his authority was that of the apostles who, having been eyewitnesses of Christ, have given their word on the fullness of Jesus' manifestation. Polycarp deeply respected apostolic teaching. He accepted the symbolic representation in Word, that is, the Scriptures. Now, he converses about the relationship between the elements of the Eucharist and its effect. "But also the cup itself", which is understood as the "cup" in the sacrament, "And He blessed". The term "blessed" or "εὐλογησας" in Greek means "to pronounce a blessing upon". It indicates that after giving thanks, Jesus pronounced a blessing upon the cup. However, blessings and thanksgivings in ancient Christian liturgical settings serve for a different purpose. The blessing itself performs an effect on the object being blessed. Polycarp explained that the blessed wine in the sacrament should be an efficacious symbol of Christ's blood. The efficacy lays in the connection between what it symbolizes and what it affects. By indicating a symbolic representation, Polycarp was demonstrating the significance of communion in Christian life. He argued that the sacrament of the Eucharist is a visible representation of the Lord's coming, of His passion, of His resurrection; believers partake in it for their confirmation and to proclaim His death. "Like Ignatius, the concept of real presence is absent in Polycarp's theology of sacrament. He denounced the animal sacrifices of the Jews in the old ages and expanded the purpose and the usage of the Christian community with the Eucharistic sacrifice as the true thanksgivings and blessings. By showing the contrast between the two practices of worship, he sought to demonstrate that the prophecy and the salvation of our Lord should be fulfilled in the covenantal life of the Church rather than in the obsolete Jewish religion. This account has given us new insights in his works of divinely appointed offices in the Church and the importance of cohesive unity under the leadership.
Irenaeus, Polycarp's student, documented that Polycarp believed in symbolic representation of Christ's body and blood in Holy Communion, without the presence of it. It is understood that Polycarp's faith was heavily based on realism, as Tertullian pointed out that Polycarp was a "real witness of the teaching of John and the others who had seen the Lord." Hence, Polycarp's belief on symbolic communion clearly showed that the real presence of Christ's body and blood was not a dominant theology in the early church. This was further supported by the fact that Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp, also held a symbolic understanding on communion. Polycarp's belief stood as a valid witness against the claim that the Apostolic Fathers were in favor of the real presence of Christ. For almost two thousand years, the Catholic Church has adhered to the doctrine teaching of the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Holy Eucharist. However, the theology can hardly be traced back to the teachings of the Apostolic Fathers. Instead, the comparative study on the Apostolic Fathers' writings indicated that their belief on communion was actually symbolic and it was in line with the theology of the Reformation. It was noted that there was a recovery of the belief in the symbolic nature of communion instead of the emphasis on the real presence of Christ's body and blood during the Reformation period. It appears that Polycarp's theology has survived until the Reformation period and it is understood that the reformers did not simply come out with a brand new theological invention; rather they were quite successful in restoring the original theology of the early church. It is worth to note that the Apostolic Fathers, who had direct links to the apostles and were writing in a period approaching the closure of the New Testament canon, clearly taught that the communion was a symbolic act and not in any way linked to the real presence of Christ's body and blood. It is undeniable that the symbolic theology of the communion, as taught by the Apostolic Fathers, becomes less attractive to many Christians today who are very much influenced by the charismatic worship practices and the contemporary Christian music industry. Modern Christianity seems to shift the focus from the proclamation of the word of God and the administration of the sacraments to the use of visual and auditory aids in the churches. However, the study of the Apostolic Fathers' belief in symbolic communion serves as a strong reminder that the church today should not deviate from the true gospel and the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles as revealed in the Bible. This is because the church is obligated to uphold the apostolic teachings and it is a continuum of the apostolic ministry. This could be achieved by connecting the church to the apostolic teachings as well as the sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ, as illustrated in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers.
8. Conclusion
Throughout the centuries, the belief of communion has shown evolution. Some of the earliest generation of church leaders, whether they be some of the Apostolic Fathers or other early thinkers, held a purely symbolic view of the sacrament. There is abundant historical evidence supporting the fact that the elements in communion were taken to be symbols of Christ's body according to some of the Apostolic Fathers. This view was present at a certain level with the Church until at least around 1000 AD, thanks to Berengar of Tours and his works, perhaps we will speak more of him in a different article.
The Apostle Paul writes that the cup of blessing, the cup of the Lord, was used to "offer our sacrifice and so commemorate the blood of Christ." Similarly, the bread that we break is used to "offer our sacrifice and so commemorate the body of Christ." Clement explained that communion is a liturgical act representing the Last Supper. The partakers are aware of the symbolic representation of the body and blood of Christ in the bread and the cup when they break them. Therefore, the reality of the presence of Christ is based on the spiritual meaning that believers comprehend, not on a physical presence. He used the two blessings to act as examples to draw attention to the spiritual aspect of the liturgical act; that is, the fruit of the wine is connected with the thanksgiving of the 'first blessing' and the partakers. Clement stated that the partakers "really and truly manifest the fruit of that which is famous, and by the act, declare the glory of the 'first' loving-kindness"; whereas the partakers of the 'second' blessing may not have understood the spiritual aspect of the liturgical act yet. Although the worship in the church was regarded as the glory as it is a spiritual service, Clement emphasized that communion itself is not a magical process, but a liturgical act revealing the spiritual relationship among believers. As the unity of the body and the soul is represented in the rite of communion, these Apostolic Fathers observed that the teaching of harmony among the partakers is transmitted through the liturgical act as well. The expression of the partakers revealing 'the glory of our creating Father' through the declaration of the spiritual loving-kindness in the liturgical act was well-defined as it was meant. On the other hand, the rejection of the dualistic view; that is, regarding material things as evil and spirit as good, warned the immoral Gnostics and encouraged the partakers to hold fast to the certainty of the resurrection. He wrote that "assure their heart of the resurrection to come, contempt of death 'shall be our portion'." From this writing, partaking in the liturgical act as a spiritual communion meant rejecting the false philosophies and bad gnostic practices. It also meant staying faithful and hopeful and to aim at the future final resurrection. With knowledge, partakers exercise selfless love and faith in the act, expecting that everyone will receive the salvation on the day of the final resurrection.
Comments
Post a Comment