In one evangelical church I pastored in the early 80’s one of the men serving communion repeated the phrase “The Body and Blood of Christ” as he administered the elements to each believer—this, in an evangelical church—despite the clear difference in teaching! [Maybe I wasn’t alone in wanting more than symbolism.]
Docetism
In the beginning of Christianity, the Apostle John contended with Docetism, the doctrine that Christ’s body was not human but either a phantasm or of celestial substance, and that therefore his sufferings were not real but only appeared to be so. It was Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–110 AD, a disciple of the Apostle John—no less—who came against docetism, writing, “They abstain from the Eucharist … because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again.” [Letter to the Smyrnaeans 7:1 ]. Ignatius was simply affirming Jesus’ humanity against the Docetists.
My mind went to John’s first epistle where He confronted this heresy! 1 John 1:1: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of life.” I always wondered why John spoke of “handling” the Savior. It was to affirm from his own experience that Jesus was in every way as human as we are [yet, of course, without sin.]
1 John 4:2 needs no further explanation:
“Hereby you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:”
Jesus was no imaginary being! Docetism was a doctrine that had to be condemned as heretical!
The History
St. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD) taught that “the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ” after 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17. Augustine often used symbolic language (e.g., calling the Eucharist a “figure” or “sign”) to avoid crude literalism. He interpreted John 6:53 (“eat my flesh”) as a figure urging participation in Christ’s passion and remembrance of His sacrifice.
Augustine’s writings influenced Hildebert, Arch Bishop of Tours, in the late 11th century. Hildebert was the first theologian to use the specific Latin term, “transubstantiation” in reference to the Eucharist. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century would further explain the Eucharist using Aristotle’s words “Substance and Appearance.” The bread was in “substance” the body of Christ but in “appearance” it was bread. The doctrine of “transubstantiation” was officially introduced at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, under Pope Innocent III.
Paul, however, did not call “the bread” the body of Christ but the “communion” of the body of Christ. It would be more to the apostle’s teaching to call the Communion service—what it really was—communion over our Lord’s death and not something symbolic. The Eucharist is fellowship around Jesus’ death. If this is only symbolic to evangelicals, they are not grasping the significance of a fellowship of thankful hearts united over what our Lord accomplished on the Cross for us. A Communion hastily offered at the end of a church service as time runs out is no communion at all.
The Celebration
To the Apostles the Communion Service celebrated our Lord’s humanity—He was the God-man on that Cross. The writer to the Hebrews tells us that because He was human He qualified as our High-Priest [Hebrews 2:14, 16-18]. There is much to be thankful for.
Communion should never be rushed but always be a time to meditate on our Lord in praise and thankfulness to Him for Calvary, and a prayer asking our Lord to further open our hearts and understanding to its great provision.
