We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2009
The earliest New Testament account of the institution of the Eucharist is found in 1 Cor 11. 23–30. The first important point to consider is whether Paul is claiming to know about Jesus' eucharistic words through a personal revelation, or through a tradition handed down to him from the leaders of the Jerusalem Church. I shall argue that the view of earlier scholarship (e.g. Loisy and Lietzmann) that Paul is speaking here of a personal vision has been too easily dismissed.
1 An adapted version of this article will be published in Maccoby, Hyam, Paul and Hellenism (SCM Press: London, 1991).Google Scholar
2 Loisy, A., The Birth of the Christian Religion (Eng. tr.; George Allen & Unwin: London, 1948) 230–5.Google Scholar
3 Lietzmann, H., Messe und Herrenmahl (3rd ed.; De Gruyter: Berlin, 1955) 255.Google Scholar
4 For bibliography, see Higgins, A. J. B., The Lord's Supper in the New Testament (SCM Press: London, 1952) 25–6.Google Scholar
5 Jeremias, Joachim, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus (Eng. tr.; SCM Press: London, 1966) 101.Google Scholar
6 Schweitzer, Albert, The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle (Eng. tr.; A. & C. Black: London, 1931) 266.Google Scholar
7 See Maccoby, Hyam, The Mythmaker (Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, 1986), arguing the importance of Paul's Tarsus background and the dubiousness of his claim to a Pharisee upbringing.Google Scholar
8 See Loisy, A., The Birth of the Christian Religion (Eng. tr; London, 1948) 231–3.Google Scholar Chapter xiv of the Didache, which refers to ‘breaking of bread’ on the ‘Lord's day’ as a ‘sacrifice’, is clearly of later date, as has been pointed out by many scholars.
9 A consideration that makes eucharistic practice (in the Pauline sense) by the Jerusalem Church most unlikely is its devotion to the Jewish Temple (Luke 24. 53; Acts 2. 46, 3. 1, 21. 23–24; Eusebius H.E., ii,23). The performance of any sacral act outside the Temple would have been a repudiation of Judaism and the Temple worship – and also of its priesthood, which the Jerusalem Church continued to recognise. Opposition to the Pauline Eucharist by the Jerusalem Church is probably reflected in John 6. 59–67.
10 Eucharistic Words, 133–4.
11 Eucharistic Words, 158.
12 Eucharistic Words, 125.
13 Eucharistic Words, 134.
14 Eucharistic Words, 125, 29.
15 Eucharistic Words, 132–6.
16 See Vööbus, A., ‘A New Approach to the Problem of the Shorter and the Longer Text in Luke’, NTS 15 (1968/1969) 457 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Richardson, R. D., ‘Supplementary Essay. A Further Enquiry into Eucharistic Origins …’ in Lietzmann, , Mass and Lord's Supper (Brill: Leiden, 1979) 217–27.Google Scholar
17 Even if we regard the Last Supper as a Passover meal (in which case there was an obligation to have four cups of wine, of which the grace-cup functioned as one), this obligation is of a much lesser order than the obligation of Qiddush over wine.
18 The declaration of the initiate in the mysteries of Attis was, ‘I have eaten out of the tympanum, I have drunk from the cymbal; I am an initiate of Attis’ (Maternus, Firmicus, De Errore Profanae Religionis, ed. Ziegler, K. [Leipzig, 1907] 57Google Scholar, Clement of Alexandria, , Protreptikos 2. 21 (89)Google Scholar. In Mithraism, the sacramental meal consisted of bread followed by liquid (Justin Martyr, Apol. i.66, Dial. c. Tryph. 70, Tertullian, De Praescr. Haer. 40). It is unlikely that the Mithraic communion was copied from the Christian Eucharist, since Pliny the Elder, writing about AD 65, refers to a Mithraic sacramental meal (Hist. Nat. xxx.2 (6)). In the Samothracian mysteries, the priest broke sacred bread and poured out drink for the mystae (inscription, Arch, epigr. Mitth. p. 8, no. 14,1882).
19 See Maccoby, Hyam, Revolution in Judaea (Taplinger: New York, 1980) 139–49Google Scholar, and Maccoby, , Mythmaker, 37.Google Scholar
20 ούκέτι is found in Mark 14. 25. A few MSS omit ούκέτι, some substitute προσθῶ and some have ούκέτι ού προσθῶ Matthew 26. 29 has ού μή πίω άπ ἄρτι, which is a little ambiguous, since it could be said either before or after drinking the wine. The same applies to Luke's άπό τονũ ννũν (Lk 22. 18), but in 22. 16, ούκέτι is read by Epiphanius and many other sources, and seems to be the earliest reading. The tendency to substitute other phrases no doubt arises from the awkwardness felt in an expression that ran counter to the ‘avowal of abstinence’ scenario, which arose very early after Jesus' death, as can be seen from the practice of the Quartodecimani, who fasted on the first evening of Passover in purported imitation of Jesus (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.23.1–25): see Jeremias, , Eucharistic Words, 122–4.Google Scholar
21 Some play may be made with the fact that the Gospels do not actually portray Jesus as eating or drinking at the Last Supper, but rather as giving bread and wine to his disciples, after pronouncing a blessing. But this is the regular formula for the commencement of a meal: the presiding person is said to ‘break bread’ and offer it to the others, and it is taken for granted that he partakes of the bread first himself, for otherwise his blessing over the bread would be a ‘vain blessing’ (
). Moreover, it was customary for those present to refrain from eating the distributed bread until they had seen the presiding person taste his own portion of bread (b.Berakhot, 47a).
22 For a fuller discussion of the linguistic aspects, see my forthcoming book, Paul and Hellenism.
23 Jeremias (p. 167) argues that the phrase is ‘inoffensive’, quoting as parallels 2 Cor 7.12 and 9. 3. But while it is natural to speak of having concern or pride for someone's sake, I cannot see that it is anything but difficult to speak of having a body for someone's sake.
