REFLECTION 5: THE THEOLOGY OF THE
WORDS OF INSITITUTION in Jesus of Nazareth, by Benedict XVI.
Name: Nkyanungi Oswald Reg
No: 11045T
Holy father Benedict xvi seeks to
express the meanings of the words and actions of our lord Jesus at the last
supper. Two actions he states are recounted from all the four versions of the institution
narratives. i.e. Mark/ Mathew on one hand and Paul/Luke on the other. “We are
told that Jesus took the bread, saying over it a prayer of blessing and thanksgiving,
and that then he broke and distributed the bread.”[1]
This indeed presents the Eucharist as a meal of remembrance and thanksgiving
for God’s goodness to all of us his people in the world. It is difficult for
one to eat without giving thanks first to the one source of food.
The second action was that Jesus
“broke the bread” was a sign of hospitality. The breaking and distributing
benedict XVI emphasizes that Jesus Christ creates a community. It is indeed the
action in which God the father himself gives and communicates himself through his
only son to all human kind as a sign of his great love. Indeed it is this self-gift
that the mystery of the Eucharist symbolizes. “The breaking of bread and
distributing it is an act of attending lovingly to those in need which is an
intrinsic dimension of the Eucharist.”[2]
The words spoken over the bread and
wine “This is my body” for Jesus meant the whole of him, not only the flesh at
the expense of the spirit. As benedict emphasizes indeed these words match very
well with our lord’s confession “No one takes my life
from me, but I lay it down of my own accord” (Jn 10:18). It is through this
that he becomes a lamb slaughtered for the forgiveness of sins of all
humankind.
The hope of the “new covenant” is the
one that arises in contrast to the old covenant that was built on the weak human
will but now written permanently on men’s hearts. In addition, Jesus blood was
shed “for many” and “for all”. It’s very interesting to agree as the Holy
Father writes that the word “for” is indeed characteristic of Jesus’ life not
only at the last supper. It was a life that was lived for the sake of others
not for his sake. Finally though Jesus’ death was meant “for all”, the range of
the sacrament is more limited to the many who participate in it .e those who
respond to it in faith in contrast to all.
REFLECTION 4: THE REAL PRESENCE AND
TRANSSIGNIFICATION by Joseph. M. Powers
The ideas of Schillebeeckx as
presented by powers on the real presence indeed require attention. For
Schillebeeckx, there is need to undertake a contemporary analysis in order to
understand the Eucharist presence of Christ. He emphasizes that “Dogma must be
re interpreted both in order to be able to preserve the soundness of the dogma
itself and in order to give men of this age a new possibility of experiencing
the truth of church’s behalf”[1]
To Schillebeeckx, some factors have
contributed to the present attempts of re-evaluating traditional explanations
of the Eucharistic dogma. The first being conflict between the Aristotelian
philosophy of nature and contemporary physics. Secondly was the rediscovering
of the principle of the sacrament being in the sign-value and function of the
sacraments that clarified the state of the question of the real presence.
Thirdly was the attempt to interpret what Trent meant by the “substance of
bread”, from the point of view of the new world view. Fourthly was the
re-statement of the “real presence of Christ” in the Sacramentum Concillium of
Vatican II. And finally the ecumenical endeavors with its vision of the
genuineness of the ecclesial character of protestant churches.
Schillebeeckx based on the New
Testament background of the eschatological communion with Christ who is now at
work in his body the church. Indeed reality is not of man’s own making rather
the Eucharist is aimed at presenting the proclamation of the death of the lord
in a meal constituted basing on the mystery of our faith i.e. as an anamnesis
(memorial) of the Christ event to us his people present in the world of today.
The different levels of perception he
highlights indeed exist in our world of reality today. It is indeed difficult
to mix up realities that exist on these two different levels i.e. physical
reality and metaphysical or spiritual reality. It is difficult to perceive the
same reality at both levels in the same way. That is why the Eucharist remains
a mystery to many because “Tran signification” reveals a change in the
signifying function of the appearances. Bread and wine change as a spiritual
reality which does not necessarily mean that the physical level can be able to realize
this change by our own human perception.
REFLECTION 3: THE EUCHARIST, A MYSTERY TO BE OFFFERED TO THE
WORLD.
Name: Nkyanungi Oswald Reg No: 11045T
The Eucharist as bread broken for the
life of the world reveals the meaning of Jesus, gift to all people. It also
reveals Jesus’ deep compassion and love for every man and woman. Since each
Eucharistic celebration reenacts the Jesus event to all of us to draw from it
the example the master himself gave to us in his life. The example of his solidarity
with sinners, the most disadvantaged among others, all these we as his
disciples need to incorporate in our daily lives if we are to make the
Eucharist our “let vivendi” into our practical lives.
The Eucharist as bread that is broken
is also a reminder to us to break ourselves for the services of others in order
for us to build the kingdom of God in our midst. It calls us more to the love
of neighbor that we draw from the love of God. This love of neighbor entails
our call to go even further in loving those who are our enemies
This will lead the Eucharist to be a
source of social commitment since it made from of old the Jews and gentiles to
be one by tearing the walls of hostility between them. It can still tear this
wall in today’s factions that prevail in society. For example, those between
different political parties, different tribes and ethnicities, different
religions, gender differences, among others. All these can be broken down by
the Eucharist if we allow it to transform us in our lives and hence social
change for better.
The Eucharist is food of truth and
human need. Thus the synod fathers stress to us that we should not keep quiet
when drastic effects of globalization continue like the increase of the gap
between the rich and the poor etc. “The food of truth (Eucharist) demands that
we denounce inhuman conditions in which people starve to death because of
injustice and exploitation, and it gives us renewed strength and courage to
work tirelessly in the service of the civilization of love” (SC, 90).
All in all the Eucharist should lead
us more in appreciating the love that God had for us in the example of the life
of Jesus which in turn we should draw from and express to our neighbor in
transforming the world.
*****
REFLECTION 2: THE EUCHARIST AND ESCHATOLOGY
Name: Nkyanungi Oswald Reg No: 11045T
In his apostolic exhortation Sacramentum
Caritatis, Benedict XVI echoing the synod fathers stresses the importance
of the Eucharist as an eschatological banquet. His emphasis on the Eucharist as
a gift to men and women on their journey sounds indeed as a reminder to all of
us as a people of God pilgrims on earth not to forget the Eucharist as a source
in which we should always turn to draw spiritual energy, to have a foretaste of
what we anticipate it will look like in the eternal life (heaven) so that we
can walk towards our heavenly home confident that salvation is and will be
ours.
We are all reminded that everyone was
created for the true and eternal happiness which God only can give. However,
since all of us were wounded by sin it would be difficult to keep on the right
path we don’t experience something of that future fulfillment our main goal
which is Christ himself and as our goal we shall be able to see him face to
face but he offers a foretaste of himself to us in the sacrament of the
Eucharist.
In the dawning of Jesus’s coming, it
was a fulfillment to the promises made by God to the fathers of old ( Lk 1:33,70)
“In the calling of the twelve, which is to be understood in relation to the
tribes of Israel, and in the command he gave them at the last supper, before
his redemptive passion, to celebrate his memorial, Jesus showed that he wished
to transfer to the entire community which he had founded the task of being
within history, the sign and instrument of the eschatological gathering that
had its origin in him”(SC, 31). I find this very appealing to all of us
Christian to rediscover the vitality that can be generated by the holy
Eucharist in our lives. How we gather as a physical reality (gathering) in love
and joy to taste and also show to the world how the love of God unites us
together and be a sign of God’s presence and hope in the eternal life where God
will be all in all.
Finally the Eucharistic celebration
in which we proclaim that the Christ who died and rose, will come again in a
pledge of the future glory in which our bodies will be glorified.
****
THE
EUCHARIST- REFLECTION 1
THE DATING OF THE LAST SUPPER-
Pope Benedict XVI
As regards the problem of the
contradictions of the actual dating of the last supper that arise from the
synoptic gospels on one hand and to john’s gospel on the other, I find the
synthesis of Pope Benedict XVI in his book Jesus of Nazareth: From the entrance
into Jerusalem to the Resurrection worth
for reflection.
The synoptic tradition
presents the last supper of Jesus and his disciples as a Passover meal (feast).
Though according to Benedict XVI, many scholars present no friction between the
prescriptions of the Passover on one hand and the trial-crucifixion on the
other. It is highly doubtable that such activities would have been permissible
or possible on such an important Jewish feast day. This doubt is supported by
mark 14:1-2 where by the chief priests and scribes in their bid to cease an
opportunity to arrest and kill Jesus, they declared “not during the feast, lest
be a tumult of people” (Mk 14:1-2).
In John’s chronology of events,
it is clear that the last supper was not a Passover meal. By this the Jewish
authorities who led Jesus before Pilate avoided entering the praetorian in
order to avoid being defiled to miss the Passover (John 18:20). In line with
this chronology, Jesus dies on the vigil of the Passover – the day of
slaughtering the lambs. Even though this theological connection between Jesus’
death and the slaughter of the Passover lambs has led to doubt in the truth of
John’s account, it is today becoming more probable than its synoptic counterpart.
Some of the attempts to
reconcile the two chronologies seem to point to the discrepancy between the two
calendars, that is to say, the priestly calendar with 364 days a year and the Jewish
calendar that matches John’s account. I personally agree with Benedict XVI when
he sees this attempt as attractive on the face but doubtable due to other
problems that remain unresolved historically.[1]
In conclusion I agree with
Benedict XVI that his farewell meal was not the old Passover, but the new one in
which Jesus accomplished in this context. Even though it wasn’t the Passover
meal in line with Jewish ritual prescriptions, its inner connection with the Jesus
event (Death and Resurrection) stood out clearly. [Pope Benedict XVI, Chapter five: Last Supper-Dating of Last Supper in
Jesus of Nazereth- from the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection].
Hope you enjoy this relctions my dear brothers and sisters
ReplyDelete