Let Every One of You Be Baptized

 Infant Baptism

For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be
circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a
foreigner-those who are not your offspring.
Genesis 17, 12

Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of

Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the

Lord our God will call.”

Acts 2, 38-39

In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting
off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in
baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who
raised Him from the dead.
Colossians 2, 11-12

Since the earliest time, the Catholic Church has stressed the importance of infant baptism. As members of the human family and descendants of Adam, we are all born with a fallen nature that is tainted with original sin. Even as infants, we have need of the rebirth given in the sacrament of Baptism to be liberated from the powers of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all human beings are called (Col 12:1-4). Baptism (Gk. Βάπτισμα / baptisma) is a Christian rite of not only admission into Christianity but also adoption with the use of water. The sacrament has been administered by sprinkling or pouring water on the head, or by immersing the recipient in water either partially or completely. The essential thing, however, is the use of water which purifies and cleanses the soul of the stain of original sin. The person who is baptized regains the state of justice and sanctity that Adam had forfeited for all his offspring. Thus, baptized infants receive the privileged washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit by being reborn of water and the Spirit, without which no soul can enter the kingdom of heaven.

Original sin is a sin that is contracted rather than personally committed. It’s the state of having fallen short of the glory of God. Since this sin isn’t one that any human being is morally culpable of having committed, it’s imperative that infants be baptized as much as adults should. After all, they, too, must suffer and die by being associated with the fallen Adam, although the pride of life and concupiscence haven’t yet manifested themselves in their lives.

St. Paul tells us that through Baptism the soul enters into communion with Christ’s death, is buried with him, and rises with him (Rom 6:3-4). Baptism is a gift of gratuitous grace from God that is offered to every human soul despite their age. Infants mustn’t be denied the gift of Baptism for they, too, must be “incorporated into Christ” and “configured to Christ.” They need to be sealed with the indelible spiritual mark or character of belonging to Christ albeit any conscious awareness.

Since the grace of Baptism doesn’t presuppose any human merit for its conferral, there is no just reason for excluding infants from being consecrated to God. No personal sin can erase the indelible mark that is sealed through Baptism even if sin prevents Baptism from bearing the fruits of salvation, so it makes no difference whether the infant is consciously aware of being baptized and making personal commitments of faith that are connected with the sacrament. Once a child attains the age of moral reasoning, while having been nurtured in the Christian faith at home and in the Church, they can decide for themselves whether to live up to their baptismal commitments and persevere in faith. These life-long baptismal commitments also apply to people who have been baptized in adulthood. One isn’t automatically and irrevocably saved just by being baptized and making an initial profession of faith. The important thing for the infant or any human being is that they receive the initial grace of justification and forgiveness for being implicated in the sin of Adam, and becoming a partaker of the divine nature through the water of cleansing and regeneration in the Spirit.

In Judaism, the ritual of circumcision ( Heb. בְּרִית מִילָה / brit milah) is a symbol of one’s partnership with God. This partnership with YWHW is a mysterious covenant that surpasses human comprehension. It is a pledge of unconditional devotion, no matter what may transpire between God and an individual. It is a bond that is absolute and immutable. For this reason, a Jew is circumcised as an infant, although it hasn’t yet developed its capacity for reasoning or making moral judgments since the covenant of circumcision is not an intellectual or calculated partnership. The circumcision of an infant demonstrates that the connection between the Jews and YHWH is beyond human rationale. Moreover, God chose the very organ that is the reproductive source of life, which can also be chosen to use for the basest acts, as the point to be sanctified with circumcision. The message here is that we can and must use every physical drive for holy purposes.

In Genesis 17, God gives no reason for circumcision other than it shall be a sign of the eternal covenant between God and Abraham and all of his descendants. God clearly commands that circumcision must occur on the eighth day of life for every Jewish male. Since Biblical times, male infants have been circumcised on the eighth day of life for it had been given since the time of Abraham and Isaac that each newly born son should be brought into the Covenant just as their fathers, grandfathers, and so on, had been before them. Ritual circumcision was originally a defining act for the young Israelite nation and continued to distinguish the Israelites (including infants) from other peoples.

When God told Israel, " Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer " ( Deuteronomy 10:16 ), it meant that they were to remove their obstinate sinful thoughts from their minds. In other words, they were to purge sin from their lives and be obedient to the laws of God. The covenant God established between Him and the Israelites was essentially meant to be a relationship of reciprocal love and fidelity. The Israelites were to have no false gods before YHWH. This covenantal relationship contributed to a communal self-understanding and encouraged the Israelites to examine who they were as consecrated people in relation to God and how they ought to behave towards each other in their common relation to God as children of Abraham.

The Old Covenant served to remind the nation of how God desired the people should live in relation to God and each other: compassionately, generously, and righteously. The eight-year-old infants were consecrated to God by their circumcision to enter this covenant of holiness. The ritual marked their separation from the sinfulness of the surrounding pagan nations. Now, the infant boys of the covenant were to be circumcised on the eighth day of their birth because this is the day of newness in Judaic tradition. If there are seven days in a week, the eighth day is the first day of a new week. The performance of circumcision on the eighth day represents God’s promise of newness to His covenant children who had formerly lived profane lives among the pagan nations. This rite ultimately points forward to the eighth day (the first day of a new week) on which Christ arose from the dead in the newness of life.

Baptism proceeds from the rite of circumcision, as to how God intended that a spiritual circumcision must take place, which is the physical aspect of circumcision represented in the Old Covenant. Baptism, therefore, is a sign of inward, spiritual “circumcision.” Baptism is a rebirth to a new life with God and being reborn from above. Although circumcision isn’t a sacrament but a symbolic ritual in Judaism, there are significant parallels between the two that show how baptism fulfills circumcision, as the Old Covenant finds its fulfillment in the New that has been established by Christ through the outpouring of his blood.

By baptism, we gain entry into the kingdom of God. Infants must be included as members of the body of Christ just as infants and young children were members of God’s chosen people in the Old Covenant. “We are members one of another.” Baptism not only purifies us from all sins but makes the neophyte a “new creature” and adopted child of God. “From the baptismal fonts is born the one people of God of the New Covenant (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1265). The Old Covenant was designed as a means to impart holiness to newly restored people who were chosen to serve God by observing His statutes. It served as an instrument of grace. In the New Covenant, we become God’s own people, “a chosen race,” and “a holy nation” by our common baptism. We “become living stones to be built up into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood” (1 Pet 2:5; 9) through the graces and spiritual gifts we receive by being baptized.

Thus, the key benefits of baptism demand that infants should be baptized but not simply as an act of defining what it means to be God’s chosen people of the New Covenant. Infants are baptized in water to reap the spiritual benefits that have been merited for all of us by the blood of Christ. Blood and water flowed from our Savior’s side as he hung upon the cross. Infants should be baptized because through the sacrament they, too, receive the “grace of sanctification or justification” to have eternal life with God. This grace shall “enable them [as members of God’s kingdom] to believe in God, to hope in Him, and to love Him through the theological virtues [Faith, Hope, and Charity].” This grace will give them “the power to live and act under the prompting of the Holy Spirit through the gifts of the Holy Spirit” allowing them to “grow in goodness through the moral virtues” (CCC, 1266). The infant itself is separated from all the people who haven’t yet been reborn from above or from heaven.

St. Paul points out that baptism has replaced circumcision. He refers to the sacrament as “the circumcision of Christ” and “the circumcision made without hands” (Col 2:11-12). The latter reference recalls the passage above taken from the Book of Deuteronomy which refers to the physical ritual as essentially being a circumcision of the heart of all the Israelites including the circumcised male infants who will eventually grow into manhood expected to abide by God’s covenant. When a Jewish boy reaches the age of thirteen, the family celebrates his Bar Mitzvah, on which occasion he is regarded as ready to observe religious moral precepts and eligible to participate in public worship at the synagogue. The boy’s father offers a prayer of thanksgiving to God for relieving him of being morally responsible for his son’s actions, because he is primarily held accountable for the boy’s religious and spiritual nurturing until he has reached adolescence.

This same principle holds in the Catholic faith with respect to baptizing infants. Infant baptism has its roots in Judaism and is an ecclesial tradition handed down to us from the apostles who themselves were Jewish (Judeans). Anyway, if the nascent Church didn’t practice infant baptism, we should doubt whether Paul would have used the rite of circumcision as a parallel for the sacrament. Of course, most of the new Jewish converts to Christianity were adults in apostolic time, but adult males who converted to Judaism (proselytes) had to be circumcised, too, though these conversions were rare.

Further, we read in the New Testament that Lydia was baptized with her “household” after she converted (Acts 16:15). The Philippian jailer who was converted by Paul and Silas was baptized that same night along with his household. In fact, he was baptized “with all his family” (Acts 16:33). And in his greetings to the church in Corinth, Paul writes, “I did baptize also the household of Stephanus” (1 Cor 1:16).

In the above passages, Paul uses the Greek word oikon (οἶκον) for the English word “household.” This accusative masculine singular noun literally means “a dwelling” and by implication “a family.” If children weren’t part of these families, Paul could have simply written that “she and her husband” or “he and his wife” were baptized. Nor would it make sense for him to have used the all-inclusive word “household” or “family” if children weren’t included as members. Now, evangelical Christians contend that if there were children in these families, they could have been young adolescents. But Paul doesn’t draw a parallel between the rite of circumcision and the sacrament of baptism because Jewish boys are circumcised at the age of thirteen. As we know, they are circumcised as infants. Still, there must surely have been young children below the age of reason who belonged to at least one of these households. Though they might not have been infants, they could still be like newborn babes by being below the mature age of moral accountability. Everyone must include infants.

Early Sacred Tradition

“And many, both men and women, who have been Christ’s disciples from
childhood, remain pure and at the age of sixty or seventy years…”
St. Justin Martyr, First Apology, 15:6
(A.D. 110-165)

“For He came to save all throughmeans of Himself–all, I say,
who through Him are born again to God–infants,

and children, and boys, and youths, and old men.”

St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2,22:4

(A.D. 180)

“And they shall baptise the little children first. And if they can answer for
themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let their parents answer or
someone from their family.”
St. Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition, 21
(c. A.D. 215)

“For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles
the tradition of baptizing infants too.”
Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9
(A.D. 244)

“But in respect of the case of the infants, which you say ought not to be baptized within the
second or third day after their birth, and that the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded,
so that you think one who is just born should not be baptized and sanctified within the eighth
day…And therefore, dearest brother, this was our opinion in council, that by us no one ought to be
hindered from baptism…we think is to be even more observed in respect of infants and newly
born persons…”
St. Cyprian, To Fidus, Epistle 58(64):2, 6
(A.D. 251)

“Be it so, some will say, in the case of those who ask for Baptism; what have you to say about those
who are still children, and conscious neither of the loss nor of the grace? Are we to baptize them
too? Certainly, if any danger presses. For it is better that they should be unconsciously sanctified
than that they should depart unsealed and uninitiated.”
St. Gregory Nazianzen,
Oration on Holy Baptism, 40:28
(A.D. 381)

“We do baptize infants, although they are not guilty of any sins.”
St. John Chrysostom, Ad Neophytos
(A.D. 388)

“And if any one seek for divine authority in this matter, though what is held by the whole Church,
and that not as instituted by Councils, but as a matter of invariable custom, is rightly held to have
been handed down by apostolical authority, still we can form a true conjecture of the value of the
sacrament of baptism in the case of infants, from the parallel of circumcision, which was received
by God’s earlier people, and before receiving which Abraham was justified, as Cornelius also was
enriched with the gift of the Holy Spirit before he was baptized.”
St. Augustine, On Baptism against the Donatist, 4:24:31
(A.D. 400)

“While the son is a child and thinks as a child and until he comes to years of discretion to choose
between the two roads to which the letter of Pythagoras points, his parents are responsible for his
actions whether these be good or bad. But perhaps you imagine that, if they are not baptized, the
children of Christians are liable for their own sins; and that no guilt attaches to parents who
withhold from baptism those who by reason of their tender age can offer no objection to it. The
truth is that, as baptism ensures the salvation of the child, this in turn brings advantage to the
parents. Whether you would offer your child or not lay within your choice, but now that you
have offered her, you neglect her at your peril.”
St. Jerome, To Laeta, Epistle 107:6
(A.D. 403)

But Jesus said to them: Suffer the little children,
and forbid them not to come to me:
 for the kingdom of heaven is for such.
Matthew 19, 14

Pax vobiscum

The Word of God

 The Deposit of Faith

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word
of God which you heard from us,you accepted it not as the word of men but
as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
1 Thessalonians 2, 13

And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth,
the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him
with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit.
Ephesians 1, 13

Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me,
in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; guard the truth that has
been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.
2 Timothy 1, 13-14

Sacred Tradition is the unwritten word of God and thus is a source of divine revelation from which even sacred Scripture (the written word of God) proceeds (Lk 1:1-4). By unwritten or verbally unspoken, we mean all the divine mysteries that are revealed or declared by the Holy Spirit to the Church in the passage of time (Jn 16:12-13). It’s because Tradition or God’s unwritten word is infallible that Scripture, God’s written word, is infallible since both sources of divine revelation originate from the Holy Spirit under the Spirit’s guidance (Tradition) or by the Spirit’s inspiration (Scripture). And since the written word proceeds from the initial unwritten word, Scripture must be interpreted in light of Tradition. The former medium serves as an objective norm or confirmation of the latter. Thus, these two mediums of divine revelation comprise two sides of the same coin, and so they mustn’t be divorced from each other or placed in opposition to each other. This isn’t an either/or proposition.

Tradition literally means “handing on” referring to the passing down of God’s revealed word from the beginning under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, Tradition means all divine revelation from the dawn of human history to the end of the apostolic age from one generation of believers to the next which is safeguarded by the Church (the Rule of Faith) until Christ returns in glory (Mt 28:20). Jesus assures his apostles, “And I will pray to the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever” (Jn 14:16). The Greek noun for the English word “forever” is αἰῶνα (aiōna). Jesus, then, is telling his disciples that the Holy Spirit or Paraclete will come to them to “always” abide in his Church throughout the entire Messianic age, viz., from the time of Christ’s ascension into heaven and Pentecost to his glorious return at the end of this age.

Further, Tradition may also be said to contain all that is materially presented in Scripture either explicitly or implicitly. It’s because Scripture isn’t always explicit that, as a sole rule of faith, it is formally insufficient. And so, Tradition often reveals or exposes what is explicitly lacking in Scripture but is there nonetheless as a representation of the verbally unspoken word: the declaration of the Holy Spirit to the Church. The written word and the unwritten word of God mutually support each other in a complementary way, having originated from the same divine Author and guarantor of the truth.

Since the beginning, the one, visible, hierarchical Church founded by Christ himself on Peter the rock and the Apostles in a physical line of succession through the sacrament of Holy Orders has understood that Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are bound closely together and correspond with one another towards the same goal in a mutual relationship and that these two mediums of divine revelation flow from the same source, viz. the Holy Spirit. The Church, therefore, has never drawn its certainty about the revealed divine truths from only sacred Scripture. The apostles believed that their preaching was guided by the Holy Spirit, who protects the Church from error (Acts 15:27-28). And it was Paul who wrote that the Church – not Scripture – is “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15).

So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions
we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
2 Thessalonians 2, 15

Referring to how Christian tradition was handed on, the Vatican ll states: “It was done by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received – whether from the lips of Christ, from His way of life and His works, or whether they had learned it from the prompting of the Holy Spirit” (Constitution on Divine Revelation, ll, 7). God was faithful in the transmission of the written word as was evident by the Church’s infallible ruling of which Biblical books and Epistles belonged to the canon of Scripture. Thus, God must also be faithful to His Church in the transmission of His unwritten word declared by the Holy Spirit and preached (spoken) by the apostles and their anointed successors, which manifests in greater fullness what has been revealed by God and committed to writing for communities acquainted with the oral tradition.

According to John Cardinal Henry Newman, Scripture and Tradition aren’t two separate “sources” of divine revelation, but rather two “modes” of transmitting the same deposit of faith. In his words: “Totum in scriptura, totum in traditione.” (“All is in Scripture; all is in Tradition.”). These two mediums point towards and embrace each other as constituting together in a single expression the word of God. If Paul had committed everything he preached to his letters, he would have written ‘by word of mouth and by letter.’

Hence, the entire body of Christ – the bishops to the laity – has an anointing that originates from the Holy Spirit (1 Jn 2:20, 27). Being members of one mystical body with Christ as the head they cannot be deceived as our Lord had promised his apostles. This feature of the Church is shown in the supernatural appreciation of the faith (sensus fidei) by all the faithful when they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals. And by this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the entire people of God’s household, guided by the Magisterium and obeying it, receive not the mere word of men, but truly the word of God declared by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 2:13); the faith delivered once for all (cf. Lumen Gentium, 12).

“What the body of the Church together with its pastors, agreed in holding as of faith, is part of revelation; since the Church is filled and assisted by the Holy Spirit and cannot be wrong on a matter of faith. This has always been the conviction of the Catholic Church both eastern and western” (Yves Congar, Tradition and Traditions: New York: Macmillan,1966). Isaiah’s prophecy points to the infallible and supernatural Church that Christ has founded on Peter the rock and the Apostles: “And a path and a way shall be there, and it shall be called the holy way: the unclean shall not pass over it, and this shall be unto you a straight way so that fools shall not err therein” (Isa 35:8; cf. Acts 9:2; 22:4; 24:14,22).

The word is near you, even in your mouth, and in your heart:
that is, the word of faith, which we preach.
Romans 10, 8

On Pentecost, the Church was established as a single and visible historical reality with the descent of the Holy Spirit. It was only then that an unfolding revelation first received by the apostles could be transmitted to future generations under the promised guidance of the Paraclete. The divine truth in all its manifestations and growing fullness has carried with it ever since the seal of the Holy Spirit whose sanctifying presence guarantees the purity of faith in the Church – the “unblemished” body of Christ. Thus, the seed which has been planted by the apostles must be abided by and sustained through an increase of knowledge and understanding of the Divine mysteries through the inspiration and assistance of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:8-9). The truth in all its fullness does not exist outside the Catholic Church, where there is neither Scripture nor Tradition on account of these two mediums of divine revelation in the deposit of faith having been divorced from each other.

In the words of the 5th-century monk, Vincent of Lerins: “We must hold what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all.” Tradition has been described as timeless although situated in temporal reality. It is an ongoing memory of the whole Church (the one timeless mystical body of Christ) whose principal aim isn’t to restore the past but to better understand it in the present and recollect it in a greater light of faith beyond the limits of time. This memory consists not only of words, written or spoken but also of how they have been assimilated and expressed liturgically by all the faithful through the centuries and passed on.

Tradition, therefore, is a continual living experience or memory that is relived and renewed over time but adversely unaffected by it without any adulteration of a divine truth presented as a gift of the Holy Spirit. Doctrines have developed over time by having to weather controversial storms through the passing on of Tradition with Scripture serving as the objective norm of the faith. The written word of God has served to aid the Church in acquiring a deeper and fuller understanding of that which is declared by the Holy Spirit in the sanctifying light of faith concerning the mighty deeds of God in salvation history and the dispensation of His manifold grace.

Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common
salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend
earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints.
Jude 1, 3

Thus, Tradition is the work of God through which He continues to reveal in greater measure to His Church what has been revealed and worded in the Scriptures. Hidden implications and ramifications in the inspired sacred writings come to light through the handing down of Tradition. The Church’s fundamental doctrines have developed over time with deep reflection and pondering of the heart under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The word of God isn’t altered or fabricated but rather better understood in time through timeless Tradition with the guarantee of the promised Paraclete. The deposit of faith was planted by the apostles in the form of a seed from which one and the same flower has continued to grow and blossom from one mysterious aspect to another. The definition of an article of faith resembles an entire work of mosaic art pieced together one tile at a time.

The apostle called the Church a “mystery” which meant that, as the kingdom of God in our midst, it could not be understood by reason alone (Eph 5:32). The power to “bind and loose” or interpret divine revelation and define dogma lies with the Universal Magisterium of the world’s bishops in union with the Vicar of Christ. God’s infinite wisdom, which is revealed through His unwritten and written word, is a hidden mystery for all ages that can be made known more fully and with absolute certainty over the passage of time only through the magisterial teaching authority of the one true Church founded by Christ on Peter and the Apostles (Mat 16:15-18; Eph 3:9-10). The Three Pillars of Faith are Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium. Neither pillar can support the one true faith on its own. Nor can the one true faith be infallibly preserved and transmitted if one of the pillars is removed. The Holy Spirit operates in all three pillars combined since the divine truth isn’t relativistic. Nor is it interminably open for debate.

Early Sacred Tradition

“Since, therefore, the tradition from the apostles does thus exist in the Church, and is
permanent among us, let us revert to the Scriptural proof furnished by those apostles who
did also write the Gospel, in which they recorded the doctrine regarding God, pointing out
that our Lord Jesus Christ is the truth, and that no lie is in Him.”
St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,5,1
(inter A.D. 180-189)

“But in learning the Faith and in professing it, acquire and keep that only,
which is now delivered to thee by the Church, and which has been built up
strongly out of all the Scriptures … Take heed then, brethren, and hold fast the
traditions ye now receive.”
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 5:12
(A.D. 350)

“But beyond these Scriptural sayings, let us look at the very tradition,
teaching, and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, which
the Lord gave, the apostles preached, and the Fathers kept.”
St. Athanasius, Four Letters to Serapion of Thumius 1:28
(A.D. 360)

“I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth;
for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak,
and he will declare to you the things that are to come.”
John 16, 12-13

Pax vobiscum

This Is My Body, This Is My Blood

 The Last Supper

While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it
to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, and after
giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of
the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will
never again drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my
Father’s kingdom.
Matthew 26, 26-29

The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ?
The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ?
1 Corinthians 10, 16

The event of Christ offering himself as the paschal lamb in the Last Supper is what the celebration of the Eucharist became for the New Covenant believers. That night of the Jewish Passover, Jesus transformed the traditional sacrificial meal of the Passover lamb. For us to see how this happened, we must examine the course of our Lord’s supper in the traditional manner. Jesus is celebrating or presiding over the Passover Seder meal with his apostles which requires them to drink four cups of wine. Matthew, however, begins his narrative at the serving of the third cup (Berekah) or the “Cup of Salvation” since Our Lord is looking towards his own immolation as the Passover lamb (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25). [1] Paul uses the “Cup of Blessing” (Berekah) to refer to the Eucharist, connecting the Seder meal to the Eucharistic sacrifice (1 Cor 10:16). The third cup actually makes present the Paschal sacrifice of Christ, the Lamb who was slain for our sins (Isa 53:7; Jn 1:29).

Yet Jesus omits the serving of the fourth cup (Hallel) or “Cup of Consummation.” This is a significant omission that joins the Eucharistic sacrifice being offered in the Seder meal to Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. In other words, they comprise one single sacrifice. The Last Supper, therefore, is a pre-presentation of our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross which is made present in the Seder meal. This one and the same sacrifice isn’t completed until Jesus partakes of the fourth cup of wine just before he dies on the cross after saying, “It is consummated” (Jn 19:29, 30; cf. Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36). [2]

Jesus was given sour wine on a “hyssop” branch that was used to sprinkle the lamb’s blood on the doorposts on the night of the first Passover (Ex 12:22) and by the priests in the sacrificial offerings of the Old Covenant. [3] This joins Christ’s sacrifice of himself to the lambs that were slaughtered and consumed by the Jews in the Seder meal which was ceremonially completed by drinking the wine in the Cup of Consummation. Thus, Christ’s sacrifice began in the upper room and was completed on Mount Golgotha.

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the Catholic Church is a re-presentation of this one single sacrifice. It is the Lord’s Supper or Seder meal of the New Covenant that makes Christ’s sacrifice on the cross perpetually present as a visible sign of the marriage feast in heaven (Rev 19:9). St. Paul tells us that we need to celebrate the Eucharistic feast:  “Therefore, let us celebrate the festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Cor 5:8). In other words, we must worthily eat the flesh of the Lamb of God and drink His blood in the Blessed Sacrament to be in holy communion with God and reap the fruits of Our Lord’s sacrifice (1 Cor 11:17-22).

Hence, the Lord’s Supper isn’t just a symbolic memorial meal, as most Protestants contend, but a marriage feast that marks God’s establishment of the New Covenant in which the Eucharist makes Christ’s one eternal sacrifice present. Scripture confirms this truth in the words of consecration – “Do this in remembrance of me” – used by Jesus in the Last Supper: touto poieite tan eman anamnasin (Lk 22:19; cf. 1 Cor 11:24-25). What our Lord literally says is, “Offer this as a memorial sacrifice.” The Greek verb poiein (ποιεῖν) or “do” is used in the context of offering a sacrifice where, for instance, in the Septuagint, God uses the same word poieseis (ποιέω) regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar (Ex 29:38-39). The noun anamnesis (ἀνάμνησις) or “remembrance” also refers to a sacrifice that is really or actually made present in real-time by the power of God in the Holy Spirit, as it reminds us of the actual event (Heb 10:3; Num 10:10). [4]

So, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass isn’t merely a memorial of a past event but a past event actually made present in time. Christ’s Eucharistic sacrifice is the memorial or reminder of what our Lord has accomplished for us and continues to accomplish by his single sacrifice, not what he had accomplished and is finished in time. Only the crucifixion itself remains a past historical event. Christ’s single sacrifice of himself on the cross is ever-present in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

We read in Leviticus 24:7: ‘By each stack put some pure incense as a memorial portion to represent the bread and to be a food offering presented to the LORD.’ The word “memorial” in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is the feminine noun azkarah ( אַזְכָּרָה )which means “to actually make present.” There are many instances in the Old Testament where azkarah refers to sacrifices that are currently being offered and so are present in time (Lev 2:2,9, 6:5; 16; 5-12; Num 5:26; 10:10). [5] These are one and the same sacrifices that are memorially being offered in time. Jesus’ command for us to offer the bread and wine (transubstantiated into his body and blood) as a memorial offering shows that the sacrificial offering of his body and blood is made present in time over and over again while serving as a reminder of what he has accomplished for us through his one, single sacrifice of himself. Thus, the Holy sacrifice of the Mass is sacramentally a re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross that began at the Last Supper and historically occurred on Calvary.

Sadly, Protestants argue in disbelief that Jesus is speaking metaphorically about eating his flesh and that the bread only symbolizes his body. But the Greek verbs used in John 6 (The Bread of Life Discourse) render their interpretation implausible. Throughout John 6:23-53, the Greek text uses the verb phago (φάγω) nine times. This verb means to literally “eat” or physically “consume.” Jesus repeated himself this often because of the Jews’ disbelief. He was, in a sense, challenging their faith in him while driving an important point home. In fact, many of his disciples deserted him since they knew he was speaking literally and feared he was mad. For this reason, Jesus uses an even more literal verb that describes the process of consuming food (Jn 6: 54, 55, 56, 57). This is the verb trogo (τρώγω) which means to “gnaw” “chew” or “crunch.” Though phago may be used in a metaphorical sense, trogo is never applied symbolically. [6]

Anyway, for further clarification, Jesus says, “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (Jn 6:55). Jesus is responding to those who refused to believe in what he was saying. Also, when Jesus institutes the sacrament of the Eucharist at the Last Supper, he says, “This is my body and blood” (Mt 26:26; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19-20). The Greek phrase is “Touto estin to soma mou.” So, what our Lord means to say is “This is really or actually my body and blood.” St. Paul uses the same phraseology in his First Letter to the Corinthians 11:24. Paul does reaffirm that “the cup of blessing” and “the bread of which [the Corinthians] partake” is “actual” participation in Christ’s body and blood” (1 Cor 10:16). The Greek noun koinonia (κοινωνία) denotes a “participation” that isn’t merely symbolic. [7]

Moreover, the Greek text in John’s Gospel uses sarx (σάρξ) which literally means “flesh.” The phrases “real food” and “real drink” contain the adjective alethes (ἀληθής) which means “really” or “truly” (Jn 6:55). This adjective is used on occasion when there is doubt concerning the reality of something, in this case, which is Jesus’ flesh really being food to eat and his blood really being something to drink for everlasting life. [8] Jesus is assuring his doubters that what he is literally saying is, in fact, true. The Apostles refused to desert Jesus after listening to their Master’s discourse and attended the Seder meal with him, on which occasion, they (except Judas) consumed the flesh of the sacrificed Lamb of God and drank his blood just as the Jewish people ate the flesh of the sacrificed lamb and were sprinkled with its blood for the forgiveness of sin (Ex 12:5-8; 24:8).

Early Sacred Tradition

“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like
manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our
salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the
prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are
nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”
St. Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66
(A.D. 155 )

“He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood,
from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he
affirmed to be his own body, from which he gives increase to our bodies.”
St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:2,2
(c. A.D. 190)

“It is good and beneficial to communicate every day, and to partake of the holy
body and blood of Christ. For He distinctly says, ‘He that eateth my flesh and
drinketh my blood hath eternal life.’ And who doubts that to share frequently in
life, is the same thing as to have manifold life. I, indeed, communicate four times a
week, on the Lord’s day, on Wednesday, on Friday, and on the Sabbath, and on the
other days if there is a commemoration of any Saint.”
St. Basil, To Patrician Caesaria, Epistle 93
(A.D. 372)

“Perhaps you will say, ‘I see something else, how is it that you assert that I receive
the Body of Christ?’ And this is the point which remains for us to prove. And what
evidence shall we make use of? Let us prove that this is not what nature made, but
what the blessing consecrated, and the power of blessing is greater than that of
nature, because by blessing nature itself is changed…The Lord Jesus Himself
proclaims: ‘This is My Body.’ Before the blessing of the heavenly words another
nature is spoken of, after the consecration the Body is signified. He Himself speaks
of His Blood. Before the consecration it has another name, after it is called Blood.
And you say, Amen, that is, It is true. Let the heart within confess what the mouth
utters, let the soul feel what the voice speaks.
St. Ambrose, On the Mysteries, 9:50
(A.D. 390-391)

“I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger,
and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.”
John 6, 35

Notes & Sources

[1-3] Brant Pitre, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist (New York: Doubleday, 2011)

[4-8] John Salza, The Biblical Basis for the Eucharist (Huntington, Ill: Our Sunday Visitor, 2008)

Pax vobiscum