Broken Bread as TYPE of our violence vs Christ


#1

I have not commented yet on this observation by Jason over on the General Discussion thread called “Can UR trump the Myth of Redemptive Violence?” but I think it deserves its own thread…

In his very moving post of Mar 29, 4:56 pm, Jason said this:

And this:

Now this is a new thought for me; that part of the symbolism of partaking in the Lords Supper (yes, my church has it’s own variant of this ritual celebration) is to actively and consciously eat of the bread in recognition of our volitional participation in the killing of Christ.

Christ, of course, was participating in the ritual celebration of the Passover. In this ritual the Jews remembered God’s deliverance from slavery in Egypt – yet Jesus was here adding even deeper symbolism to the deliverance from sin that was about to be accomplished in His death on the cross. And of course earlier He had asserted that He was the Bread of Life. Jesus as source and cause of Life is easily seen here; not just physical life (bread is the physical sustenance for our physical bodies) but the deeper Spiritual meanings too.

Except now Jason suggests to me that there is a deeper symbolism yet to the voluntary eating of the broken bread; it is a type of my own participation in the death of the Christ. But I recoil at this; I do not want to shoulder my share of that awesome burden. Yet this type insists I must – as recognition of the fact that, as a sinner, I too was there at the cross --killing God, as-it-were.

Thanks Jason, for new eyes through which to see this old ceremony.

TotalVictory
Bobx3


Can UR trump the Myth of Redemptive Violence?
#2

Of course, for those Christian churches who believe in the Real Presence (not limited to the RCCs) it becomes more than only a type. But not less than one. :slight_smile:

I think it goes rather farther beyond the notion of recognizing our complicity in sinning against God, too. A the very least it typifies our utter dependence upon God, Who gives Himself self-sacrificially for our sake. This self-sacrificial giving of God is more obvious, again, for those groups who hold to the doctrine of the Real Presence–a doctrine I have great respect for, although I am agnostic about it at this time–but it should be still implicit for the rest of us. The action, as in salvation, is primarily that of God; with which we are called and expected to participate as responsible persons and inheriting children. He does not simply (some Arminianistic theologians notwithstanding) permit us to be saved; nor does He wait for us first to seek salvation before acting toward our salvation.

(But I’ll have more to say about this when I post up my next reply to our current conversation in the thread you referenced, eventually. :slight_smile: )

Anyway, a fine place and time to mention the topic, Bob! {bow!} :smiley: