NOTES for Co1 11:23-26

All the readings today are connected with the feast: they are about the Messiah's priesthood, the feeding with bread, and the Eucharist. But the Eucharist is above all the continuing presence of Christ in this world and His service to God, which the whole Church shares with Him: "the fulfillment of the Gospel of the Kingdom," "the healing of soul and body" (St. John Chrysostom). The Church journeying, the Church teaching, the Church preaching, the Church healing: this is the Body of Christ.

The Sacrament of the Eucharist, whose institution we commemorate today, is so familiar to us from the Liturgy celebrated every day that it is not easy on this day to experience all its newness. Nevertheless, it is worth making an effort to grasp anew what happened. At the Passover meal, the Lord commanded His disciples that from then on He Himself, His Flesh and Blood, would be the food that gives us life. And this is the food of eternal life. In this sacrament we offer thanksgiving to God—and thereby do something directly opposed to sin. Therefore, for us who participate in the sacrament, it becomes an entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven. And this takes place not only in spirit but also in the flesh—the Most Pure Flesh of Christ, which becomes our life.

Whatever may be happening within us during the Church's principal act of worship, the Eucharist, whatever thoughts may occupy or distract us, the moment when the priest pronounces these words holds our attention. We may understand them differently and perceive them a little differently each time than we did before, but the most important thing is that they are spoken. They flow into our hearts, pass through them, and inevitably leave their trace. For even if there are no sensations or feelings at that particular moment, the moment of consecration, we are called to answer Christ by consenting to His sacrifice for us. Each time the heart gives this answer, even though we may say and think nothing. This, perhaps, is what it means to "examine ourselves" before Communion (see 1 Cor 11:28): by our life, by the way we live each day, to prepare and help the heart give the right answer at the necessary moment...

Continuing his discussion of the Church, Paul never tires of reminding the Christians in Corinth of the true meaning of the breaking of bread. In the early Christian Church it continued into a fraternal meal, as was customary in the Jewish religious fellowships from which the Church borrowed its form. Apparently, for many who took part, the breaking of bread was merely an ordinary fraternal meal, a gathering of fellow believers who came together to spend time among “their own.” With such an attitude, it is not surprising that those assembled often saw no need to wait for people who were late for some reason, assuming that the latecomers could simply join the meal when they arrived. Of course, such latecomers missed the actual breaking and blessing of the bread, but this apparently caused little concern among those taking part in the meal: they probably regarded the traditional blessing of bread and wine as no more than a formality or a tribute to tradition, while considering the friendly meal itself to be the purpose of the gathering.

It is not surprising that some then allowed themselves more than they should, while others might receive nothing or very little (vv. 20–22). Paul reminds the Christians in Corinth that the breaking of bread is not merely a fraternal meal, or even merely a religious ritual. For Christians, the breaking of bread is a form of entirely real communion with the Risen One, who Himself blesses the bread and wine in the assembly of the faithful, as He did at the Last Supper (vv. 23–26). For the apostle, the breaking of bread is the center and meaning of the whole assembly; in it and through it the gathering becomes a community of the Kingdom headed by the Savior Himself, and those who do not understand this would do better not to take part in the breaking of bread (vv. 26–32). This is why the apostle requires those assembled not to hurry to begin, but to wait for latecomers: those who are absent from the blessing are in fact deprived of the communion with the Risen One for which the faithful gather. The point is not to make sure everyone has time to eat, since one can, after all, eat at home (vv. 33–34). For Christians, the breaking of bread is the form of communion with the Savior Himself that He commanded, and a way to participate in the life of the Kingdom; nothing should distract those assembled from this chief purpose.

The apostle Paul warns us against a very serious danger: confusing concepts. He says that the Corinthians gather "in such a way that it does not mean eating the Lord's Supper." But how should it be eaten? What is wrong in the Corinthian community, and what does this have to do with us? It is completely obvious that in our day, even with every desire, it is impossible to come to church in order to eat. The Eucharist in its modern form cannot serve as breakfast or lunch. So are we all right?

Apparently not. The problem is that a person comes to church not for the sake of meeting God. What is put in the place of this meeting is no longer so important. In our day this is usually human interaction. We feel our loneliness acutely, and in church we have the opportunity to interact with people, counting on understanding, since people in church really are usually more benevolent than on the street or in the subway. And we come in order to socialize, to talk, to spend time... The Church becomes a hangout for us. And this does not mean eating the Lord's Supper.

For Paul, as for all Christians, the breaking of bread and the gatherings connected with it were the center of church life. The Church, properly speaking, exists as a gathering in which the breaking of bread is performed in Christ's name. This has been so in every age, from the very beginning of church history. But "in the name" does not mean only "in memory," at least not in the sense in which we use that expression today. In the Bible we often meet expressions such as "God remembered" or "God forgot," although it is perfectly clear that, in our human sense, God forgets no one and nothing, and does not remember in that sense either; He simply knows all His creation as a whole and each of the people He created specifically.

But God is not an impersonal Absolute. He is a Person, and like every Person He can turn His face toward someone or turn away. This is what the language of the Bible calls "remembering" or "forgetting." And during the Christian breaking of bread, we Christians remember Christ, and He remembers us. Then the bread and wine again become His body and His blood, in the same sense in which this happened at the Last Supper. But for this to happen, He Himself must be at the center of the gathering.

And the issue is not only that He should come, but also that communion with Him should become the center and meaning of the whole gathering. In the Corinthian church, judging by the apostle's words, there were problems with this. The breaking of bread there sometimes turned simply into a noisy feast, and it often turned out that some ate and drank to excess while others remained hungry. The feast as such came to the fore, pushing communion with the Risen One into second place. The sacred act turned into profanation, not because there were food and wine on the table, but because behind them one could no longer see the One for whom and around whom they had gathered.

It is precisely against this, and not against the meal as such, that the apostle protests when he says that those who perform the breaking of bread in this way are not thinking at all about the body of Christ, not only in the sense of the bread they break, but also in the sense of the spiritual reality that is called the Church with a capital letter. This is no longer Christianity, but the same old paganism under the guise of Christianity, which cannot and must not exist in the Church.