www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Leavened or Unleavened bread

I am in the need of some assistance.

A Roman Catholic I know, I hesitate to call him a friend due to responses like this from him, has told me that our use of leavened bread for the Eucharist is total bunk and can not be proven correct.

That it is Church teaching to use unleavened bread.

This person insists on calling us the Byzantine Rite of the Roman Catholic Church.

I would like some assistance in how to deal with the leavened bread issue.

I would also like some advice, should I just give up on this individual?

If you wish to respond to this individual, go to http://www.catholic-pages.com/forum/

Select the Eastern Catholicism topic and reply under the Questions for Craige and anyone interested thread.

I really do need help on this one, even if you only respond to me here.


Your brother in Christ,
David

[ 05-13-2002: Message edited by: DavidB ]

Dear David,

I would rather respond to your "friend" here. I've tried other chat forums, but I am most "at home" right here!

It is ultimately the Church that decides these things, not things we think we can "prove" or not.

That mentality is truly a Protestant one, cast into an RC mold when people quote canon law from way back when et al. to show that a practice is right or wrong.

The continual tradition of the Eastern Church and of the Eastern Fathers, recognized as Saints by the West as well, is that the bread used in Communion is leavened bread.

The symbolism is that it represents the Risen Christ for it is bread that has "risen." And this is also why we have always used red wine, the colour of true blood.

In the Christian East, the symbol and the reality are intertwined, one indicates the other. The symbol participates in the reality of what it truly "Re-presents" namely, the Body and Blood of Christ.

It is also ancient tradition that Christ used leavened bread during the Mystical Supper, a portion of which was formerly kept at Constantinople.

That the Church, West and East, constantly used leavened bread is seen in the controversy of the Azymes when the East accused the West of changing tradition by using Azymes i.e. unleavened bread and, from then on, Western Catholics were called "Azymites" by the East (and still are in some Orthodox circles).

That this person continues to call us the Byzantine Rite of the RC Church demonstrates his fundamental ignorance of fundamental Catholic Church teachings, especially on the subject of the Particular Catholic Churches.

Perhaps, for this person, Vatican II and its Decree on the Eastern Churches, is something that happened to "other people."

If we only had different outward liturgical traditions, then he might have some justification for speaking as he does.

But we have our own Church hierarchies, theologies, spiritualities, ecclesial regulations et al., most of which pre-date the Particular Latin Church (aka "Roman Catholic Church").

Alex

Alex,

How could Christ have used leavened bread? Wasn't it the Feast of Unleavened Bread. I think the Pentateuch says that a person is cut off from his people if he posseses leavened bread during the feast.

Would Christ render himself unclean, and his disciples by using leaven?

I like the "risen" imagery but historically speaking, I don't see how one could assert that Christ used leavened bread.

Also, why the heck does it matter? I'm a Johny-come-lately so I don't see why this would ever be an issue. Why all the fuss over leaven? Could you explain the historical context of this debate?

yours in Christ,
Marshall

It was the Jewish Passover celebration when Jesus and the Apostles had the Last Supper. From the Gospel it is clear that Jesus celebrated the Passover according to the jewish tradition, which prescribes unlevened bread.

So, what is that evidence that Jesus used levened bread?

Can somebody also explain what were the arguments of the azymes controversy between East and West?

St. John's Gospel places the Last Supper before the Passover, hence the Byzantine's tradition that Christ used leavened bread. See John 13:1.

Although, I agree both the historical reasoning of the Latins and Armenians based on the Synoptics and their view of leaven as impurity and the theological reasoning of the other Eastern Churches based on St. John's Gospel and view of leaven as symbolic of the Resurrection are equal and valid traditions. Interestingly, the Ethiopians use leavened throughout the year but use unleavened for the Liturgy of Holy Thursday. Also the Armenians do not add water to the wine at Liturgy. This is not becasue they reject Christ's humanity, which the water represents in the Latin tradition, but becasue they view water as in impurity, i.e. it weakens the wine.

In Christ,
Lance

[ 05-13-2002: Message edited by: Lance ]

Matthew 13:33 He told them, The another parable, "The kingdom of heaven is like the yeast a woman took and mixed in with THREE measures of flour till it was leavened all through." Jerusalem Bible. Alex's response! And don't forget the Liturgy starts with...Blessed is the KINGDOM.

Lance's response in pointed out the difference between St. John and the Synoptics is also true. Why would Jews use Unleaved Bread in a time of Leavening?

In Acts 20, verse 7, St. Luke gives an account of his travels with St. Paul. "On the first day of the week, we met to break bread. Paul was due to leave the next day (from Ephesus), and he preached a sermon that went until the middle of the night."

So in the early Gentile Church, it is quite obvious that St. Paul used leavened bread, served the Eucharist on Sunday (Day of the Lord's Rising instead of the Jewish Sabbath), and was opposed to any kind of Judaizing of Gentile Converts to Christ. This is clear in his Epistles, and his Eucharistic code of conduct in 1st Corinthians is clearly targeted at Gentile converts.

In 1054, these issues and others like priests being accused of fornication (with their wives) seem so non-pastorally trivial today.

Christos Anesti! Alithos Anesti! Alithos A Kyrios!

Three Cents

I agree with Three Cents. Based on the evidence of St. John's Gospel, together with the clear anti-Judaicising imperative of St. Paul's epistles, it seems that the Byzantine tradition regarding leavened bread is perfectly legitimate. The use of azymes in the bread (as in the West, and in the Armenian Church -- which learned this from the West during the Crusader period) seems grounded in the Synoptic tradition, but all the same does seem to go against the grain of the anti-judaicising spirit of Paul. All the same, at this time, it does not appear that this is, or should be, a significant issue between the churches -- unless stubborn-minded on all sides (Catholic as well as Orthodox) choose to make it so.

Dear Friends,

Thank you for coming to my rescue and defence . . . Not that I couldn't have handled myself, but it is always nice to know you have friends in your corner!

The Azymite Latins represent a later tradition within Christianity, even though that tradition is much older within Judaism.

John Meyendorff (+ Memory Eternal!) wrote that the whole controversy about what kind of bread is to be used is really, in the end, nothing because after the Consecration, both East and West believe that there is no longer any bread on the Altar at all, but the Body and Blood of Christ!

The rich symbolism of the Risen Lord in the Bread that has risen and the red wine of the Orthodox Church is most inspiring.

A Byzantine tradition has it that when the Crusaders invaded Constantinople, they broke into the Patriarchal reliquary and found a part of the Bread that was said to have been used at the Last Supper.

It was leavened. And the Latin Bishops with the Crusaders ordered them to be removed and hidden from public view.

Finally, I don't think one can push St Paul's "anti-Judaizing" attitudes too far on this as on other things.

Paul was simply against making Judaism the necessary stepping stone for Gentiles on their way to Christianity.

He participated in Temple worship and traditions, as we also see in the Acts. In every which way, he was loyal to his Jewish religious and cultural heritage, albeit as a follower of Christ.

Alex

[ 05-14-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

Dear Marshall,

Just a note to address the notion of "unclean."

Jesus actually did many things throughout His public ministry that did not mesh with the notions of "clean" and "unclean" of his contemporaries, such as the disciples husking wheat stalks on a Sabbath, healing on a Sabbath, eating with sinners and publicans etc.

In fact, a significant teaching of the Acts of the Apostles is the conversion of St Peter to a new way of thinking about other cultures that did not follow the Judaic cleanliness laws.

Our Lord followed His Judaic heritage, but He transformed it significantly, just as He transformed His Passover during the Mystical Supper.

Alex

Brendan,

I can't remeber were I read it but I scholars have discovered that the Armenian use of unleavened bread predates the Crusades and was not in imitation of the Latins. The Ethiopians as well have used unleavened bread on Holy Thursday predating contact with latin missionaries.

In Christ,
Lance

Dear Lance,

Yes, the Oriental Churches have, in varying degrees, continued with a number of Judaic practices from Apostolic times and following.

The Ethiopians in particular were of the Jewish faith, under their Queen Saint Makeda and the Emperor Saint Menelik-David ben Solomon.

Interestingly enough, some Latin writers in the past have accused the Byzantine Church of "Judaizing" with its solemnization of Saturday and the like.

Believe it or not.

Alex

Lance wrote:
<<St. John's Gospel places the Last Supper before the Passover, hence the Byzantine's tradition that Christ used leavened bread. See John 13:1. Although, I agree both the historical reasoning of the Latins and Armenians based on the Synoptics and their view of leaven as impurity and the theological reasoning of the other Eastern Churches based on St. John's Gospel and view of leaven as symbolic of the Resurrection are equal and valid traditions.>>

If we read literally the Synoptics and this passage of St. John's Gospel it is clear that there is some inconsistency between them. But probably (an just probably) St. John's Gospel is not directly refering to the time when the Last Supper happened, but to some other event in the same passage. There is an interesting opinion at the Catholic Information Network about this issue. This is the link www.cin.org/users/james/questions/q060.htm [cin.org]

Anyway, I agree with Lance and the others here who said that the different traditions of the Apostolic Churches are equally valid.

The metaphor of Christ Risen and leavened bread is gorgeous and expresses a reality of our Faith. After all our Faith is abundant in symbols that express the reality.

But could we think about the wonderful implications of Christ passion beginning on the firt day of Passover, since it is the day when the Jews use to sacrifice a lamb for their meal and we call Christ the God's Lamb, the Virginal Lamb, whose sacrifice saved us from death and whose blood bought us at a great price. Also during the Pascha celebration the Catholic Church proclaims "Let see the tree of the cross where Christ our Pascha was immolated".

Cristo ha resucitado.

David
The Eastern tradition is for leavened bread and the Western for unleavened. Each should follow their tradition.
In the end does it ultimately matter?
Stephanos I

It does if you're the assigned baker!

(Just joking - getting to close to the weekend!!)

Blessings!

Dear Dr. John,

You brought back a fond memory for me.

My priestly granddad and his presbytera would have special "bread baking days" to prepare the prosphora.

This was always an all-day affair that ended with us eating up the unusuable remainders to the accompaniment of coffee and tea.

Even I had a role . . .

I'll never forget those days I spent with my grandparents. It brings a tear just talking about it now!

Alex