Yeah, it is kind of a letdown, ain’t it?

A reader writes

I find the Protestant understanding of the Eucharist very disappointing and anticlimactic. To say that that Melchizedek and the Passover are prefiguring revelations of the Eucharist is to allow that God’s word speaks once from eternity into time, but to deny His presence in the Eucharist suggests that the power of His eternal word diminishes and weakens from evening to morning. Consider — In Genesis, God creates a sacrifice of symbolic bread. Then, in Exodus, God intensifies the message by giving us a sacrifice of sacred flesh to eat that we might not die, but live with Him. And then . . . in the culmination of all history; the moment of the true victory prefigured by Melchizedek’s celebration; the fulfillment of the promise made by eating the sacred paschal flesh; on the very brink of the entire torrent of revelation of which those things are only a part, God Himself, in the fufillment of all prophecies, calls together His people and gives them — symbolic bread again. One might as well say that the Second Coming will only return us to Eden, and that the marriage of Bride and Bridegroom is even less intense than what one can experience on a Sunday morning.

The whole “Passover is a symbol that symbolizes…. another symbol” thing doesn’t quite cut the mustard for me either.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X