Scott Hahn (Roman Catholic theologian): The Fourth Cup

[JLatimer]

Now what's the problem? The problem is that gospel account says something like this: after the third cup is drunk Jesus says, "I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until I am entering into the kingdom of God." And it says, "Then they sang the psalms." Every Jew who knows the liturgy would expect: and then they went ahead and said the grace and the blessing and had the fourth cup which climaxed and consummated the Passover. But no, the gospel account say they sang the psalms and went out into the night.

Versions of this talk (including an audio version) are available on the internet. I don't really have anything to say about it except that I like this. Comments and discussion of Scott Hahn's analysis of the Eucharist, anyone?

[Aindriú]

Holy Red Webpage, Batman! Apparently Scott Hahn is Klingon.

[JLatimer]

For instance, why is that Jesus happened to be wearing a seamless linen garment at the cross, when just coincidentally that's what the priest was legislated to wear when he sacrificed the Passover? Here is the true priest, as well as the true victim.

I think this is really wonderful, especially when considered together with how Caiaphas, the lawless High Priest, tore his clothes at the trial, which is specifically forbidden in the Law:

And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes;

Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.

Yet our Lord kept the Law perfectly, even on the Cross!

[JLatimer]

Holy Red Webpage, Batman! Apparently Scott Hahn is Klingon.

LOL! it is difficult to read. 

[ialmisry]

Now what's the problem? The problem is that gospel account says something like this: after the third cup is drunk Jesus says, "I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until I am entering into the kingdom of God." And it says, "Then they sang the psalms." Every Jew who knows the liturgy would expect: and then they went ahead and said the grace and the blessing and had the fourth cup which climaxed and consummated the Passover. But no, the gospel account say they sang the psalms and went out into the night.

Versions of this talk (including an audio version) are available on the internet. I don't really have anything to say about it except that I like this. Comments and discussion of Scott Hahn's analysis of the Eucharist, anyone?

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

We talked a lot about this here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,25677.msg413150/topicseen.html#msg413150

[JLatimer]

Now what's the problem? The problem is that gospel account says something like this: after the third cup is drunk Jesus says, "I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until I am entering into the kingdom of God." And it says, "Then they sang the psalms." Every Jew who knows the liturgy would expect: and then they went ahead and said the grace and the blessing and had the fourth cup which climaxed and consummated the Passover. But no, the gospel account say they sang the psalms and went out into the night.

Versions of this talk (including an audio version) are available on the internet. I don't really have anything to say about it except that I like this. Comments and discussion of Scott Hahn's analysis of the Eucharist, anyone?

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

We talked a lot about this here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,25677.msg413150/topicseen.html#msg413150

Well, I'm not gonna defend azymes, or RC doctrine generally, but I think there is plenty of good food for thought in this anyway. Albeit mixed with error? - you're probably right. But I still find it interesting.

My understanding was that it couldn't have been an actual Seder, since Friday was the "day of preparation"; nevertheless, it was "near the Passover", so the Passover symbolism/typology is intentional and important. The Lord calls the Last Supper "this Passover"; the Apostle calls Christ our "Pascha"; also, he refers to the "cup of blessing". Hahn's assertion that this alludes to the Seder ritual seems rather non-objectionable to me, as even if the original meal was not a Seder, it was replete with Passover symbolism.

[Wyatt]

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

Why does it matter whether leavened or unleavened bread is used for the Eucharist?

[Michał Kalina]

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

Why does it matter whether leavened or unleavened bread is used for the Eucharist?

Why does it matter whether bread or boiled potato is used for the Eucharist?

[ialmisry]

Now what's the problem? The problem is that gospel account says something like this: after the third cup is drunk Jesus says, "I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until I am entering into the kingdom of God." And it says, "Then they sang the psalms." Every Jew who knows the liturgy would expect: and then they went ahead and said the grace and the blessing and had the fourth cup which climaxed and consummated the Passover. But no, the gospel account say they sang the psalms and went out into the night.

Versions of this talk (including an audio version) are available on the internet. I don't really have anything to say about it except that I like this. Comments and discussion of Scott Hahn's analysis of the Eucharist, anyone?

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

We talked a lot about this here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,25677.msg413150/topicseen.html#msg413150

Well, I'm not gonna defend azymes, or RC doctrine generally, but I think there is plenty of good food for thought in this anyway. Albeit mixed with error? - you're probably right. But I still find it interesting.

yes, the seamless garment, and your addition, are things I had never thought of, but perfectly align.

[Jetavan]

Now what's the problem? The problem is that gospel account says something like this: after the third cup is drunk Jesus says, "I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until I am entering into the kingdom of God." And it says, "Then they sang the psalms." Every Jew who knows the liturgy would expect: and then they went ahead and said the grace and the blessing and had the fourth cup which climaxed and consummated the Passover. But no, the gospel account say they sang the psalms and went out into the night.

Versions of this talk (including an audio version) are available on the internet. I don't really have anything to say about it except that I like this. Comments and discussion of Scott Hahn's analysis of the Eucharist, anyone?

Hahn:

"But he had also said, "I will not taste of the fruit of the vine again until I come into the kingdom." So He wouldn't take the wine. But then we turn to John, chapter 19 - (If you have a Bible, turn with me to John 19. If you don't have a Bible you're probably a cradle Catholic (laughter) Sorry, one of those convert jokes; shame on me! (laughter))"

That Hahn...what a card.

[Aindriú]

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

Why does it matter whether leavened or unleavened bread is used for the Eucharist?

Why does it matter whether bread or boiled potato is used for the Eucharist?

...?

[ialmisry]

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

Why does it matter whether leavened or unleavened bread is used for the Eucharist?

hit the azymes tag.

[JLatimer]

It seems the cup of blessing features in the Seder, but also in any festive meal:

At the conclusion of a festive meal on the Sabbath, holidays and other important occasions, prior to the recitation of birkat hamazon - Grace after meals - the leader in bentshen would fill a kos shel berakhah - a cup of blessing - with wine and summon all those who were present to join him in the recitation of the benedictions.

[Jetavan]

Interesting interpretation of the non-symbolic nature of the Eucharist:

Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, "Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed, therefore" - what? - we don't need to have any more sacrifice? Therefore we don't need to have any more ritual, therefore all we have to do is have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and invite him into our hearts and everything else is taken care of? No, he's too knowledgeable about the Old Testament to say any of that. He says, "Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed; let us therefore celebrate the feast." What feast? The whole Passover feast. It's not complete yet. What do you mean?

Well, go back to the Old Testament, to the book of Exodus. Suppose that night as head of my household and father, I sacrificed an unblemished lamb with no broken bones, and I sprinkled his blood on the door post, and then I said, "Family, we're safe, let's go to bed', and we went to bed. I'd wake up in the morning to tragedy. My firstborn would be dead. Why? You had to eat the lamb. It isn't enough to kill him. That is the satisfaction for sin, but the ultimate goal of sacrifice is not blood and gore and God making sure He sees the death. The ultimate goal is to restore communion, to have fellowship with God restored. And that's what's signified by eating the lamb. Who shares a common meal? Family. What is this a sign of? Covenant. And what is a covenant? A sacred family bond. In the Old Testament any family that sacrificed a lamb and sprinkled the blood had to eat the lamb. It wasn't enough to say, 'Well we don't like lamb do we, kids? Why don't we make lamb cookies? Little lamb wafers that symbolize the lamb? We'll eat those and those'll be enough, right? Symbolic presence of the lamb, and all that?' No, you'd wake up and you'd be dead. You ate the lamb and you burned what was left. But you ate the lamb to reestablish and restore communion with your heavenly Father through His firstborn Son and Lamb. That's the way it was in the Old Testament, and St. Paul recognizes that it's still the way it is in the new covenant, only in spades, only with more glory.

[Michał Kalina]

I've heard very interesting theory that that was informal Pascha meal for those eg. who were travelling or had no family and in Jewish tradition it had looser rules than normal Pascha meal (not exact date had to be kept, other meals, with friends instead of family).

[JLatimer]

Looking at that Jewish site, I noticed he mentions the cleansing, outside and inside, of the cup:

The first requirement is hadachah mi-befnim - the cup must be washed on the inside. The second is shetifah mi-bachutz - rinsing it on the outside. The third regulation is that the cup be shalem - a finished product, without chips or cracks. The fourth rule is that the cup be maley - filled with wine to the brim. The fifth is meshagro le-anshei beito - that part of the wine be given to others in the household and those who are present. The sixth is me-atro be-talmidim. One ought to invite worthy disciples and learned men to share in such festive moments. The seventh is notlo bishtei yadav - the cup of blessing should be taken with both hands (Ber. 5 la and b; Orach Chayim 183:1-14).

This, of course, brings to mind our Lord's words to the Pharisees:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. [26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

It is interesting to me, though, to think about these ritual cleansing requirements in relation to all those references to cleanness in our Lord's words to the Apostles at the Last Supper:

Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. [4] Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

It's almost as if Jesus is fulfilling the requirements for washing the cup, outside and inside, but where the disciples are the cup. Maybe this is going out on a limb, but isn't it true that when we partake of the Fruit of the True Vine, our bodies become holy chalices?

[Fr. George]

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

Why does it matter whether leavened or unleavened bread is used for the Eucharist?

It matters in the question of, "Which Passion time-line do we use?  St. John's, or the so-called 'Synoptics'?"  Defense of azymes requires ascribing to the "Synoptics'" time-line, while the Orthodox position has been St. John's time-line, which would then preclude azymes from the Mystical Supper (and, correspondingly, the Liturgy).  Mr. Hahn's point about the 4th cup only works on the "Synoptics'" time-line, not on St. John's.

[Wyatt]

Why does it matter whether bread or boiled potato is used for the Eucharist?

Don't be obtuse. Bread (whether unleavened or leavened) is still bread. Boiled potato is not bread.

It matters in the question of, "Which Passion time-line do we use?  St. John's, or the so-called 'Synoptics'?"  Defense of azymes requires ascribing to the "Synoptics'" time-line, while the Orthodox position has been St. John's time-line, which would then preclude azymes from the Mystical Supper (and, correspondingly, the Liturgy).  Mr. Hahn's point about the 4th cup only works on the "Synoptics'" time-line, not on St. John's.

So are you saying that the other gospels suggest that unleavened bread was used, while St. John's gospel suggests leavened bread? How so?

[ialmisry]

Looking at that Jewish site, I noticed he mentions the cleansing, outside and inside, of the cup:

The first requirement is hadachah mi-befnim - the cup must be washed on the inside. The second is shetifah mi-bachutz - rinsing it on the outside. The third regulation is that the cup be shalem - a finished product, without chips or cracks. The fourth rule is that the cup be maley - filled with wine to the brim. The fifth is meshagro le-anshei beito - that part of the wine be given to others in the household and those who are present. The sixth is me-atro be-talmidim. One ought to invite worthy disciples and learned men to share in such festive moments. The seventh is notlo bishtei yadav - the cup of blessing should be taken with both hands (Ber. 5 la and b; Orach Chayim 183:1-14).

This, of course, brings to mind our Lord's words to the Pharisees:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. [26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

It is interesting to me, though, to think about these ritual cleansing requirements in relation to all those references to cleanness in our Lord's words to the Apostles at the Last Supper:

Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. [4] Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

It's almost as if Jesus is fulfilling the requirements for washing the cup, outside and inside, but where the disciples are the cup. Maybe this is going out on a limb, but isn't it true that when we partake of the Fruit of the True Vine, our bodies become holy chalices?

Of course, which is why we shouldn't  spit, get a hair cut, engage in marital relations, etc. after taking communion for a respectible time period.

[ialmisry]

Why does it matter whether bread or boiled potato is used for the Eucharist?

Don't be obtuse. Bread (whether unleavened or leavened) is still bread. Boiled potato is not bread.

It matters in the question of, "Which Passion time-line do we use?  St. John's, or the so-called 'Synoptics'?"  Defense of azymes requires ascribing to the "Synoptics'" time-line, while the Orthodox position has been St. John's time-line, which would then preclude azymes from the Mystical Supper (and, correspondingly, the Liturgy).  Mr. Hahn's point about the 4th cup only works on the "Synoptics'" time-line, not on St. John's.

So are you saying that the other gospels suggest that unleavened bread was used, while St. John's gospel suggests leavened bread? How so?

go to the thread I linked above, or the azymes tag below.

[JLatimer]

Looking at that Jewish site, I noticed he mentions the cleansing, outside and inside, of the cup:

The first requirement is hadachah mi-befnim - the cup must be washed on the inside. The second is shetifah mi-bachutz - rinsing it on the outside. The third regulation is that the cup be shalem - a finished product, without chips or cracks. The fourth rule is that the cup be maley - filled with wine to the brim. The fifth is meshagro le-anshei beito - that part of the wine be given to others in the household and those who are present. The sixth is me-atro be-talmidim. One ought to invite worthy disciples and learned men to share in such festive moments. The seventh is notlo bishtei yadav - the cup of blessing should be taken with both hands (Ber. 5 la and b; Orach Chayim 183:1-14).

This, of course, brings to mind our Lord's words to the Pharisees:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. [26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

It is interesting to me, though, to think about these ritual cleansing requirements in relation to all those references to cleanness in our Lord's words to the Apostles at the Last Supper:

Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. [4] Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

It's almost as if Jesus is fulfilling the requirements for washing the cup, outside and inside, but where the disciples are the cup. Maybe this is going out on a limb, but isn't it true that when we partake of the Fruit of the True Vine, our bodies become holy chalices?

Of course, which is why we shouldn't  spit, get a hair cut, engage in marital relations, etc. after taking communion for a respectible time period.

Right. In terms of "going out on a limb" I was referring more to my speculations on the foot washing, etc.

Incidentally, ISTM, Jesus' giving a whole speech about how He is the Vine at the Last Supper kinda ruins the whole Protestant objection to the Real Presence based on Matthew 26:29.

[deusveritasest]

It wasn't a Seder. Hahn of course is defending the traditional (since the schism) Latin practice of azymes.

Why does it matter whether leavened or unleavened bread is used for the Eucharist?

I don't know that it does...

[ialmisry]

Looking at that Jewish site, I noticed he mentions the cleansing, outside and inside, of the cup:

The first requirement is hadachah mi-befnim - the cup must be washed on the inside. The second is shetifah mi-bachutz - rinsing it on the outside. The third regulation is that the cup be shalem - a finished product, without chips or cracks. The fourth rule is that the cup be maley - filled with wine to the brim. The fifth is meshagro le-anshei beito - that part of the wine be given to others in the household and those who are present. The sixth is me-atro be-talmidim. One ought to invite worthy disciples and learned men to share in such festive moments. The seventh is notlo bishtei yadav - the cup of blessing should be taken with both hands (Ber. 5 la and b; Orach Chayim 183:1-14).

This, of course, brings to mind our Lord's words to the Pharisees:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. [26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

It is interesting to me, though, to think about these ritual cleansing requirements in relation to all those references to cleanness in our Lord's words to the Apostles at the Last Supper:

Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. [4] Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

It's almost as if Jesus is fulfilling the requirements for washing the cup, outside and inside, but where the disciples are the cup. Maybe this is going out on a limb, but isn't it true that when we partake of the Fruit of the True Vine, our bodies become holy chalices?

Of course, which is why we shouldn't  spit, get a hair cut, engage in marital relations, etc. after taking communion for a respectible time period.

Right. In terms of "going out on a limb" I was referring more to my speculations on the foot washing, etc.

Incidentally, ISTM, Jesus' giving a whole speech about how He is the Vine at the Last Supper kinda ruins the whole Protestant objection to the Real Presence based on Matthew 26:29.

[JLatimer]

^ Cool. Where is that from?

[ialmisry]

^ Cool. Where is that from?

It's a Transylvanian glass icon (notice how the lettering in the halo is backwards).

[Aindriú]

^ Cool. Where is that from?

It's a Transylvanian glass icon (notice how the lettering in the halo is backwards).

No, but I noticed the vine coming out of the wrong side.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: Scott Hahn (Roman Catholic theologian): The Fourth Cup