I came across a question in a book today: “Why is the common meal regarded as the place where Jesus’ death is proclaimed?”
Paul spoke about how the cross made a spectacle of the existing powers and authorities, how it stripped them bare and revealed them as the really are - powers of violence and death. Quoting from the book again, and speaking about the early Christian community after the events of Jesus’ death and resurrection, “Their common meal became a place to remember Jesus’ death. As often as the meal was celebrated, Rome’s vicious deed was named as such. The remembrance of Jesus’ death gave Rome’s imperial oppression the name that unmasked it.”
Jesus’ death and resurrection unmasked the powers, ended the charade. The powers offered one script, one version of how things really were, and the work of Christ trounced it and revealed the truth. And every time people remembered Christ’s death at their common meals they further loosened the grip of the powers of death.
Then it hit me - of course the common meal is the place of remembering! What human practice could be more basic, more fundamental, more influential than eating a meal? Even aside from the scriptural significance of meals in Jewish culture, eating traditions (even mundane, every-day ones) form one of the largest, strongest and most necessary threads in the fabric of any society. Placing the remembrance of Christ’s death at people’s tables offers the most potent resistance to powers that would deny Christ and his work. Everyone eats, and if people proclaim Christ’s death every time they are at table then the oppressive story of the powers is quickly unwritten.
Of course the meal is the place of remembrance. Where else would it be?
As usual, these are just thoughts. I’m not trying to make the Eucharist more complicated than it needs to be.
