Sacrifice of the Mass: Consumption Redeemed
Hierothee suggested I do a post on my research about the connection of sacrifice to consumption. This is very difficult to do in the space of a standard post so this will necessarily be a broad sketch of what one day may be a much more compelling (I hope) manuscript.
I suppose the place to start is with John Paul’s Trinitarian anthropology. Man is made in the image of a Communion of Persons. He explains this Communion, starting from traditional Processional theology, in terms of total self-gift. Communion is total self-gift. This total self-gift is thereby the archetype for the human person in his relationships.
The human person is a hylomorphic entity; that is, a unity comprised of a spiritual soul and a material body. Man exists at once, in the realm of the spiritual and the animal. As a spiritual being man shares in the capacity for communion by use of his rational faculties, intellect and will. These faculties give him he capacity for total self-gift, for communion.
Animals also, in some way, must reflect God’s perfection. As fundamental as communion is to God’s being, one might expect that there should be some way in which sub-personal animals participate in communion. Certainly sub-personal beings do not have the rational faculties necessary for the communion of gift. They do however, experience a sort of communion in which they join themselves to something of a lower nature (hopefully). However, this union is through annihilating the lower nature and raising it into a higher nature. They become one with it, though this is a defective communion because the “other” has lost its being.
Man lives in both of these dimensions. He experiences both this spiritual communion of persons–most perfectly when the giving accords with the archetype, that is total, disinterested self-gift. He also experiences the communion of consumption when he eats…though I would argue he can consume in other ways…when he treats another person as a means rather than an end…but this requires more discussion than we have space for.
Man now exists in a deficient condition; he is fallen. It is very interesting to look at the third book of Genesis and the story of the fall in light of the above discussion. The mythic (this does not mean untrue of course) imagery shows our first parents with the task of total self-gift–that is, to give themselves in trust and thanksgiving to God, very much the way that John Paul describes the second Procession of the Son. There is a detailed discussion of the theology of creation in relation to the Son and the second Procession which should be inserted here but neither is there space for that so this might seem less compelling than it should be, but the support will have to wait a longer work.
The Genesis imagery of the fall indicates that the instead of achieving communion through this act of total-self gift, they instead chose consumption. I would argue that whatever the act of rebellion might have actually been, the choice of the consumption imagery is significant. It suggests that consumption–communion on man’s terms rather than God’s terms–is to be a perennial problem. In fact, consumption now often masquerades as communion. I believe that this is the anthropology behind what we know as “comfort foods” which are standard recourse for many of us, particularly when we have trouble with relationships of communion.
Man’s fallen state means that his capacity for love takes upon itself, potentially a bitter aspect. It is now the case that one has to die in different ways, when one loves. In the very least, he must die to himself and his selfish inclinations if he is to love the other for the other’s sake. This is a type of sacrifice. In fact, the challenge to love disinterestedly requires varying degrees of sacrifice. Sacrifice is to give of yourself for the sake of the other to the point that you experience loss in some manner or another. This is ultimately what the divine Processions are…though it may not be appropriate to use the term sacrifice for the divine Procession because of the attendant connotation of loss in sacrifice and there is no loss in the divine Communion.
However, the remedy to the fall, in which man’s failure to emulate the second Procession, will take on the proper meaning of the term sacrifice. The Son Incarnate will freely choose to manifest temporally what He does eternally. He will, in love, trust and thanksgiving, return to the Father all that the Father has given Him…including His human life. This Sacrifice on the cross will restore the conditions of possibility for communion, but interestingly enough, it does so in a way the redeems the consumption by which man’s initial communion was lost.
Of course we know well the fact that the Cross draws together the eternal with the temporal. It draws into itself the last Passover seder in the upper room before Christ’s Passion, as He transforms this seder into the New Testament Passover–the Sacrifice of the Mass. The Cross also brings forth the economic manifestation of the second Procession, that is Pentecost–in an analogous way in the first Procession brings about the second.
This one Paschal act, beginning with the Incarnation and ending with the sending of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, is liturgically made present in the Sacrifice of the Mass. The Mass re-presents the Sacrifice of the Cross through the memorial enactment of the New Testament Passover proleptically celebrated in the Upper Room. It culminates in an efficacious symbol of communion which looks very much like animal consumption–we call it Holy Communion.
The consumption in the Garden of Eden which destroyed man’s communion with God is now redeemed by the Son. The Son, who in an act of total self-gift reflective of His eternal gift, continually gives up His Body and Blood in every Mass celebrated throughout the ages, that through an animal act of consumption the faithful are restored by this life-giving communion with the Son and thereby, inserted into Trinitarian Communion.
In a hylomorphic act of love which eclipses Aristotle’s greatest thoughts, both aspects of the human person, animal and spiritual, are incorporated during this divinizing rite we call Holy Communion. The human person is inserted into the hypostatic order giving him entrance into Trinitarian life when he consumes the Flesh of the Son of Man and drinks His Blood…he now truly has life in him.
Consumption has been redeemed and is immutably implicated in spiritual communion. This doesn’t mean that consumption no longer masquerades as communion; it does.
It does mean though, that when this masquerading does lead to sin, it is now the source of its own ultimate undoing…because where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more. The love revealed and effected on the Cross, is poured out in time via the mediation of the Sacrifice of the Mass, restoring communion where souls choose to turn again to God. Sacrifice has redeemed consumption and made it the material cause of communion.
.jpg)












































































































I have been thinking for many years on the linkage between consumption and sacrifice in relation to a woman’s journey to Christ. Because of our biology women can intuitively understand Christ’s sacrifice. (A related but too-large topic is the difference between a man’s and a woman’s path to Christ.) Throughout pregnancy and during breastfeeding a woman is literally consumed. Women, in our fallen way, know Christ’s joy at offering His body. Joy, and certainly in our human case, conflict.
God’s grace grants women an overwhelming love during the act of baby-growing; however, great sacrifice is also required. Women, in our fallen way, also know the burden of the Cross. An unmedicated birth is an intense sacrifice followed by the greatest spiritual “communion,” as you would say. To be a participant in a miracle, childbirth, is to briefly touch heaven. We are in God’s hands at that moment and our will is rendered meaningless.
Breastfeeding is, in some ways, a larger sacrifice because our technology (baby formula) has given women the illusion that they can say “no” to consumption. To agree to breastfeed for more than a couple of weeks is a great humbler. That I am consumed during pregnancy is not as obvious as during breastfeeding. It is very disconcerting to be consumed. I know personally the great love and sacrifice that is part and parcel of offering one’s body for consumption. Because of this I believe that my experience, a woman’s perspective, of Holy Communion is different from a man’s.
To be a woman is to offer body and blood. I would completely agree with your premise that sacrifice and consumption lead to spiritual communion. The larger the sacrifice, in my experience, the greater the communion.
Comment by Kafbst — December 19, 2009 @ 12:43 PM
Are you guys dead or just retired?
Comment by Dim Bulb — March 8, 2010 @ 12:57 AM
Dim – thanks for checking in. Not dead yet…but also not quite yet willing to throw in the towel…just very busy.
Comment by David — March 8, 2010 @ 6:39 PM