We've been having this conversation about the Eucharist, and there are a couple Church fathers, in particular Clement of Alexandria and Augustine, who use words like symbol and figure when talking about the Eucharistic elements. What we have to keep in mind is that these words are English translations of Greek and Latin concepts that do not mean exactly what the English words mean. To the point, symbolic does not mean "only a symbol," and figurative does not mean "only a metaphor."
The word symbol (especially in Augustine, but reading Augustine correctly will help you understand Clement of Alexandria correctly) should be understood very much like the way the word SIGN is used in the Gospel of John. A sign is something that points to a deeper reality. So the bread and wine are symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ, in the sense that they point to the deeper reality of the Body and Blood. The Body and Blood are MORE real than the bread and wine, because after the consecration, the bread and wine only exist in the tangible aspects (accidents) and do not have substance (essence), but the Body and Blood of Christ exist in substance, even though they do not have tangible accidents. The point is that to say the bread and wine are symbols, does not mean that what they symbolize is not really there - actually it's the opposite - to say that the bread and wine are symbols means that they are the less real reality that "show" us the more real reality that underlies it. Another way that Augustine would say this is that the symbol BECOMES the reality.
The word "figure/figurative" is more tricky, but for all practical purposes you can read this word in the same way. The bread and wine are present "in a figure" - the point being that the Body and Blood are present IN REALITY.
One final note, for fun, as a reward if you read this to the end. In the ANF translation of Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 2.2, where Clement is trying to tell us not to get drunk, there is a Greek word there that means "the discomfort and nausea that follow the immoderate use of wine and the intoxication" and that is characterized by "head shaking." In other words, a hangover. The Greek word for a hangover is apparently kraipale - which the translator renders as "crapulousness." What a great word! So the next time you have a hangover (not that I'm advocating that), you can say, "Man, I feel crapulous!"
Here's a short (about a minute) video I took going around the Holy Column in the church of Santa Prassede. This is the column that Jesus was tied to when he was scourged by Pontius Pilate. They don't always have the barrier down, so you usually don't get to see it from all the way around. I wanted to get video of the whole thing all the way around because I ran across a note in an ancient document that said that those who made a pilgrimage (at that time to the Holy Land, since it was still in Jerusalem) could visit the Holy Column, and could see marks left from the hands of Jesus where he gripped it as he was being whipped. I assume that this is pious legend, but I figured since the column has that dark & light marble, maybe there's a place where the dark parts look like hands. I did not see it, but if you do, let me know!
I mentioned in The Journey that I wrote a song based on Isaiah 2, which is one of my favorite OT passages:
In days to come, the mountain of the Lord’s house
shall be established as the highest mountain, and raised above the hills.
All nations shall stream toward it. Many peoples shall come and say:
“Come, let us go up to the Lord’s mountain, to the house of the God of Jacob, That he may instruct us in his ways, and we may walk in his paths.” For from Zion shall go forth instruction, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
He shall judge between the nations, and set terms for many peoples.
They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; One nation shall not raise the sword against another, nor shall they train for war again. House of Jacob, come, let us walk in the light of the Lord!
I hope you like the song!
Here is our next set of texts - as we get into John chapter 6, we first encounter Jesus feeding the multitudes - in this case 5,000 families!
Now, as you know, there is also an account o Jesus feeding 4,000, and so you may also know that some scholars might speculate that these are just different versions of the same story that circulated and were handed down orally, until they were written down. Even the fact that both stories occur in the same gospel would not stop that kind of speculation. So I thought the first question I would have to ask was whether the Church fathers thought this was one event or two - BUT (and you see where this is going) I forgot that Jesus himself makes reference to two separate events (in Matthew 16 and in Mark 8) so there is no question for the Church fathers - these are two separate events. So it seems that Jesus performed this sign (miracle) of the feeding of the multitudes on two occasions. It's not just one event told two different ways, and it's also ...
My voice was still recovering from a bad cold, so not sounding my best, but this was a great conversation about pilgrimage, for the Jubilee year - more of this coming in other interviews! (FYI, I think I was the third of three guests that day, so you will have to fast forward to find me)
It seems that one way or another we need to talk about different kinds, or different levels of heresy. What I have been calling heresy vs. heterodoxy, others call heresy on fundamental doctrines vs. heresy on less fundamental doctrines. In other words, Heresy with a capital H (over fundamental doctrines like the Trinity and christology) are the kinds of heresies that move one outside the boundaries of what Christianity is, and that's because the very definition of Christianity is defined according to these fundamental doctrines. To refuse to sign the Creed at the Council of Nicaea in 325, or the Council of Constantinople in 381 - and indeed to reject any of the contents of the Creed today - means that a person is NOT a Christian.
So are the non-chalcedonians, such as the miaphysites (including St. Gregory of Narek, and today's Coptic Christians) - are they heretics? Well, like it is with a lot of things, that depends on your definition of heresy. If you include in your definition of ...
