Sermon Tone Analysis

| *SCOTT HAHN: THE FOURTH CUP * | *The Sacrament of the Eucharist * |

|   | Transcript of a taped address by Dr. Scott Hahn, former Presbyterian minister and Professor of Theology at The Fransiscan University of Steubenville The original tape was distributed by Catholic Answers.

I'd like to cover a lot, and I'd like to tell you in advance what I'm going to tell you.

I'd like to move from one to another to a third area.

The first area I'd like to focus on is how it is that Christ in the Last Supper and in the Eucharist offers himself up as the *New Covenant Passover*, and how the Eucharist and the Old Testament Passover are in a sense two sides of the same coin.

The second focus of our time will be on the *Nature of the Mass*, then, as a sacrifice.

That was big problem for me, and that's a big problem for lots of people outside the church and I think for some people in the church too, who wonder about how it is that after Calvary we can still speak of any activity that is performed on earth as being a sacrifice of Christ.

And then finally the third area for our consideration will be on what *Our Proper Response* would be to our Lord in the Eucharist, in the blessed Sacrament.

In other words, why should we adore our Lord in the Eucharist as opposed to just any old place we happen to be?

In other words, we'll conclude on the note of Eucharistic adoration, and why that is a fit, proper, and very necessary act of devotion in the family of God, the Catholic Church.

Let's go back to the first, the Eucharist as Passover.

What I'd like to share in this first part is not what theologians would call de fide; it isn't infallibly defined dogma that binds the conscience, the intellect and will of every Catholic believer.

Instead, what I'd like to do is just to share my own Scripture study in sort of an abbreviated form that led me to see something that I didn't think was possible - it led me to see that the Last Supper and Christ's sacrifice on Calvary and the Eucharist are all of one piece.

Some scholars might dispute this.

You can't find all Scripture scholars agreeing on anything these days, so I don't lose much sleep over the fact that there might be some scripture scholars who dispute this point.

But through my own study (/and I've checked this with others who are more qualified and better trained scholars than me/) it helps.

It's been an explanation that has provided insight for others as well.

It's not entirely original, but for me it was a discovery of my own before I discovered it in the writings of other great and holy and wise authors.

|

| ...*all the nations in God's eyes are like sons, but that Israel back then held a kind of primacy, like the oldest brother.

"**Israel** is my firstborn son.* *All firstborn sons would have died, not just the Egyptian firstborn sons, except for one thing - the Passover.

**...what God was interested in doing was to restore the family purity and the family communion of His children, the people of **Israel**.

The Passover was the bonding agent that brought it about... **...when Christ institutes the Eucharist, as I said, it takes place in the upper room at the Last Supper.

And what are they doing but celebrating the Passover?

* | *New Covenant Passover* When we think about how Christ instituted the Eucharist, we're obviously taken back to the Upper Room.

And just recall if you will some well known facts.

He and the disciples were celebrating what well known feast?

The Passover.

Probably the most important feast in all the Jewish calendar back then, because it signaled the event - it signified the salvation deed of God, the work of God.

Centuries, over a thousand years before, when Moses and the twelve tribes of Israel found themselves in bondage down in Egypt.

And you know how it was that God called Moses from the burning bush and said, "Go and tell pharaoh the following: 'Israel is my firstborn son.'"

Now that's a very interesting statement to begin with, because that idea of firstborn son is very essential to the Passover itself.

"Israel is my firstborn son."

God is saying something to Egypt and to all the other nations: 'You are enslaving and ignoring and mistreating your eldest brother'.

It almost implies that all the nations in God's eyes are like sons, but that Israel back then held a kind of primacy, like the oldest brother.

"Israel is my firstborn son.

Go tell pharaoh that Israel is my firstborn son.

Let him go to serve me or else I will slay your firstborn sons."

And you know the story about the plagues and how they came upon Egypt and pharaoh kept hardening and turning away from God and wouldn't listen, or he would listen and act like he was going to give in but at the last minute he'd turn away and harden his heart some more.

Until finally the tenth plague came, which was the plague of the angel of death visiting death upon the firstborn sons in Egypt.

All firstborn sons would have died, not just the Egyptian firstborn sons, except for one thing - the Passover.

If you and your household through the father took a lamb and slew that lamb and sprinkled the blood on the doorpost and ate the meal you would wake up and your firstborn son would be alive.

And of course the Egyptian families didn't, the Israelite families did and with that they were brought up in the exodus out of Egypt to Mount Sinai where God made a covenant with them, where He, like a father, entered into a loving relationship with the son.

It's almost like a bridal....it's like a marriage encounter.

That's the Old Testament background.

What it all meant was that this was the covenant event.

In other words, what God was interested in doing was to restore the family purity and the family communion of His children, the people of Israel.

The Passover was the bonding agent that brought it about, through the blood of the lamb, that sacrifice.

And so it was celebrated for thousands of years, and still is by Jews, as the sign of the Mosaic covenant.

Now remember, a covenant is a sacred family bond; it's more than just a contract.

And remember also that firstborn sons were marked for destruction.

In other words, Egypt offered up a sacrifice and so did Israel.

Egypt's sacrifice was unwilling: their firstborn sons.

Israel's sacrifice was voluntary: the unblemished lamb.

All of this is key, I believe, to understand the New Testament context of the Last Supper and our own Holy Eucharist, because when Christ institutes the Eucharist, as I said, it takes place in the upper room at the Last Supper.

And what are they doing but celebrating the Passover?

Luke 22:15: "I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you."

So likewise in Mark chapter 14: "His disciples said to him, 'Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?'

And he gave them instructions and the disciples set out and entered the city and found it as he had told them and they prepared the Passover."

|

| *There are four cups that represent the structure of the Passover.

**Now what's the problem?

**Why did he (Jesus) skip the fourth cup? * | And you know the circumstances and details surrounding the Last Supper.

I won't recount all of them, but let's just go over the more salient features.

In Mark 14:22ff we read, "And as they were eating he took bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to them and said, 'Take; this is my body.

And he took a cup and when he had given thanks (/the Greek word for that is eucharisto/) he gave it to them and they all drank of it, and he said to them, 'This is my blood of the new covenant which is poured out for many.'"

And then he adds a kind of unusual statement: "Truly I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God."

And then, when they had sung a hymn, they went out into the night to the Mount of Olives.

Now that might not seem very significant to you but to scholars who study the gospel accounts of the Passover in the upper room, there's a big problem.

Why?

Because we know the way the Passover has been celebrated for centuries, for millenia; it's a very ancient liturgy, it's well known, it's no secret.

Jews still celebrate it according to the same structure.

There are four cups that represent the structure of the Passover.

The first cup is the blessing of the festival day, it's the kiddush cup.

The second cup of wine occurs really at the beginning of the Passover liturgy itself, and that involves the singing of psalm 113.

And then there's the third cup, the cup of blessing which involves the actual meal, the unleavened bread and so on.

And then, before the fourth cup, you sing the great hil-el psalms: 114, 115, 116, 117 and 118.

And having sung those psalms you proceed to the fourth cup which for all practical purposes is the climax of the Passover.

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.

I'm sure this doesn't seem like a big problem and for a long time it didn't seem big to me, but it had led many scholars to question whether he was celebrating a Passover at all because you just don't blow apart the liturgy that way.

You don't just sidestep the most important part.

It would be like saying the Mass and skipping the Eucharist, forgetting the words of consecration.

So why did Jesus do it?

Other scholars say, well back then there must not have been a fourth cup.

But ancient revered traditions like that don't just spring up overnight and then cover the globe like the Passover liturgy has, with all four cups.

And so it seems likely that there might be a better explanation.

But where?

Why did he skip the fourth cup?

After all, he was raised a Jew, he'd been celebrating the Passover every year of his life since he was a little boy according to the strictest laws of Moses.

Well, maybe there's a psychological reason.

Maybe he was so anxious, so uptight about what he knew he was going to do, he - for instance, we read in Mark 14:32, "They went out to a place called Gethsemane and he said to his disciples, 'Sit here while I pray.'

He took with him Peter, James and John and began to be greatly distressed and troubled, and he said to them, 'My soul is very sorrowful even unto death.'"

|

| *Three times he fell down to the ground and said to his Father, he cried out.

"Abba, Father!"

The most intimate of terms.

"All things are possible to Thee.

Remove this cup from me.

Yet not what I will, but what Thou wilt."