The Eucharist
Ignatius’s understanding of the
Eucharist is closely linked to his ecclesiology. The link arises from his claim
that the only legitimate Eucharist is that which is conducted with episcopal authorization.
Thus Ignatius declares, “Only that Eucharist which is under the authority of
the bishop (or whomever he himself designates) is to be considered valid” (Ign.
Smyrn. 8.1b). It is notable that Ignatius does not state that the bishop
must preside at every eucharistic celebration, but rather that those events
must take place under his authority or with his delegated permission. In the
wider context of this statement, Ignatius suggests that certain people “do not
believe in the blood of Christ” (Ign. Symrn. 6.1), thus making
themselves liable to judgment. Furthermore, it appears that certain opponents who
hold docetic beliefs have abstained from the Eucharist. For Ignatius, refusal
to participate in the Eucharist was not merely a rejection of the bishop’s authority,
but it reflected deviant beliefs concerning the reality and redemptive nature
of Christ’s death.
In this context, as a polemical
response to those holding the beliefs that Ignatius opposes, he makes his
strongest and most direct claim, affirming the Eucharist as “the flesh of our
Saviour Jesus Christ” (Ign. Smyrn. 6.2). While this statement is
certainly compatible with later understandings of the real presence of Christ in
the Eucharist, and hence with a more developed notion of transubstantiation, it
would nevertheless be unhelpful to take this statement out of its charged
polemical context. In other passages, Ignatius perhaps does not go as far in
equating the Eucharist with the flesh of Christ. For instance, writing to the
Philadelphians, the community is instructed to unite in partaking of one
Eucharist. The rational for this instruction is “for there is one flesh of our
Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup that leads to unity through his blood; there is
one alter, just as there is one bishop together with the council of presbyters
and the deacons, my fellow servants” (Ign. Phld. 4.1). Here the
Eucharist, like Christ’s blood, and like church-leadership structures, should
lead to unity rather than division. Ignatius does not provide a thoroughgoing
theology of the Eucharist. However, what emerges is his strong and repeated
belief that only a Eucharist. However, what emerges is his strong and repeated
belief that only a Eucharist held under the authority of the bishop or his
delegate is legitimate. Furthermore, Ignatius presses the comparison between
the eucharistic elements and the flesh and blood of Christ. (Paul Foster, “The Letters
of Ignatius of Antioch,” in The Apostolic Fathers, ed. Paul Foster
[Ancient Literature for New Testament Studies 4; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan
Academic, 2025], 193-94)
