Leviticus 7.11-15 (𝔐): A Eucharistic Prefiguration
The Church has consistently regarded the Old Testament as having an inescapable relationship with the New Testament. Such doctrine prevailed universally upon the defeat of the Marcionites—those who taught that the Old Covenant was separable from the Gospel—through the councils of Nicea and Ephesus.[1] Pope Paul VI formulates the ontology of divine testaments poetically:
“The principal purpose to which the plan of the old covenant was directed was to prepare for the coming of Christ, the redeemer of all and of the messianic kingdom, to announce this coming by prophecy and to indicate its meaning through various types […] God, the inspirer and author of both Testaments, wisely arranged that the New Testament be hidden in the Old and the Old be made manifest in the New.”[2]
The Scriptures themselves clearly teach this unison (Jn. 5.46–47; Heb. 9.8–14; 1 Pet. 1.10–12). They articulate that the Old Covenant features typologies and patterns which became known through the mystery of Christ (1 Cor. 10.1–4; Heb. 10.1).[3] Christ thus fulfills the Torah through His Melchizedekian lineage by implication (Heb. 7.11–16). Furthermore, the Levitical Cult finds its culmination in the oblation of Christ upon the cross.
Consider the Burnt Offering as a paradigmatic example. Mark Rooker, a contemporary Old Testament scholar, astutely observes that “the burnt offering foreshadows or typifies the death of Christ for sins.”[4] Leviticus itself emphasizes that the sacrifice must be unblemished (Lev. 1.3, 10); in the same way, Christ Himself is unblemished (cf. 2 Cor. 5.21; 1 Pet. 1.18–19). The same hermeneutical principles utilized here may be applied to the Peace Offering, one of five central offerings prescribed in Leviticus (Lev. 3.1–17; 7.11–34).[5]
The Peace Offering features remarkably distinctive prescriptions. First, the Scriptures at times deem the offering a voluntary offering, or nǝdāvāh in the Tanakh (Lev. 7.16 cf. Lev. 22.29; Deut. 12.6). In contrast, other rituals were not “optional” (e.g., Lev. 16.29–34). Second, YHWH permitted this offering to be eaten by the congregation. While the priests had an apportioned breast (Lev. 17.31), the rest was to be eaten by the people (Lev. 22.29–30). No other offering was to be touched by the people; rather, the flesh of other offerings was to be given to the Aaronic priesthood as their portion, or it was to be burnt before the Lord. Third, the sacrifce was to be presented with Leavened Bread (Lev. 7.13). While this will be addressed further below, it shall suffice to say for now that the concept of “leaven” is generally not favorable in Scriptures (cf. Am. 4.5; Mk. 8.15; 1 Cor. 5.6–8; Gal. 5.9). Finally, the offering is called a “sacrifice of thanksgiving,” or zeḇah toḏaṯ (Lev. 7.15). Observe the parallelism between these words and one of the earliest liturgies of the Church prior to the Eucharistic partaking:
“[…] send forth, O God, Thy good grace, and sanctify our souls, and bodies, and spirits; and turn our thoughts to holiness, that with a pure conscience we may bring to Thee a peace-offering, the sacrifice of praise” (italics added).[6]
Likewise, the Book of Common Prayer (1662) Eucharistic liturgy incorporates a prayer following the distribution of elements which includes the phrase:
“O Lord and heavenly Father, we thy humble servants entirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, most humbly beseeching thee to grant that by the merits and death of thy son Jesus Christ, and through faith in His blood, we and thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins […]” (italics added).[7]
These additions to the liturgies are not coincidental. They trace their roots, not only to the earliest practice of the Church, but also the Torah itself.
The Text of Leviticus 7.11–15
It is helpful to preface the discussion around Leviticus 7 by beginning in Leviticus 3. Here, YHWH prescribes the regulations for a Peace Offering (lit. zeḇah Šǝlāmīm, or “sacrifice of peace offerings”). In the instruction, YHWH commands that the people bring an undefiled animal before the Lord at the door of the Tabernacle, where Aaron and his sons would then offer it upon the altar. From there, the blood of the animal would be sprinkled on the altar, and the inward portions (e.g., kidneys, fat, & caul) would be burned (Lev. 3.1–17).
Leviticus 7.11–15 [11–34] supplements Leviticus 3. The section begins with a formulaic marker introducing the law (cf. Lev. 6.9, 24). Then, YHWH issues a series of commandments to offer cakes with the offering:
“(12) If he offer it for a thanksgiving, then he shall offer with the sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of fine flour, fried. (13) Besides the cakes, he shall offer for his offering leavened bread with the sacrifice of thanksgiving of his peace offerings. (14) And of it he shall offer one out of the whole oblation for an heave offering unto the LORD, and it shall be the priest’s that sprinkleth the blood of the peace offerings. (15) And the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten the same day that it is offered; he shall not leave any of it until the morning.” (Lev. 7.12–15).[8]
Note the conditional nature of Lev. 7.12. The Peace Offering was to be offered as a voluntary expression of fellowship (cf. Lev. 22.29). The text is a direct reflection of the MT emphasis, which utilizes a segolta accent and waw conjunction to connotate a statement of conditionality ([…] אִ֣ם עַל־תּוֹדָה֮ יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ֒ וְהִקְרִ֣יב).[9]
When the sacrifice was to be presented, bread supplemented it. The description here closely matches that of Lev. 2, the laws concerning Grain Offerings. Notice the overlap in the comparison below:
“[…] then he shall offer with the sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of fine flour, fried” (Lev. 7.12).
“And if thou bring an oblation of a meat offering baken in the oven, it shall be unleavened cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, or unleavened wafers anointed with oil” (Lev. 2.4).
The parallels demonstrate the overlap between these two offerings, save the final clause of Lev. 7.12: the people were to offer “fried” (mūrǝbeḵeṯ) cakes mingled with oil. More peculiar yet, every participial idea in Lev. 2.4 and 7.12 (“mingled” & “anointed”) are Qal passive participles. In contrast, the word “fried” features a derived Hof’al stem—a relatively rare form in the Hebrew in stark contrast to the Qal stem and active derived stems (Pi’el and Hif’il). While the Hof’al does not necessarily imply the same rhetorical, semantic purpose as it may in poetic texts, it is interesting to note nonetheless as a feature of discontinuity.
The passage begins to traverse unique grounds. Lev. 7.13 reads the following:
“Besides the cakes, he shall offer for his offering leavened bread with the sacrifice of thanksgiving of his peace offerings” (Lev. 7.13).
This command is scarce in the Scriptures. As aforementioned above, Scripture generally treats leaven in an undesirable fashion, especially as a metaphor for sin (1 Cor. 5.6–8; Gal. 5.19). In addition, leavened bread could not be offered with the blood of the sacrifice (cf. Lev. 2.11). The malicious attributes of leaven are carried over into Rabbinic writings, like the one below from the Talmud:
“Master of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that our will is to perform Your will, and what prevents us? On the one hand, the yeast in the dough, the evil inclination that is within every person; and the subjugation to the kingdoms on the other.”[10]
However, the leaven does not carry inherent, ontological evil within itself. The Torah also allows for leaven in Lev. 23.17, where the leavened loaves are deemed “firstfruits unto the Lord.” Jesus Himself uses leaven in a parabolic pericope in Mt. 13.33, where leaven represents the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, leaven has no inherent malice; rather, uses of “leaven” must be analyzed contextually on a case-by-case basis.
Lev. 7.13 must be interpreted in light of Lev. 23.17, since the leaven itself is not being offered on the altar (cf. Ex. 23.18–19). This leavened bread must be reckoned as an offering of food, the firstfruits of the Peace Offering. Certainly, it must be so, for Lev. 7.14 reads:
“And of it he shall offer one out of the whole oblation for an heave offering unto the LORD, and it shall be the priest’s that sprinkleth the blood of the peace offerings” (Lev. 7.14).
YHWH received the leavened bread as a heave offering, or “contribution” (tǝrǔmāh), for the priest.[11] Consequently, the priest himself ate this gift as a part of the instruction of YHWH. If the leaven exuded ontological defilement, such a provision would be nonexistent. The leavened cake portrayed a clean and pure offering to the Lord.
Finally, before turning toward Christology, Lev. 7.15 must be reckoned with:
“And the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten the same day that it is offered; he shall not leave any of it until the morning” (Lev. 7.15).
Once again, no other sacrifice was to be eaten by the people apart from the Peace Offering. The priests themselves either ate or burnt other offerings presented at the gate of the Tabernacle. While the regulations for the offering are extensive, the Mishnah summarizes its consumption:
“Peace offerings are offerings of lesser sanctity. Their slaughter is anywhere in the Temple courtyard, and their blood requires two placements that are four, and they are eaten throughout the city of Jerusalem, by every person, i.e., any ritually pure Jew, prepared in any manner of food preparation, for two days and one night, i.e., the day on which they are slaughtered, the following day, and the intervening night. The status of the portion that is separated from them and given to the priests is similar to theirs; but the portion that is separated is eaten by the priests, by their wives, and by their children, and by their slaves.”[12]
Herein lies the crux of Lev. 7. The covenant community may express true thanksgiving to God—the firstfruits of their thanksgiving—through fellowship with Him, which He promises through feasting upon the flesh of the Peace Offering. Every clean covenant member may partake of the divine feast (cf. Lev. 7.20). The Mishnah’s exhortation closely matches that of the Didache with reference to the Eucharist:
“As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountain tops and after being harvested was made one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom, for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever.’ But let no one eat or drink of the Eucharist with you except for those baptized in the name of the Lord, for it was in reference to this that the Lord said: ‘Do not give that which is holy to dogs’” (Did. 8.4–5).[13]
The rest of Lev. 7.16–34 deals with the prohibitions against eating the sacrifice on the condition of uncleanness, and how the offering must be eaten within a certain timeframe lest YHWH become provoked in wrath (Lev. 7.21). For the sake of brevity, these instructions are left to the study of the reader as the Didache smooths a transition to Christology.
Eucharistic Ramifications
The Peace Offering of Leviticus 7 offers a glimpse—a type and shadow—of the true and present reality in Christ. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines the Eucharist as worship:
“[It is] the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being. It is the culmination both of God’s action sanctifying the world in Christ and of worship men offer to Christ and through Him to the Father in the Holy Spirit” (1325).[14]
With this definition in mind, Leviticus 7 helps to paint a diversified canvas of what the Eucharist is, and how YHWH must be approached in reverence with regards to worship:
- The Eucharistic sacrifice must be made in good conscience and a free will. The Peace Offering was not a habitual requirement, but rather a freewill offering (Lev. 7.11; Lev. 22.29–30). 1 Pet. 3.21 states that believers have a good conscience through baptism, which now saves. Therefore, believers ingrafted into the New Covenant may partake freely and thankfully, not out of compulsion. This is why St. Paul places no time constraint on the divine celebration, but rather says that as often as we partake, we must do so together in remembrance (1 Cor. 11.24–25). After all, the Lord desires mercy, not sacrifice (Hos. 6.6)—no Eucharist is better than a Eucharist with no discernment, faithfulness, or godly intent.
- Christ is the fulfillment of the Peace Offering. Christ is the Unleavened Bread anointed with oil (Lev. 7.12 cf. Ex. 12.9–10; Lk. 22.19). He is the firstfruits of the sacrifice, the Leavened Bread, since by His sacrifice He also became the firstfruits of the resurrection (Lev. 7.13 cf. 1 Cor. 15.20). Moreover, He is the undefiled, holy lamb led to the sacrifice (Lev. 22.21 cf. 2 Cor. 5.21). He has made fellowship and peace possible by His blood (1 Jn. 1.9).
- The Church truly feasts on the Body and Blood of Christ by the Spirit. St. Paul instructs the Church that the bread from which we eat is a participation in the Body of Christ, and the drink which is blessed a participation in the Blood of Christ (1 Cor. 10.16). In the same way, the Israelite community experienced a type of fellowship with God through feasting on the flesh of the Peace Offering (Lev. 7.15). They feasted at the altar of God in gratitude and thankfulness. In this feast does Christ Himself say that there is life to be found (Jn. 6.53–54). In the Eucharistic feast, the Father gives grace and assurance to those who walk by faith in the Son of God.
- The Church must approach the Eucharist with repentance and faith. All throughout the Scriptures, unclean sacrifices were associated with unclean hearts (cf. Mal. 1.9–10). In the same way, a defiled Peace Offering led to a cutoff from the covenant community (Lev. 7.20). This is why St. Paul exhorts the Church to examine themselves before coming to the altar (1 Cor. 11.27–28). Just as the Peace Offering was to be approached with specificity and order (e.g., Lev. 7.12–13), so too must the Eucharist be approached with that same order and specificity (cf. 1 Cor. 11.18–22).
“For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same My name shall be great among the Gentiles; And in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: For my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts” -Mal. 1.11
Εν Χαριτι αυτου,
Alex McWilliams
[1] See Tertullian, The Five Books Against Marcion 4.9 (ANF 3.355) for examples of Marcion’s erroneous teaching.
[2] Vatican Council II, Dei Verbum, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, ¶ 15–16.
[3] For a patristic example, see Melito, Fragments V (ANF 8.759).
[4] Rooker, Leviticus, NAC (Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000), 85.
[5] The five offerings, in order of appearance in the Scriptures, are the Burnt Offering (Lev. 1), the Grain Offering (Lev. 2), the Fellowship (Peace) Offering (Lev. 3), the Sin Offering (Lev. 4), and the Guilt Offering (Lev. 5.14–6.7).
[6] “Prayer of the Veil,” The Divine Liturgy of James II (ANF 7.543).
[7] Church of England, “The Order for the Administration of Communion,” The Book of Common Prayer (Her Majesty’s Printing Office, 1662), 253.
[8] All Scripture quotations are derived from the King James Version KJV (1900).
[9] All MT quotations are derived from the Lexham Hebrew Bible (LHB). For a list of [binary] disjunctive/conjunctive accents, consult Futato, Basics of Hebrew Accents (Zondervan Academic, 2020), 18–19. In this verse, the segolta is a second-tier disjuctive accent. Since an atnakh is not present until after the phrase “anointed with oil” in Lev. 7.12, the segolta is thus the most “potent” disjunctive accent between Lev. 7.12a & 7.12b. Its placement indicates that the waw-conjunction is to be translated as “then” and not merely “and.”
[10] b. Ber. 17a, The William Davidson Talmud.
[11] For a more in-depth study, see Koehler et al., “תְּרוּמָה,” The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994–2000), 1788–1790.
[12] m. Zebaḥ 5:6, Koren-Steinsaltz Midrash.
[13] Glimm et al., trans. The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1 of The Fathers of the Church (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1947), 179.
[14] John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed (Doubleday, 1995), 369.
Leave a comment