Do we need unleavened bread?
Orthodox Christians object to the Catholic use of unleavened bread (azymes) in the Eucharist, arguing that Christ used leavened bread at the Last Supper since it occurred before the Jewish Passover. They contend the Greek term „artos‟ used in the Gospels specifically refers to leavened bread, and they see the use of leavened bread as symbolizing Christ’s living body with the fullness of divinity and humanity.
Orthodox Christians object to the Catholic use of unleavened bread (azymes) in the Eucharist, arguing that Christ used leavened bread at the Last Supper since it occurred before the Jewish Passover. They contend the Greek term „artos‟ used in the Gospels specifically refers to leavened bread, and they see the use of leavened bread as symbolizing Christ’s living body with the fullness of divinity and humanity.
Refutation
In „Contra Errores Graecorum,‟ St. Thomas Aquinas addresses this controversy by examining both scriptural and patristic evidence that supports the Catholic practice of using unleavened bread.
„Against the position of those who deny the Sacrament may be confected with unleavened bread.‟
Aquinas first cites the clear testimony of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) that the Last Supper was celebrated on „the first day of Unleavened Bread‟ (Matthew 26:17), when it would have been forbidden by Jewish law to have leavened bread in the house:
„On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, ‚Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?’‟ (Mark 14:12)
He then quotes St. John Chrysostom, an Eastern Father highly respected by Orthodox Christians:
„The first day he says is Thursday, on which observers of the Law began to celebrate the Passover, that is, to eat unleavened bread, absolutely free of yeast. The Lord, therefore, sends his disciples on Thursday, which the Evangelist calls the first day of the unleavened bread, on which in the evening the Savior ate the Passover; in this deed, as in all he did from the beginning of his circumcision to the final day of his passover, he clearly showed that he was not opposed to divine laws.‟
Thomas addresses the apparent contradiction with John’s Gospel, which some interpret as placing the Last Supper before the Passover. He follows Chrysostom’s explanation that the Passover mentioned in John 18:28 refers to the continuation of the feast, not its beginning, so there is no contradiction between the Gospels.
Regarding the term „artos,‟ Aquinas notes that while it typically refers to leavened bread, it can be used more broadly for bread in general, including unleavened bread. The specific context of the Passover feast determines its meaning in the Last Supper narratives.
Finally, Aquinas acknowledges that both leavened and unleavened bread can validly confect the sacrament, citing Pope Gregory’s statement:
„The Roman Church offers unleavened bread because the Word of the Father took flesh without any carnal commingling; but other Churches offer leavened bread because the Word of the Father is clothed with flesh and is true God and true man.‟
Conclusion
While recognizing the validity of the Orthodox use of leavened bread, Aquinas defends the theological appropriateness and historical basis for the Latin practice of using unleavened bread. He sees this not as a divisive issue but as a legitimate liturgical variation that reflects different aspects of the same Eucharistic mystery. The Catholic practice emphasizes Christ’s sinlessness and the historical continuity with the Passover, while acknowledging the equally valid symbolism in the Eastern practice.