Abstract
Common sense dictates that cannibalism—eating another person—is immoral whether because of the harm done to the other person or because of a violation of human sanctity. Some Christian traditions interpret the Eucharist as the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Hence, on its face, communion would involve a form of cannibalism. As human beings, is it morally permissible for us to eat the flesh of another in a sacred ritual? According to many Christian theologies, this is one of the most important ways that human beings relate to the divine. This constitutes a conflict between what is ethical (to not commit cannibalism) and what is divine (to participate in a sacred ritual). Søren Kierkegaard’s Discourses at the Communion on Friday illuminates the ethical tension between communion and cannibalism. For Kierkegaard, communion is an exception to the ethical, ‘a teleological suspension of the ethical.’ There is no resolution to the fact that Christianity calls its members to commit spiritual cannibalism, but the ethical is suspended by a higher power, a direct divine mandate. Furthermore, Kierkegaard’s understanding of the human-divine relation emphasizes that cannibalism is necessary in order to maintain a right relationship with God. It is through the act of communion that humans affirm their relationship with God, and to reject this relationship leads not only to despair but to auto-cannibalism. While other forms of cannibalism may be unethical, ritualistic cannibalism, in which the human and divine come into relation, supersedes any moral rule against cannibalism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Not applicable.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
Notes
Yet this does happen without any disruption to society as seen from plasma, sperm, and egg donations, although many might argue these donations are social goods.
As seen in the1973 movie Soylent Green, based on the book Make Room! Make Room!, which inspired the naming of the popular meal replacement drink Soylent.
Alternatively, this may support an argument against eating any sort of meat, animal, or human.
The question of consent is interesting however as there is a case in Germany in which the cannibal (Armin Meiwes) apparently gained consent from the victim beforehand, and the German courts were concerned that the consent would move the case from murder to euthanasia (see Levitt’s 2004 CNN article ‘Germany's cannibalism-by-consent case: Possible human-rights claims’). Although Meiwes was eventually convicted for murder (although not simply because he did so out of a desire to eat flesh), the question about consent and the clear video evidence of the victim’s consent in this case complicates how we think about the ethical valence of cannibalism. Another case is the Sourtoe Cocktail, which is located in Dawson City, Canada. The cocktail contains a mummified human toe, and anyone who orders the drink must have the toe touch their lip for a moment, but they are not allowed to actually consume the toe. The toes are provided by donation, and there is a fine for swallowing the toe. There have been reports of accidental consumption, and one deliberate consumption in 2013. While macabre, this is given as a sort of tourist attraction and generally accepted (see NPR’s 2017 article ‘The Sourtoe Cocktail: Yes, It’s An Actual Human Toe In A Drink’ and Atlas Obscura’s 2009 article ‘The Sourtoe Cocktail’).
Although I pull from the Council of Trent as it is one of the most well-known versions, my interest is not in any particular version of Christian theology.
See Genesis 9, in which God tells Noah that all living things are provided as food except meat with lifeblood. He immediately connects this commandment against eating the lifeblood of animals to a commandment against the killing of other humans on account of shedding blood. In addition, the Mosaic books set up distinct laws on food consumption.
Although this was a concern for the Romans about the ethics of the early church.
While other countries may have specific laws against cannibalism, the USA has no federal law against it, and I am not concerned with the legality of cannibalism.
We see this particularly with the shock of Jesus’ announcement that someone at the table would betray him. Judas is marked in the narrative (if not by the disciples) as the betrayer because he leaves the meal early. The importance of the shared meal is reinforced after Jesus’ resurrection with the reconciliation between Jesus and Peter after the meal on the beach.
I note too that Jesus establishes communion during the Passover meal, a tradition centered on the sacrifice of the lamb in lieu of the firstborn.
Perhaps by murdering, seeking out unwilling victims, engaging in desecration of graves and morgues, etc. All of these circumstances would change the event and are not elements of the original brunch.
I want to make it clear that this not a carte blanche for someone to invent a religion as a cover for cannibalism. I have used examples of ritualistic cannibalism that already exist and make sense in those religions’ worldview. I want to make it clear that I am not saying that we should all become cannibals.
References
Baber, H. E. (2013). Eucharist: Metaphysical miracle or institutional fact? International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 74(3), 333–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-012-9383-0
Bach, A., & Glancy, J. A. (2003). The morning after in Corinth: Bread-and-butter notes part 1. Biblical Interpretation, 11(3), 449–467. https://doi.org/10.1163/156851503322566831
Burley, M. (2016). Eating human beings: Varieties of cannibalism and the heterogeneity of human life. Philosophy, 91(358), 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819116000322
Cevasco, C. (2016). This is my body: Communion and cannibalism in colonial New England and New France. The New England Quarterly, 89(4), 556–586. https://doi.org/10.1162/TNEQ_a_00564
Smith, J. Z. (1980). The bare facts of ritual. History of Religions, 20(1), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.1086/462864
Toner, P. (2011). Transubstantiation, essentialism, and substance. Religious Studies, 47(2), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412510000272
Catholic Church. (1848). The catechism of the Council of Trent (J. Waterworth, Trans.). Dolman. (Original work published 1833).
Kierkegaard, S. (1983). Fear and trembling (H. Hong & E. Hong, Trans.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1843).
Kierkegaard, S. (1980). The sickness unto death (H. Hong & E. Hong, Trans.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1849).
Kierkegaard, S. (2011). Discourses at the communion on Fridays (S. Walsh, Trans.). Indiana University Press. (Original work published 1849).
Mufson, B. (2018, June). This guy served his friends tacos made from his own amputated leg. Vice. https://www.vice.com/en/article/gykmn7/legal-ethical-cannibalism-human-meat-tacos-reddit-wtf. Accessed 15 Nov 2020.
Sokolowski, R. (2006). Christian faith & human understanding: Studies on the Eucharist, Trinity, and the human person. Catholic University of America Press.
Wisnewski, J. J. (2004). A defense of cannibalism. Public Affairs Quarterly, 18(3), 265–272.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
I confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interests
The author declares no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Pan, L. Cannibalism and the Eucharist: the Ethics of Eating the Human and the Divine. SOPHIA 61, 869–885 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-022-00928-x
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-022-00928-x