In the last five years the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has taken harsh steps against various theologians because of their interpretations of belief. Some theologians were censured; others, silenced; one, excommunicated. The question that emerges from that effort by Rome’s Holy Office to censure theology is whether theology can be universal, i.e., catholic, or whether it must reflect the interpretations of Rome’s Holy Office.

I argue that the late twentieth century relies more upon the symbolic than upon the causal power of events acknowledged as sacraments. Since this is the case with the Eucharist no less than with other sacraments, the symbolic meaning of the Eucharist must be refocused. This may be accomplished through the concept of the numinous dimension of the Lord’s Supper.

The forms of bread and wine can be understood to be amogs a series of symbols representing the presence of the Lord. The object of the celebration is this presence, not the symbols. This can be observed in the history of the Christian tradition.

The emphasis on analytical reason may be insufficient to explain all of life’s enigmatic experiences. Imaginative myth can play an important role in the expression and explanation of an enigmatic occurrence. Symbols, developed from myth and the imagination, may also be useful in accepting and successfully coping with enigmas.