Teaching on the Eucharist
The
Eucharist: Real Body and Blood of Jesus or Symbolic? Part two
When
we look at the different views and understandings concerning the Eucharist, we
can identify three.
The
term transubstantiation was a term arrived at much later in the life of
the Church, even though the belief and practice of the Eucharist as the Real
Presence began with Jesus and the Apostles. During the earlier centuries in
attempting to understand the mystery, a variety of terms circulated to convey
belief in the real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. Various writers used
words like "transelementation", "transformation","transposing"
"mystery", "change","alteration"of the bread and
wine into the body of Christ. But they all agreed that they were grappling with
mystery.
The
word "trans" signifies change and transubstantiation means that a
change in the substance of bread and wine occurs through the invocation of the
Holy Spirit and the words of Jesus Christ spoken at the consecration by the
priest.
It
seems the first theologian to use the term "transubstantiation" to
describe the change of bread and wine to the body and blood of Christ was
Hildebert de Lavardin, Archbishop of Tours in the 11th century.
However,
it was The Fourth Council of Lateran on November 11, 1215 that formerly adopted
the term of Transubstantiation to explain the mystery of the Eucharist. Canon 1
stated: "There is one Universal Church of the faithful, outside of which
there is absolutely no salvation. In which there is the same priest and
sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the
sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine; the bread being
changed (transsubstantiatio) by divine power into the body, and the wine into
the blood, so that to realize the mystery of unity we may receive of Him what
He has received of us."
Later,
the Council of Trent in 1551 decreed: "In the first place, the holy Synod
teaches, and openly and simply professes, that, in the august sacrament of the
holy Eucharist, after the consecration of the bread and wine, our Lord Jesus
Christ, true God and man, is truly, really, and substantially contained under
the species of those sensible things."
Some
Protestants hold that the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist co-exist
with the bread and wine. They use the term consubstantiation. By this
they mean that the substance of bread and wine remain, while Jesus is somewhat
spiritually present. This was the position that Martin Luther formulated as an
different explanation than transubstantiation. The prefix "con" means
"with" or "along side of." In other words, the bread and
wine remain bread and wine without any change, while at the same time they are
the spiritual body and blood of Jesus. In saying this, Luther also believed
that the Eucharist was a mystery to be accepted in faith.
The
majority of other Protestants prefer to celebrate the memorial of The Lord's
Supper with bread and wine or grape juice as symbols reminding them of
Jesus. They hold to transignification. The change is not in the bread
and wine but in what the bread and wine now signify. For them the bread and
wine are not changed into the Body and Blood of Jesus but represents his
spiritual presence. Thus, Jesus' words at the Last Supper are to be understood
symbolically rather than literally.
One
author explains it thus: "The bread and the cup are not holy elements in
and of themselves. But they do represent something that is very holy. So it is
with great respect and reverence that we come to the Communion table,
recognizing it is a symbol of what Jesus Christ accomplished for us on the
cross." (Gregg Laurie)
I
believe Jesus would say today to those who cannot accept transubstantiation
what he said to the disciples who objected to his first presentation on the
True Bread come from Heaven. "Therefore, many of his disciples, upon
hearing this, said: 'This saying is difficult,'and, 'Who is able to listen to
it? But Jesus, knowing within himself that his disciples were murmuring about
this, said to them: 'Does this shake your faith?.... It is the Spirit who gives
life. The flesh does not offer anything of benefit. The words that I have
spoken to you are spirit and life....After this, many of his disciples went
back, and they no longer walked with him." (Jn: 6:61-62, 64, 67)
In
the flesh Jesus' teaching is hard to accept. In the spirit we are able to
embrace this mystery because of our faith in the person of Jesus.
About the Author
1 comments
Bishop Sam
ReplyDeleteQuestion #1
In your teaching "the Culture of Pentacost" you stated that Pope John Paul II had called us to several areas of commitments, one of those being "Ecumenical Commitments" . Would this mean a certain relationship or association with or ministry with or to non-catholics?
Question#2
Is there anything as training or teaching wise from the Churchs' standpoint which is directed toward the clergy (priests/deacons) to motivate, encourage, direct them to be more involved with, open to,and understanding of the Charismatic Renewal and not be "stand-offish or cautious of it? How can we as charismatics help in this regard?
Thank you
Dwight Pappion - Lake Charles
Please direct any response to my email on file.