Transubstantiation

Main article: Eucharist (Catholic Church)

Transubstantiation (in Latin, transsubstantiatio) is the change of the substance of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ occurring in the Eucharist according to the teaching of some Christian Churches, including the Roman Catholic Church. In Greek, it is called μετουσίωσις (see Metousiosis).

Theology of transubstantiation

"Substance" here means what something is in itself. (For more on the philosophical concept, see Substance theory.) A hat's shape is not the hat itself, nor is its colour the hat, nor is its size, nor its softness to the touch, nor anything else about it perceptible to the senses. The hat itself (the "substance") has the shape, the colour, the size, the softness and the other appearances, but is distinct from them. While the appearances, which are referred to by the philosophical term accidents, are perceptible to the senses, the substance is not.

When at his Last Supper Jesus said: "This is my body", what he held in his hands still had all the appearances of bread: these "accidents" remained unchanged. However, the Roman Catholic Church believes that, when Jesus made that declaration, the underlying reality (the "substance") of the bread was converted to that of his body. In other words, it actually was his body, while all the appearances open to the senses or to scientific investigation were still those of bread, exactly as before. The Church holds that the same change of the substance of the bread and of the wine occurs at the consecration of the Eucharist.

Because Jesus, risen from the dead, is living, the Church holds that, when the bread is changed into his body, not only his body is present, but Jesus as a whole, body and blood, soul and divinity. The same holds for the wine changed into his blood.

In accordance with this belief that Christ is really, truly and substantially present under the remaining appearances of bread and wine, and continues to be present as long as those appearances remain, the Catholic Church preserves the consecrated elements, generally in a church tabernacle, for administering Holy Communion to the sick and dying, and also for the secondary, but still highly prized, purpose of adoring Christ present in the Eucharist.

The Roman Catholic Church considers the doctrine of transubstantiation, which is about what is changed, not about how the change occurs, the best defence against what it sees as the mutually opposed interpretations, on the one hand, a merely figurative understanding of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (the change of the substance is real), and, on the other hand, an interpretation that would amount to cannibalistic eating of the flesh and corporal drinking of the blood of Christ (the accidents that remain are real, not an illusion).

Scriptural foundations

Words such as "transubstantiation", "Real Presence", and "Eucharist" are not found in Scripture. Nor is the doctrine conveyed by those words stated explicitly. As is stated in such secular sources as the Encyclopaedia Britannica, "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deuteronomy 6:4)"; yet most Christians believe the Trinity is an essential doctrine of their religion and implicitly taught in the Bible. Most Christians (including Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Catholics) also believe that the consecrated elements in the Eucharist as indeed the body and blood of Christ. However, many disagree that transubstantiation is implicitly taught in the same way that the doctrine of the Trinity is.

Proponents of transubstantiation see as the main Scriptural support for their belief that in the Eucharist the bread and wine are actually changed into the body and blood of Christ the words of Jesus himself at his Last Supper: the Synoptic Gospels and Saint Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians recount that in that context Jesus said of what to all appearances were bread and wine: "This is my body … this is my blood."

Opponents of a literal interpretation of these words say that Jesus repeatedly spoke in non-literal terms e.g. "I am the bread of life", "I am the door", "I am the vine", "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" (Matthew 16:6–12),etc. Figurative language in the Synoptic Gospels, which are those that give the words of Jesus at the Last Supper, includes: "You are the salt of the earth ... You are the light of the world" (Matthew 5:13–14); "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees" (Matthew 16:6) and many other verses. Believers in the literal sense of Christ's words, "This is my body", "This is my blood" claim that there is a marked contrast between metaphorical figurative expressions that of their nature have a symbolic meaning and these words about concrete things presented to the apostles. Believers in a metaphorical interpretation disagree with such an assessment of context and style saying that Matthew 16:7–12 in which Jesus' corrected the apostles' literal interpretation of his words, demonstrates Jesus speaking metaphorically about what seemed in the minds of the apostles to be concerning concrete things. Such believers also assert that the apostles began to understand the style in which Jesus communicated spiritual and literal truths, and so Jesus deemed it less and less necessary to exhaustively explain what was meant to be taken metaphorically and what was meant to be taken literally including his words at the last supper.

The Gospel of John presents Jesus as saying: "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood you have no life in you … he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him" (6:53–56), and as then not toning down these sayings, even when many of his disciples thereupon abandoned him (6:66), shocked at the idea, which appeared to be in conflict not only with ordinary human sentiment but also with the Noahide Law's prohibition against consuming the blood even of animals (see Genesis 9:4, Lev 17:10–14, cf. Acts 15:19–21 and Council of Jerusalem).

In response to a report that, while some came hungry to the celebration of the Lord's Supper, others were drunk (1 Corinthians 11:21), Saint Paul reminded the Corinthian Christians of Jesus' words at the Last Supper and concluded from that: "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11:27).

In general, Orthodox, Catholic and other Christians who believe that the reality in the Eucharist is that of the body and blood of Christ consider it unnecessary to "prove" from texts of Scripture a belief that they see as held by Christians from earliest times. They believe that the teaching of the apostles has been transmitted orally as well as in writing. For them, it is enough if Scripture cannot be shown to contradict the belief, especially if Scripture has passages such as those quoted here, which they see as supporting the belief, even if perhaps not irrefutably. In particular, they see Jesus' words at his Last Supper, reported in four different parts of the New Testament, as indicating that what was bread was indeed changed and was his body, and that the wine had become his blood.

Christians who reject the doctrine of transubstantiation hold that in addition to lack of scriptural support, many passages as well as the central message of the gospel of Christ contradict belief in such a doctrine. For them, claims of a handed down tradition, even if recorded at a very early date, are not enough to substantiate belief in a doctrine that they see as heretical.

Historical development

As with much history historical revisionism, especially that concerning religionrevisionism of the dark ages, the historical development of this doctrine is the subject of controversy. Christians in general disagree as to the actual history of this doctrine.

In his letter to the Smyrnaeans, written about 106, Saint Ignatius of Antioch criticized those who "abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh (metaphorical or literal depending upon interpretation) of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again."</ref>Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, 7</ref>

St. Ambrose of Milan countered objections to the doctrine, writing: "The Lord Jesus Himself proclaims: "This is My Body." Before the blessing of the heavenly words another nature is spoken of, after the consecration the Body is signified. He Himself speaks of His Blood. Before the consecration it has another name, after it is called Blood. And you say, Amen, that is, It is true. Let the heart within confess what the mouth utters, let the soul feel what the voice speaks."

The earliest known use of the term "transubstantiation" to describe the change from bread and wine to body and blood of Christ was by Hildebert de Lavardin, Archbishop of Tours (died 1133) in about 1079, long before the Latin West, under the influence especially of Saint Thomas Aquinas (c. 1227-1274), accepted Aristotelianism. (The University of Paris was founded only between 1150 and 1170.)

In 1215, the Fourth Lateran Council used the word transubstantiated in its profession of faith, when speaking of the change that takes place in the Eucharist.

In 1551 the Council of Trent officially defined that "by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation" (Session XIII, chapter IV; cf. canon II).

With the Protestant Reformation, the doctrine of transubstantiation became a source of extreme controversy. In the five-year reign of Mary I of England, rejection of this doctrine was considered proof of heresy, and many, including John Frith, John Rogers (Protestant minister), and Rowland Taylor refused, even under pain of torture and death, to accept it, as recounted in sources such as Foxe's Book of Martyrs. Her successor Elizabeth declared that: "Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions"; and made assistance at Mass illegal.

Many Protestants believe that the early Church founded by Christ knew nothing of the doctrine of transubstantiation but that it was one of many inventions of the Roman Catholic Church devised in order to create dependence upon itself in the minds of lay persons for salvation and right standing before God. It is a popular conclusion among Protestants and secular society that such inventions were for the purpose of gaining loyalty to the Roman Catholic Church and amassing wealth.

The attempt by some twentieth-century Roman Catholic theologians to present the Eucharistic change as an alteration of significance (transignification rather than transubstantiation) was rejected by Pope Paul VI in his 1965 encyclical letter Mysterium fidei In his 1968 Credo of the People of God, he reiterated that any theological explanation of the doctrine must hold to the twofold claim that, after the consecration, 1) Christ's body and blood are really present; and 2) bread and wine are really absent; and this presence and absence is real and not merely something in the mind of the believer.

Views of other Churches on transubstantiation

Eastern Churches

The Eastern Catholic, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Churches, along with the Assyrian Church of the East, agree that the bread and wine truly and actually become the body and blood of Christ. They have in general refrained from philosophical speculation, and usually rely on the status of the doctrine as a "mystery," something known by divine revelation that could not have been arrived at by reason without revelation. Accordingly, they prefer to say too little about the details and remain firmly within Holy Tradition, than to say too much and possibly deviate from the truth. However, they do speak clearly of a "change" (in Greek μεταβολή) or "metousiosis" (μετουσίωσις) of the bread and wine.

Anglicanism

During the reign of Henry VIII, the official teaching of the Anglican Church was identical with the Roman Catholic Church's doctrine, in defence of which the king wrote a book for which the Pope rewarded him with the title of Defender of the Faith. Under his son, Edward VI, the Anglican Church accepted a more Protestant theology, and directly opposed transubstantiation. Elizabeth I, as part of the Elizabethan Religious Settlement, gave royal assent to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, which sought to distinguish Anglican from Roman Church doctrine. The Articles, declared: "Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions."

Anglicans generally consider no teaching binding that, according to the Articles, "cannot be found in Holy Scripture or proved thereby." Consequently, some Anglicans (especially Anglo-Catholics and High Church Anglicans) accept Transubstantiation, while others do not. In any case, the Articles are not considered binding on any but Church of England clergy, especially for Anglican Churches other than the Church of England. While Archbishop John Tillotson decried the "real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion", considering it a great impiety to believe that people who attend Holy Communion "verily eat and drink the natural flesh and blood of Christ. And what can any man do more unworthily towards a Friend? How can he possibly use him more barbarously, than to feast upon his living flesh and blood?" (Discourse against Transubstantiation, London 1684, 35), official writings of the Churches of the Anglican Communion have consistently upheld belief in the Real Presence. Some recent Anglican writers explicitly accept the doctrine of transubstantiation, or, while avoiding the term "transubstantiation", speak of an "objective presence" of Christ in the Eucharist. On the other hand, others hold views, such as consubstantiation or "pneumatic presence", close to those of Reformed Protestant Churches.

Theological dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church has produced common documents that speak of "substantial agreement" about the doctrine of the Eucharist: the ARCIC Windsor Statement of 1971, and its 1979 Elucidation. Remaining arguments can be found in the Church of England's pastoral letter: The Eucharist: Sacrament of Unity.

Lutheranism

Lutherans believe that within the Eucharistic celebration the body and blood of Jesus Christ are objectively present "in, with, and under the forms" of bread and wine (cf. Book of Concord). They place great stress on Jesus' instructions to "take and eat", and "take and drink", holding that this is the proper, divinely ordained use of the sacrament, and, while giving it due reverence, scrupulously avoid any actions that might indicate or lead to superstition or unworthy fear of the sacrament. However, Luther explicitly rejected transubstantiation, believing that the bread and wine remained fully bread and fully wine while also being fully the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Luther instead emphasized the sacramental union (not exactly the consubstantiation, as it is often claimed).

Other Protestants

Many Protestant denominations believe that the Lord's supper is a symbolic act done in remembrance of what Christ has done for us on the cross. He commanded the apostles: "This do in remembrance of me", after "he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you" (Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 11:24). Therefore they see it as a symbolic act done in remembrance and as a declaration (1 Corinthians 11:26)of faith in what they consider Christ's finished (John 19:30) work on the cross. They reject the idea that a priest can transform bread and wine into the actual body and blood, soul, and presence of God incarnate in Jesus Christ, and they see the doctrine of the Real Presence, and especially the practice of Eucharistic adoration, as idolatry, worshipping, praying to, and kneeling before mere bread and wine, as if it were God. They base their criticism of the doctrine of the Real Presence on a number of verses including the second commandment as stated in Exodus 20:4–5, and on their interpretation of central message of the gospel. They see a lack of support for the "Real Presence" in scripture e.g. Jesus said "This is my body", but did NOT say "this is me", "this is my soul", or "this is my presence" and scripture does not say "the bread was transformed" or "changed" in any way. Therefore they consider the doctrine of transubstantiation to be heretical from more than one approach.

Some Protestants apply to the doctrine of the Real Presence the warning that Jesus gave to His disciples in Matthew 24:26: "Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not", believing that "secret chambers" (also translated as "inner rooms", "a secret place", "indoors in the room") may refer to the church buildings or church tabernacles in which consecrated hosts are stored. They also apply the warning that Jesus gave in Matthew 24:11 "And many false prophets shall rise, and deceive many". They thus do not believe the words of those who say that Jesus Christ (in host form) resides inside churches or in church tabernacles. They believe that Christ's words at the Last Supper were meant to be taken metaphorically and believe that support for a metaphorical interpretation comes from Christ's other teachings that utilized food in general (John 4:32–34), bread (John 6:35), and leaven (Matthew 16:6–12), as metaphors. They believe that when Christ returns in any substance with any physical form (accidental or actual), it will be apparent to all and that no man will have to point and say "there He is". They reject the Aristotelian substance theory as mere philosophy which they assert has no basis in scripture or reality and fogs the line between idolatry and worship of God as well as the identity of God.

Protestant Churches that hold strong beliefs against the consumption of alcohol replace wine with grape juice during the Lord's supper. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (also referred to as Mormons), a Restorationist sect, uses bread and water to commemoratively symbolize Christ's body and blood.

Others, such as some Presbyterian denominations, profess belief in the Real Presence, but offer explanations other than transubstantiation. Classical Presbyterianism held the Calvinist view of "pneumatic" presence or "spiritual feeding." However, when the Presbyterian Church (USA) signed "A Formula for Agreement" with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, both affirmed belief in the Real Presence.

See also

• Consubstantiation
• Eucharist
• Eucharistic theologies contrasted
• Real Presence
• Eucharistic adoration
• New Covenant

Persons killed for believing in or disbelieving transubstantiation

• Saint Tarcisius
• John Frith
• John Rogers (Protestant minister)
• Rowland Taylor

External links

• "Transubstantiation" in Catholic Encyclopedia
• Pope Paul VI: Encyclical Mysterium Fidei
• Pope Paul VI: Credo of the People of God
• Extensive collection of statements by the Eastern Orthodox Church on transubstantiation/metousiosis, translated into English
• An Anglican defence and explanation of transubstantiation
• An Anglican's view of transubstantiation
• The Antiquity of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation