INTRODUCTION
1. THE
EUCHARISTIC REAL AND LIVING PRESENCE
1.1 The
victim in a glorified state
1.2 Eucharistic presence: real but also symbolic
1.3
Foreshadow of real presence in the O.T
2. TRANSUBSTANTIATION (CCC 1376 AND C. TRENT 1545-65)
3. The
manifold presence of Christ
4. CHRIST’S TRANSFIGURED EUCHARISTIC BODY
5. EUCHARISTIC PRESENCE IS PERSONAL PRESENCE
5.1
Personal presence – Subject to growth
INTRODUCTION
Eucharist comes from
the Greek word, euchapistias which
means “thanksgiving.” The Eucharist is “the Great Thanksgiving” in which we
meet God in the ordinary substances of bread and wine. On the night before
Jesus died he took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it
to his disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body broken for you.” He
then took the cup of wine and after giving thanks, gave it to them saying,
“Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the new covenant poured out
for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Mat 26:26-28). We come to the Lord’s
Table and as his followers, eat and drink his body and blood.
The
early Christian community remembered and recalled the celebration of the
Eucharist. 1 Cor 11:23-26 is but one of the evidence to testify the fact how
reverently the church kept the remembrance of what had taken place at the Last
Supper and how faithfully those early Christians repeated it following Jesus’
command. Eventually the extreme popular piety shown in the Eucharistic
celebration often gave rise to mere devotional practices and superstitious
beliefs rather than to an understanding of the sacrament as an encounter with
Christ giving rise to abuse of the sacrament as well. The reformers criticized
the church for the abuses, but in doing so they landed up in propagating
heretic beliefs, such as; communion is merely symbolic, denial of real change
and real presence, sacrificial nature of the mass. The council of Trent
discussed greatly on the sacrament of Eucharist, which was again affirmed by
the Vatican II especially in the Dogmatic constitution of the church (LG 11).
1. THE
EUCHARISTIC REAL AND LIVING PRESENCE
1.1 THE VICTIM IN A GLORIFIED STATE
In the sacrament we do have the victim of Calvary really present, no doubt,
but —and we can
never emphasize this sufficiently—it is a glorified, transfigured victim. In a certain way the very term
"victim" is highly misleading,
for in Christian literature it is usually associated with blood, suffering and
sacrificial death. A victim seems to evoke
primarily the idea of a bleeding individual, a person that is given over to God after having passed
through the crucible of suffering. Yet
this is only partially correct, for the
essential aspect in a victim is not suffering but self-surrender, which
usually, it is true, is inextricably bound up with suffering and even death, but this immolative dimension of
the victim is rather a preparatory step to that essential
self-commitment which constitutes the core
and kernel of the victimal state. In the
Eucharist we have Jesus in a victimal condition, as the
pure victim that gave himself over to God, but it is definitely no longer a suffering victim. This is
one of the essential differences
between the Eucharistic presence at the Last Supper and the Eucharistic presence today.
Ø At the last supper: Then the Jesus present under the veils of bread and
wine was a person
still subject to suffering and death, and the entire setting was strongly suggestive of the figure of the Suffering Servant;
Ø At the Eucharistic altar: whereas now we have in the Eucharist the very same person, but no longer subject to the
clutches of death; it
is a triumphant, transfigured person, resplendent in heavenly glory, with his face shining "like the
sun, and his garments. . . white as light" (Mt 17, 2).
The Eucharistic
presence of the glorified Christ turns the altar into a new
Tabor. Jesus continues to be the victim, to be sure,
but he is a glorified victim
permanently given over to God, not in the suffering of his passion but
in the splendours of an eternal Easter.
1.2 EUCHARISTIC PRESENCE: REAL BUT ALSO
SYMBOLIC
The Church has always stoutly defended the real character of
this presence as opposed to a merely metaphorical or symbolic presence. Jesus’ Eucharistic presence is real, no
doubt—but it is also symbolic. It
would be a mortal wound
in the body of the Church to reduce the Eucharistic presence to a mere symbol, for the Eucharist is
more, much more than a
symbol. But it is also a symbol. We should not neglect this most essential dimension of the Eucharistic reality. It is a calm, comprehensive
consideration of this symbolic aspect of the Eucharist that will unveil before us two essential dimensions hidden in it: unity and
love.
i. Symbol of Unity: The Eucharistic body, really present, is a symbol of the
unity of the ecclesial Body. One Bread leads to one
Body. The glorified Eucharistic Christ, besides being really present, symbolizes the internal unity of the Church. (1 Cor 10, 17)
ii. Symbol of Love: But
over and above this symbol of unity, the
Eucharistic body is also the sign or symbol
of love.
·
At the Last Supper Jesus gave the Church even his body as the supreme symbol or manifestation of love, as we saw above. The martyr surrenders his or
her body to God as
the maximum gift of self, as a sign of total and complete dedication;
·
The young married virgin similarly surrenders her tender body to her new husband, and in
giving him her body she gives herself
to him totally. Martyrdom and marriage are profound and beautiful because they
both signify the total commitment of
self. In a similar manner, the Eucharistic Jesus surrenders to "her beloved
spouse" even his body as the
supreme symbol of love.
1.3 FORESHADOW OF REAL PRESENCE IN THE O.T
Obviously the presence of God to his people
did not start
with the Eucharist. But the strong conviction of Israel was that Yahweh’s presence was ALL-PERVADING, PENETRATING, ENCOMPASSING the whole earth. No one
can reasonably expect to escape the searching gaze of God, his personal presence. (Gen 3: 8. Ps 139, 7-12)
i. In the tent meeting (Ex 33: 7-11)
ii. In the pillar of cloud (Ex 29: 42, 34:29, Num 12: 5-8). The pillar of cloud covering the Tent, the splendour of God enveloping it: both visible
signs of the Lord's presence,
a presence, however, that, though intense, is only transitory, not yet permanent.
iii.The Ark of the Covenant (Ex 25: 8.17. 21.22) (Ex: 40: 34-38)
iv.Placing the Ark in the JLM Temple: Once the wearisome trek through the desert comes to an end and the Promised Land is reached, the
Ark is placed in the Jerusalem Temple, built by Solomon. Now the cloud fills the Temple as it had before filled the
Tent. (Deut 12, 5).
The magnificent Jerusalem Temple is the
place of the shekkmah, the dwelling place of
Yahweh, which is meant to express God's benevolence to his people. By
comparison the splendours of the Tent, the Ark and the Temple fade into insignificance and outshone by the reality of the Eucharistic presence.
For 1000 years: For nearly a full millennium nobody ever disputed the doctrine of Jesus' real
presence in the Eucharist.
no opposition, no contradictions, no doubts,
but calm acceptance and ready acquiescence.
2. TRANSUBSTANTIATION (CCC 1376 AND C. TRENT 1545-65)
At
the council of Trent (1545-1563) the Roman Catholic Church reiterated the
position on the Holy Communion it had defined and refined during the middle
ages. Three positions in particular had become controversial during the era of
reform. First, the Roman Catholic Church taught that the mass is a sacrifice
during which Christ sacrifices himself to God the father bloodlessly under the
signs of bread and wine. This sacrifice is intended to represent the sacrifice
of the cross to the congregation and apply its saving power to them. Second,
employing a distinction borrowed from Aristotle and put to Christian use by
medieval theologians, the Roman Catholic Church taught the doctrine of
transubstantiation, according to which the “accidents” of bread and wine, the
things determining its appearance and the human perception thereof, remained
that of bread and wine, while its “substance” the internal nature of bread and
wine, became Christ’s body and blood. Third, Roman catholic practice withheld
the cup from the laity who was permitted to receive only the bread. Protestants
consistently rejected both the sacrifice of the mass and the doctrine of
transubstantiation. Protestants also consistently maintained the privilege of
the laity to receive both bread and wine in the Holy Communion.
The council of Trent in general explained the sacrifice
of the mass entirely in terms of its reference to memorial and this memorial
sacrifice draws it value from the cross and it intended to apply the merits of
that sacrifice ND 1555-1563. The discussion on the Eucharist began as early as
1547; the decree on the Eucharistic presence could be published only by the
council’s 13th session in 1551. The council of Trent devoted
separate session to the sacrament of the Eucharist and sacrifice of the mass.
The doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass is among the most beautiful document
issued by it. We find the Council speaks
about the real presence; the institution;
the primacy of the Eucharist; transubstantiation; the cult of the sacrament;
the reservation of the sacrament; the preparation and reception of the sacrament; Mass: holy
sacrifice; (see the text in Christian
Faith 1512 to 1563). The council affirmed the
presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Eucharist. This is not directed
against Luther, who never denied the real presence, but against Zwingli who said Christ is present in
the Eucharist “in sign” only, and also against the theory of Calvin, Christ’s
dynamic presence by his power. Martin Luthar believed in the real presence of Christ in the bread
and wine and he based his belief in the NT accounts of the institution and of
John chapter 6. He accepted the words "this is my body, this is my blood"
as a real identification. He did not accept the doctrine of transubstantiation.
He proposed a new term “consubstantiation”. Luther develops the idea of
"ubiquity" ie. the capacity to be in many places at once (belongs to
the divine nature of Christ is communicated to the human nature of Christ).
Hence Christ is not confined to a physical space but can be present in many
places in the sacrament of the altar. He also taught that the sacramental
presence is limited to the celebration; it is an event confined by certain
time, so as soon as the communion is over, presence of Christ in the elements
too is over. He rejected the Eucharistic devotion or preservation of the sacred
species.
Council of Trent affirmed
that Christ is sacramentally present to us in the Eucharist. ND 1513, 1514.
·
“By
the consecration of the bread and wine, there takes place a change of the The
whole substance of bread in to the substance of the body of Christ Our Lord,
and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of his blood.” ND 1519.
1527.
·
In the sacrament of the
most holy Eucharist, the whole of Christ is truly, really and substantially
contained. ND 1526.
·
The worship and
veneration shown to the most holy sacrament is because of the belief in the
real presence. ND 1520.
·
One of the most ancient
customs of the Catholic Church reserving the holy Eucharist in a sacred place
was upheld. ND 1532, 1521.
·
Eucharist is the sign
of unity, bond of charity. “May all Christians have so firm and strong a faith
in the sacred mystery of his body and blood, may they worship it with such
devotion and pious veneration. ND 1524.
·
In the consecrated
hosts which are preserved or left over after communion the true body of the Lord
remains. ND 1529.
·
Christ the only
begotten son of God is adored in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, thus
special festival celebration, solemnities precessions, public exposition are
upheld.
·
Christ present in the
Eucharist is eaten, sacramentally, spiritually and really as well. ND 1533.
3. The manifold presence of Christ
It has been said for a
long time that Jesus is present in heaven and
in the tabernacle. Catholics certainly did not thereby deny that Christ is present in the Church in other ways
too. It is Vatican II that, speaks of many
forms of Christ presence. Soon after
the council, Pope Paul VI expanded
the doctrine still further.
Four forms of Eucharistic presence
The council had spoken of four different forms of Christ
presence and the
Pope added three more. Anyhow, the number is immaterial, for even Paul VI's longer list could
still be lengthened.
1.
Presence in the prayerful community
Christ is
present in the midst of a prayerful community, in virtue of Jesus's promise, (Mt
18:20 ) It is not only bread and wine that are the vehicles of Christ's presence, but the Christian community
as well. This particular form of
presence is stressed nowadays in the
contemporary charismatic movement
and the prayer meetings, pervaded by a deep realization of Christ's presence
in the midst of the prayerful
assembly.
2.
Christ’s presence in the poor and afflicted
Furthermore, Christ is also present in the poor and afflicted, with a form of
presence so intense that it almost
borders on identification between Christ
and the poor: (Mt 25:35-40)
3. Christ’s presence through living Faith
Moreover,
Christ is also present in the heart of the baptized Christian through living faith. Paul
prays for his 
Christians at Ephesus: (Eph 3: 14.17)
Christians at Ephesus: (Eph 3: 14.17)
4. Christ’s presence in the Word of God
Jesus
is also present
through the instrumentality of the word, the scriptural word, which is preached in the name
of Christ, by the authority of Christ and with the assistance of Christ, the Incarnate word of God. The
word of God becomes
then another vehicle of Christie presence.
5.
Presence in the pastors
Christ
is also present in the Church's pastors who
govern in the name of Christ, in keeping
with Jesus' promise to the Eleven immediately
before his ascension, "I am with you always to the close of the age" (Mt 28, 20).
6. In
the Sacraments
He
is present in the sacraments
too, and present when the sacrificial memorial of his redemptive work is offered on the
altar.
7. EUCHARISTIC PRESENCE – A SPECIAL PRESENCE
Yet in the midst of this rich, variegated presence of Christ, there is one particular form of presence that stands out far above all others: his Eucharistic presence, which outshines them all. Christ's Eucharistic presence is almost like the sun, with all
the other forms of Christic presence like
satellites turning around that central star. All the
six satellites enumerated are magnificent, no doubt. But the Eucharistic
presence is so special, so peculiar and
rich.
a)
Christ presence through faith in the heart
of the believer explained
As the result of baptism or the sacrament of reconciliation, Christ is
present through faith in the heart of the believer. It is not easy to explain satisfactorily this form of presence which implies
a vital link between
the Christian and the glorified Christ.
Unborn
baby and its mother
In order to convey this absolutely unique type of
presence, Paul compares it to that connecting the unborn baby to its mother. The mother is in
physical contact with the baby, supplying it with life and sustenance. The link between mother and baby is
probably the most intimate type of union that can exist between two living persons, holding and nourishing the other. The baby's dependence on the mother is absolute,
total, but it is certainly not reciprocal. This is the pattern that to some extent clarifies the unique relationship between the Christian and the
transfigured, glorified Jesus. They
are both intimately connected — through
faith. The faith acts almost like an umbilical cord.
Yet not
physical or substantial presence: This closeness is not to be identified with the Eucharistic union, for
in itself it is a type of presence that precedes and in a way leads to the Eucharistic presence. It is a baptismal link, not a Eucharistic link. It is intimate, personal and all-absorbing, it is an
enveloping presence and yet, it is not even quasi-physically present in the
person of the Christian. The Christian, even if endowed with living faith, does
not carry within himself the
glorified humanity of Jesus, as if he were
a sort of personal, living tabernacle.
And here lies precisely the
profound mystery of this presence through
faith. The union is certainly most intimate, it
is almost physical — and yet the glorified humanity of Jesus is not substantially present in the
Christian, for this form of substantial
presence is exclusive to the Eucharist. The
Eucharistic form of
presence is of a superior kind, there is something in the Eucharist which goes well beyond
the baptismal presence
through faith, a 'surplus' which even
living faith cannot supply. The
Christian, through faith, is intimately connected
with the Lord of Easter, like the vine is united to the branches, but properly speaking he
is not the temple of Christ.
b) Christ presence through the Word of God explained
Christ is also present through the word of God
when it is read
and preached with authority and received in faith. Christ makes himself present in the preacher
and the hearer alike. The scriptural word is like the vehicle through which Christ makes himself present or intensifies his presence if he was already present in the heart of the believer through living faith. (Heb 4:12)
Faith is
indispensable:
In a way faith is the indispensable receptacle of both, for it is only if the
word of God and the
bread of life are received in faith that word and bread will nourish the receiver. A faithless
hearing of the word is as
ineffectual as a faithless reception of the bread. The word is like a seed that will sprout and fructify,
will convey the presence of Christ
only if it falls into a heart rendered soft and receptive through living
faith. (Is
55, 10-11). We are usually so
dazzled by the splendours of Jesus' Eucharistic
presence, so taken up by this incredible reality, as to be almost blinded to certain essential
elements surrounding it. The real
presence is brought about in the midst
of a worshipping community where Christ was already present through faith; and it is effected
in a sacramental action by the efficacy of the word. The
three forms of Christic
presence, in the community, through faith and through
the word, conspire, as it were, to bring about the climax of this Eucharistic presence.
c)
Twofold Eucharistic Presence
In reality it is a twofold Eucharistic presence that we encounter at the altar: (i) the
past salvific event of Christ's death and
resurrection is rendered present sacramentally,
through signs, since the worshipping community is celebrating the memorial of that event. (ii).And in the midst of this presence of the saving event, Jesus
himself becomes personally present and
sacramentally
present. Our usual terminology is not particularly
commendable. Unreflectively we go on
speaking of Christ's 'real presence' in
the Eucharist, reserving this expression exclusively to his Eucharistic presence, as if the other forms of
presence were not real. In reality
all the seven different forms of Eucharistic presence in the Church are real, very real; they are not at all imaginary. Yet the Eucharistic presence stands supreme, for
besides being real and personal, it is also substantial. Through his word and through faith Christ
is present in the individual and he is also
present in the community, but this is
a twofold presence through his power only, not a substantial presence; whereas in the Eucharist — and only in
the Eucharist — he is present also substantially,
viz., with his own glorified
humanity.
d)
One single
Presence in various degrees of intensity
Yet, let us not complicate matters unnecessarily: rather than a manifold presence of Christ, what we have in
reality is one single presence in
various degrees of intensity. These forms
of presence mentioned above are but the various degrees of actualization
of Christ's single and undivided presence in the
ecclesial community. The vehicles of his
presence are certainly varied (word, sacraments, faith,
community, the poor and destitute)
but his presence is only one. He is present to the Church, and this single presence admits of various degrees of intensification, for the presence of
Christ, just like any other form of
personal presence, can grow indefinitely, it can become more intense and it can diminish in intensity, but the presence is always one. Eucharistic
presence in the body of the communicant does not last long. It soon vanishes, in fact, but not before having caused an intensification of Christ's presence
through faith in the heart of the
communicant. Christ's Eucharistic presence in the body of the communicant is no
more, but his presence through faith
does continue, marvelously deepened and intensified. The familiar biblical episode of Jesus' appearance to two of his disciples on their way to
Emmaus on that eventful Easter Sunday
is a clear embodiment of most of
these forms of presence.
a).
The two disciples were walking along when "Jesus himself drew near and went with them" (Lk 24,15), thereby fulfilling, as it were,
his own earlier promise that he would be in the midst of those gathered in his name.
b).
After joining
them, Jesus began to explain to them the meaning of the messianic prophecies. (Lk 24, 27). In other words, he showed them that Christ was present
in the word of God.
c). At the end of the episode all three sat at table and then Jesus "took the bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened and they
recognized him" (Lk 24, 30-31).
Their faith has finally grasped the presence
of Jesus, they recognize him through faith in the breaking of the bread, which on this occasion is
probably but a Lucan symbol of the
Eucharistic presence. Luke is deliberately using Eucharistic language ("took, blessed,
broke, and gave") to tell his readers that at their own 'breaking of the bread' they too
can encounter the Risen Christ as the two disciples did at Emmaus.
4. CHRIST’S TRANSFIGURED EUCHARISTIC BODY
This is an exceedingly obscure question, yet of considerable importance to understand correctly in all
its riches the reality of Eucharistic communion. Once again it is not idle speculation, but rather a better grasp
of the biblical datum that will throw some
light, however limited, on the nature of Christ's Eucharistic body. Already in the Old Testament we
encounter three realities
intimately linked together: glory or splendour, power and Spirit, all three connected with the presence of
God, and later on, in the fullness of the
New Testament, also with the body of
Jesus. Yahweh's awe-inspiring theophanies are often characterized by the
effulgence of his presence; he makes his presence
manifest through light. (Ex 24:16-17) It should be recalled that
the presence of the Lord was often manifested by means of effulgence, a brilliance that radiated from the Tent of meeting
or from the Ark of the Covenant.
New Testament: Furthermore, Paul often associates glory or
effulgence with power,
to the extent of almost identifying them. Thus he speaks of "the glory of his
power" (2 Thes 1,9), or
reverting the
terms, of "the power of his glory" (Col 1,11). Transfiguration, glorification, body, power: four suggestive musical notes that produce a most delightful
symphony in the ear attuned
to biblical harmony. The
theme of the resurrection seems to hold an
irresistible attraction for Paul. In a famous passage which describes the qualities of our
future risen body, he states succinctly:
Ø 1 Cor 15:43-44: "So
it is with the resurrection
of the dead, (the body) is raised in splendour ... it is raised in power... it is raised a Spirit-filled body". Splendour, power, Spirit: three
unbreakable links in one and the same chain. This, according to Paul, will be the future reality of our
glorified body.
Not only the power of the person but the
person steeped in splendor
It
is not that we have in the Eucharist only the power of a distant person, of a person that is physically absent. It is the person himself that is present,
steeped in splendour, penetrated by
power, possessed by the Spirit. The Ark of
the Covenant now pales into insignificance, for the altar has become a permanent Tabor. The Tent of meeting was but a distant foreshadowing of the Eucharistic
reality, for the transfigured, glorified Christ is now permanently present in the midst of the Church, comforting her
with his presence and enveloping her
in his brilliance.
5. EUCHARISTIC PRESENCE IS PERSONAL PRESENCE
Jesus did not bestow on the Church the wondrous gift of his Eucharistic presence just to be
there, right in the middle of the Church and very close to her, but rather in order to give himself over to her. The real presence
is the presence of a sacrificial victim, and victim means a total self-gift to
another. The
Eucharistic Christ is given over to the Church; or, to express it differently, he is a person
given-for, with an outward bent and a strong personalistic connotation. His is a personal presence. Jesus’ Eucharistic presence is
obviously not merely spacial, it is strictly and warmly personal. The Eucharistic Christ, precisely because he is and will
always be a victim, is
a person given over to another. He gave himself over to his Father on the cross ("Father, into
your hands...") and he gives himself over to the Church in the Eucharist.
The two beneficiaries of that total self-gift of Jesus are the two persons that were all along the real obsession of his life: his Father and his Church.
Between the Eucharistic Lord and "his beloved spouse the Church," (to
use once again the beautiful
expression of the council of Trent) there is intimacy, there is warmth, there is mutual self-gift.
Christ is given over
to the ecclesial community and the ecclesial community (as well as each and every individual
Christian within the community) gives itself over to the Lord really present within it. There is a mutual current of affectivity
and love binding the Church and Christ to each other. This is a mutual penetration of love, of
reciprocal self-surrender, and this surrender of self is based upon the deeper layers of mutual openness and freedom. At
the Supper Jesus chose this Eucharistic self-donation to the infant Church with
the utmost freedom,
nobody forced him into it, for forced gifts are not gifts at all. Jesus was certainly free and
he was and
remains essentially open to his spouse. Hopefully this
double attitude of openness and
freedom on the part of Jesus is reciprocated by the Church. Both of them give freely and both receive freely, the ultimate reason — the deepest
layer of their mutual personal presence —
being the granitic foundation of
their mutual trust and reciprocal faithfulness.
5.1 Personal presence – Subject to growth
This
mutual presence is not only real but also personal, and if it is personal it is subject to growth, like any other personal relationship. The Church's
self-commitment to her Lord, in
openness and freedom, should grow until her pilgrim condition gives way to the definitive, beatifying
state. For the Eucharistic presence
has an inbuilt dynamism that thrusts the
Church forward towards her final destiny.
Eucharistic presencei s preparatory to reach
the heavenly presence. “Eucharistic
presence is personal and substantial independant of the faith. To bear fruits, the faith is
necessary”
For Reference
CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES OF THE REAL PRESENCE OF THE
EUCHARIST IN THE MIDDLE AGES (19TH CENT)
Real
Presence of Christ in the Eucharist remained, properly speaking, unquestioned
down to the time of the heretic Berengarius of Tours (d. 1088), and so could
claim even at that time the uninterrupted possession of ten centuries. In the
course of this dogma's history there arose in general two great Eucharistic
controversies.
1.1
The First Controversy -RADBERTUS AND
RATRAMNUS.
Charles had come to power as king of the West Franks. He assumed the responsibility of promulgating to his subjects the teaching on
the Eucharist. So he encouraged the monks to write about Eucharist. Radbertus
wrote a book entitled De Corpore et
Sanguine Domini (On the Body and Blood of the Lord) and dealt with the presence of Christ
in the sacrament of the Eucharist.
In
his writings De Corpore et Sanguine
Domini,
- He
taught a complete identity between
the historical body of Christ, born of Mary, and the Eucharistic body of
Christ, because that is the only body that can give salvation and that
can be the Head of the Body of the redeemed which is the Church.
- Radbertus asserted that Christians are saved by a kind of natural
union formed
between the recipients of the supper and the Body of the risen Lord. For this reason, he also insisted that
the Body of Christ present in the Eucharist was the same Body as that which was
born of Mary.
- It is eaten mystically and not in a way that is
perceptible to the senses
The question was how can the same Christ be present at different altars at the same time?
1)
The flesh of Christ is multiplied miraculously at different altars as bread and
fish are multiplied.
2)
Because of divine omnipotence.
3)
Holy Spirit which works at Incarnation also works here.
v In short, Radbertus attempted to strongly affirm the reality of the
flesh of Christ present in the Eucharist and to
connect our salvation to the literal eating of this divine/human body.
Rabanus Maurus
The
position of Paschasius seemed novel and exaggerated to Rabanus Maurus (+ 856), though he had no doubt about the real
presence of Christ in the consecrated bread and wine.
But he
questioned the simple identification of what was eaten in the Eucharist with
historical body of Christ. He thought that this would suggest that Jesus Christ
actually died each time the Eucharist was celebrated.
Ratramnus
- He refused to identify the Eucharistic body with the historical body of Christ.
What is offered to Christians in the sacrament is not the body of Christ that appeared
on earth.
- For Ratramnus, therefore, to hold the view that Christ is present according to the natural mode of flesh and blood would destroy the very notion of a sacrament.
- But he also did not deny that something
real and objective happens to the bread and wine in the celebration of the Eucharist.
Nevertheless, he argued that the manner in which this happens is properly
called sacramental.
- In other words, the Eucharistic body
of Christ is the sacrament of His historical body. Therefore the two are not the same. The central concern for
Ratramnus was the question of faith in the sacrament rather than the issue
of material realism.
He
employs St. Augustinian’s concepts of Veritas and Figura. Veritas refers to the
physical body of Christ and it is in heaven. The change is taking place only
figuratively.
I. Ratramnus explained that "bread and wine
of the Eucharist are not changed corporally in the sacrament, but
are changed figuratively under the cover of the corporeal bread and of the
corporeal wine. Christ's spiritual body and spiritual blood do exist." There is no literal or empirical change. The
body and blood is eaten spiritually.
The
Second Eucharistic Controversy - BERENGAR against LANFRANC
A) Berengar of Tours (998-1088)
The
tradition represented by Radbertus Paschiasius received some popularity. The
idea of a physical miracle in the mass gained increasing ground in popular piety.
In fact this was the reason why Berengar of Tours (998-1088) protested. The central issue in the controversy was that
of the substantial conversion.
Berengar rejected the doctrine of
substantial conversion because it was contrary to the evidence of the
senses and contrary to the principles of nature. His basic position was the
denial of the Eucharistic change: one may after the
consecration refer to the Eucharistic gifts as Christ's
body and blood but they in reality remain bread and wine.
Principles of nature
He assumed that the reality of
a thing was known by its appearances, and therefore that thing must really be
what is seemed to be in appearance. If what was on the altar seemed to be bread it must be
bread.
No miracle
HE says, no miracle can be accepted with
regard to the Eucharist. By bread and wine, one may refer to body and blood
after consecration, but in reality they remain bread and wine. He employed same
argument i.e., Christ cannot be subjected to death again.
- The nature, or substance of bread and wine is not
changed in the Eucharist, but they signify an invisible reality, heavenly
reality, the body and blood of Christ.
Influence: He was influenced by the empirical approach,
which was gaining popularity – what can be touched and seen is only real.
B). Lanfranc of Le Bec (1005-1089), the later Archbishop
of Canterbury
- He
accused him of denying the substantial change. So, they said Berengar was
not confessing the faith of the Church. As a result, Berengar was summoned
to a series of councils (between
1047-1054) where he was forced to give his assent to statements
concerning the Eucharistic presence
of a strongly realistic manner.
- The most
extreme was the confession of faith
forced on him by the Synod of Lateran in 1059 which reads thus: “The
bread and wine which are placed on the altar are after consecration not
only a sacrament but also the real body and blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and in a tangible way not just sacramentally but in truth they are
held and broken by the hands of the priest and are crunched by the teeth
of the faithful".
Berengar
rejected this statement when he returned, later on and in 1079 he had to sign a second formula (Christian Faith 1501).
A year later Berengar died in peace with the Church.
Basing himself on those teachings of Ambrose, Lanfranc affirmed:
[i] That God has the power to change what already existed into something else,
and [ii] that such a change occurs at the moment of consecration of the bread and wine. He
argued further, that God's
infinite power can and does cause such a change to happen in the Eucharist. The
earthly elements are changed into Christ's Body and Blood.
Fr. Albert Leo
Precious Blood Missionaries
Fr. Albert Leo
Precious Blood Missionaries
No comments:
Post a Comment