Madarijas-Salikeen
3rd June 2007, 07:44 PM
Theology of transubstantiation; This is just part of a much longer explaination,but maybe it will help...Vito
"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,[1] 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.[2]
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.[3]
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).[4]
Accordingly, the Church declared subject to the ecclesiastical penalty of anathema anyone who "denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue" and anyone who "saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood - the species only of the bread and wine remaining - which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation"[5]
On the other hand, as already stated, the Catholic Church insists on the reality of the "accidents" that remain. In the sacrament these are the signs of the reality.[6]And by definition sacraments are "efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us."[7]
[edit] 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 faith and implicitly taught in the Bible. Christians who reject the doctrine of transubstantiation do not believe that the teaching is implied at all in scripture much less to the extent as that of the Trinity.
The great majority of Christians (including Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Catholics) hold that the consecrated elements in the Eucharist are indeed the body and blood of Christ. They 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[8] and Saint Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians[9] recount that in that context Jesus said of what to all appearances were bread and wine: "This is my body … this is my blood."
This further moves me away from ashari terminology
"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,[1] 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.[2]
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.[3]
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).[4]
Accordingly, the Church declared subject to the ecclesiastical penalty of anathema anyone who "denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue" and anyone who "saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood - the species only of the bread and wine remaining - which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation"[5]
On the other hand, as already stated, the Catholic Church insists on the reality of the "accidents" that remain. In the sacrament these are the signs of the reality.[6]And by definition sacraments are "efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us."[7]
[edit] 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 faith and implicitly taught in the Bible. Christians who reject the doctrine of transubstantiation do not believe that the teaching is implied at all in scripture much less to the extent as that of the Trinity.
The great majority of Christians (including Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Catholics) hold that the consecrated elements in the Eucharist are indeed the body and blood of Christ. They 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[8] and Saint Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians[9] recount that in that context Jesus said of what to all appearances were bread and wine: "This is my body … this is my blood."
This further moves me away from ashari terminology