Transubstantiation
On the night of Jesus’s betrayal he sat down at the table with the twelve apostles to celebrate Passover in remembrance of the Israelites being freed from slavery in Egypt.
“While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, ‘Take and eat; this is my body.’ Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins” (New American Bible, Mt 26.26-28).
Jesus’s words referring to the bread and wine as his own body and blood ignited the million-dollar question that has persisted among theologians for centuries. Is the bread and wine consecrated during the Eucharistic rite merely a symbolic representation of Jesus’s flesh and blood, or does the matter itself undergo a substantial change into his body and blood? Well before Jesus’s time, Aristotle posed a theory in which all matter is comprised of its substance and its accidents. Unfortunately, most of Aristotle’s work was either lost or prohibited to be taught at universities because educators felt it to be contradictory to religious beliefs (Martos 61). However, scholar Thomas Aquinas used Aristotle’s theory as his foundation for illuminating the concept of transubstantiation as a way to resolve the Real Presence conflicts between theologians during the Medieval Period.
…show more content…
135:6]. Because he willed to be present, though under the figure of bread and wine, it must be believed that after the consecration these are entirely nothing other than the flesh and blood of Christ. Whence [Jesus] spoke the very Truth to the disciples, saying “This is my flesh for the life of the world” [Jn 6:52]. And, speaking more marvelously, [this flesh in the Eucharist] is none other than that which was born from Mary, suffered on the cross, and resurrected from the tomb” (Prusak, “Explaining Eucharistic ‘Real Presence’” …show more content…
Thomas Aquinas, in an attempt to put this conflict to bed, sheds light on how this transubstantiation could be possible. In examining the resurrection of Jesus, he connects the reunion of Christ’s spiritual and physical body to this conversion of substance on the altar. Moreover, he illustrates that although this body of Jesus was immaculate and immortal, it still contained the characteristic properties of a living person. Thus, Aquinas states that this physical, tangible form of Jesus’s body after the resurrection is precisely why it is possible to eat and drink his body and blood in the Sacrament of the Eucharist (Prusak, “Explaining Eucharistic ‘Real Presence’” 247-248).
Analogous to Ratramnus’s dispute over the simultaneous presence of the body in heaven and on earth, Aquinas proposed that Christ’s body being present in the Eucharist is not a result of him physically traveling from heaven to earth (Prusak, “Explaining Eucharistic ‘Real Presence’” 247-248). Instead, he stresses that the only possibility for Christ to be present during this Sacrament is if such conversion takes place. He clarifies that although Jesus is not present physically or accidentally, we still receive him in spiritual form (Prusak, “Explaining Eucharistic ‘Real Presence’”
Showing the change in Christianity is Aquinas’ argument in the 13th century C.E. He argues against being
In this paper, I will be discussing the views on Christianity’s Doctrine of Resurrection. I will use the methods of philosophy and theology for my discussion. To begin, an explanation of the doctrine itself will be presented. This will be followed by an objection to the doctrine as stated by Trenton Merricks. To contrast Merricks’ view, the ideas of Stephen T. Davis on this doctrine will be presented. From here, the views of Augustine and Aquinas will be discussed. To conclude, I will summarize my findings and present my assessment of the various views explored.
The bread and wine prepared for communion symbolically turn into the body and blood of Jesus Christ during the consecration rite of the Catholic mass. The consecration reminds believers of what Jesus Christ did to his disciples during 'The Last Supper.'
There is far reaching agreement among researchers today over a wide religious spectrum that the resurrection of Jesus is the focal point of Christianity, asserted by conventional believers in light of New Testament passages like 1 Corinthians 15:12-20. However, it is also declared by secular analytical intellectuals also. One of the major confrontational arguments facing Christian theology or apologetics is the resurrection of Jesus being a significant part; therefore, if the
The juice that is consumed represents the blood of our Savior. Found in 1 Corinthians 11:26, 28, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup” We are the branches growing off of Jesus which is the true vine. The Lord’s supper also represents the years between Calvary and when the Lord comes again. It also states that no unbelievers should never be preceded by, “the most serving and receiving of this blessed sacrament should be ever preceded by the most solemn hart-searching, self-examination, forgiveness and love toward all men, that non partake unworthily and drink condemnation to his own soul.” So no one who is struggling with their faith or those who do not believe should not take part in the Lords supper. This is found in 2 Corinthians 13:5 (This We
Many Catholics see this passage as their proof text that Christ’s literal body is present in the Eucharist. It is arguable that this passage is not even talking about the Lord’s Supper. The first reason is that, The Lord’s Supper was not ordained by Christ until his last Passover meal. Second, Jesus did not clarify the meaning or practice to focus on the physical eating but instead showing the disciples understood by saying, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God." Jesus ate and explained his New Covenant and His fulfillment as the Passover lamb among his closest disciples. This was a personal time of instruction at their last Passover right before He fulfilled its meaning. Those intimate instructional times are found in Matthew 26, Mark 14 , and Luke 22. The context of John 6 is that many Jews rejected His deity, and thus did not want to follow him. This is clearly supported by Spurgeon’s commentary, “Do not any of you interpret this teaching of Christ as the Jews did…The Lord’s supper was not instituted at the time that our Saviour spoke these words, and he was speaking of quite another matter, the spiritual reception of Christ, the real and true feeding by faith with our spirit upon the Lord Jesus Christ.” In addition, the only time John mentions details of the Lord’s Supper in his narrative is to identify Christ’s betrayer in John 13:26-27 through the dipping of
“Christian theology developed in the very act of responding to pagan objections” remarks Gonzalez (63). As the church grew the practice of theology resulted in many interpretations and threatened traditions held about the nature of God. Gnosticism made inroads claiming that Christ was a messenger who carried gnosis so that humanity could return to its spiritual origins (72). It viewed the physical world as evil so the form of Jesus’ body was open to interpretation consistent with the thought that it wasn’t physical like the bodies of other people and couldn’t die so it also could not rise again. Some held that life in the world should discipline our bodies while others held that the human spirit was inviolable and life in the body should be unrestrained. This duality of physical and spiritual also gave rise to Marcionism.
Apart from the three principals, the Eucharist sacrament was also elucidated by Luther with reference to consubstantiation. Consubstantiation refers to the assurance that Christ is indeed present in the Eucharist celebration. The belief is also similar to the transubstantiation doctrine. However, in the transubstantiation doctrine, it is believed that wine and bread factually change to the blood and body of Jesus Christ during the
Christians have been celebrating the Lord’s Supper for almost two thousand years. In this paper I will refer to the Lord’s Supper as an ordinance of the church. “An ordinance is an outward rite prescribed by Christ to be performed by His Church.” There are quite a few varying interpretations among the different churches on how the Lord’s Supper is to be practiced. I Corinthians 11:23-34 provides Christians with the scriptural meaning and reasons for observing the Lord’s Supper, also known as communion. Many consider the Lord’s Supper of little or no value and some consider the ordinance as more of a ritual. In some modern churches, preaching the Word is emphasized the most and communion is only observed once a month or
The resurrection of Jesus Christ can be seen as a highly argued topic. However, Perman’s article, “Historical Evidence for the Resurrection”, does a magnificent job detailing and explaining evidence of Jesus’ resurrection that will make you a believer. When looking at evidence of Jesus’ resurrection, no other theory of what happened to Jesus can compare, and it is overall seen as the best explanation. The historical grounds show solid truth that Jesus has risen from the dead.
And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the Kingdom of God shall come. And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my
After this monumental event Jesus only asked for two things in return, one is which your heat, the second being that you remember the blood that was shed. Communion is the basic remembrance of that terrible and glorious day. For a Christian, Jesus commanded that his followers do this so they will never forget the agony that was experiment so they could be saved. Since it was spoken by Jesus and the event it reverences is the sole purpose of Christianity, it is fit to say that it is more of a requirement in order to fully accept and believe in the sacrifice itself. One cannot go about living and believing in Christ without first taking full appreciation and respect for the great sacrifice that was made. Think about any club or society, there are almost always requires some sort of participation. Christians must participate in Communion because it is the divine representation and symbolization of the sole meaning of Christianity. This ritual means that a particular person believes and receives that precious act of grace that was so freely given by Christ himself. The bible mentions that “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” Here we see that this ritual is proactive and a direct participation with Christ. This is the reason why this ritual is so
Two practices important to Christian worship usually take place in churches. These practices are (1) baptism and (2) the Eucharist, also called Holy Communion or the Lord's Supper. The ceremony of baptism celebrates an individual's entrance into Christianity. The Eucharist represents the Last Supper, the final meal that Jesus shared with His disciples. Worshipers share bread and wine in the Eucharist as a sign of their unity with each other and with Jesus.
One question brought up as a result of reading the narrative. Is Jesus relating the wine to his body in a literal sense? “Jesus identifies his blood with the cup. In the NT, αἷμα may refer to the red fluid within the body’s circulatory system; however, it more often has metaphorical connotations. It may denote “the death of a person, generally as the result of violence or execution…This metaphorical corollary is especially true when αἷμα is found with ἐκχύννω in 23:35 and 26:28. Thus, in his saying over the cup, Jesus also speaks of his violent death.” The reason this has to be clarified is that it could easily lead a person to say the cup is his blood in a literal sense.
The Lord gave us the sacrament of communion on Holy Thursday at the Last Supper. After first washing the feet of the disciples, he then did the breaking of the bread. Jesus said “Take, eat, this is my body” after Jesus said this he did the same for the wine saying “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins”. This shows us how Jesus himself is the bread and wine us Catholics receive at Holy Communion. The sacrament of Communion is the only one of the seven sacraments that we are actually receiving Jesus directly, along with having a grace bestowed upon us.