Eucharist & the "Real Presence"

[Maximus]

please state what you mean when you say "symbol". I am sure you are well aware of the vast difference in meaning between the theological meaning of the term and the modern vulgar meaning of the term.

Please note that I used the modifier mere in front of the word symbol.

The Eucharist is certainly a symbol, but it is not merely a symbol.

In the same way, one might correctly say that Christ Himself is a symbol of the Father. He would be grossly mistaken, however, if he thought that is all Christ is.

 

[Maximus]

That site is written by an Eastern Catholic??? I did not know that at all...

In IC XC,
Marjorie

Yes. I have personally argued with Dr. Alex Roman (whoopee!).

And you can, too, if you visit the forum at ByzCath.org.

He's actually a pretty nice guy.

 

[Maximus]

We believe in transubstantiation as long as that word is limited to mean only that the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist are completely transformed into the literal and true Body and Blood of Christ.

The following is from the book Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism (1972) by the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Aksum, Methodios Fouyas:

"Roman and Orthodox teach that by the words spoken in the Holy Eucharist the species of bread and wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ, so that although these species have the outward qualities of bread and wine, essentially they are the Body and Blood of Christ." (Fouyas, page 187, footnote refers to Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat 22; John of Damascus, De Fide Orth 4:13; John Chrysostom, Hom 82:4)

Here's how Fouyas describes the difference between the Orthodox and the Latin viewpoints:

"The difference between Orthodox and Romans is this: the latter used this word to mean the special theory according to which the change is made, but the Orthodox used it to mean the FACT of the change, according to the Patristic conception." (Fouyas, page 189)

Here is an appropriate excerpt from The Orthodox Confession of Peter Moghila (1640):

"Christ is now in heaven only and not on earth after that manner of the flesh wherein He bore it and lived in it when He was on earth; but after the sacramental manner, whereby He is present in the Holy Eucharist, the same Son of God, God and Man, is also on earth by way of TRANSUBSTANTIATION [kata metousiosis]. For the SUBSTANCE of the bread is changed into the SUBSTANCE of His holy body, and the SUBSTANCE of the wine into the SUBSTANCE of His precious blood.

Where it is fitting to WORSHIP and ADORE the Holy Eucharist even as our Savior Jesus Himself. The priest must know that at the moment when he consecrates the gifts the SUBSTANCE itself of the bread and the SUBSTANCE of the wine are changed into the SUBSTANCE of the real body and blood of Christ through the operation of the Holy Ghost, whom the priest invokes at that time, consecrating this mystery by praying and saying,

'Send down Thy Holy Ghost on us and on these gifts set before Thee, and make this bread the precious body of Thy Christ and that which is in this cup the precious blood of Thy Christ, changing them by Thy Holy Ghost.'

For immediately after these words the TRANSUBSTANTIATION [metousiosis] takes place, and that bread is changed into the real body of Christ, and the wine into His real blood. ONLY THE SPECIES WHICH ARE SEEN REMAIN, and this by the ordinance of God, first, that we may not see the body of Christ, but may believe that it is there....

The honor which it is fitting to give to these awful mysteries is of such a kind as that which is given to Christ Himself....This mystery is also OFFERED AS A SACRIFICE on behalf of all orthodox Christians, both the living AND THOSE WHO SLEEP in hope of a resurrection to eternal life; and the SACRIFICE shall never fail until the last Judgment.

The fruits of this mystery are these: first, the commemoration of the sinless passion and death of Christ....secondly....this mystery is a PROPITIATION AND ATONEMENT WITH GOD FOR OUR SINS BOTH OF THE LIVING AND OF THE DEAD....thirdly....that each Christian who shall frequent this SACRIFICE and partake of this mystery may be delivered by means of it from the temptation and danger of the devil."

Peter Moghila was the Orthodox Metropolitan of Kiev. His confession was approved at the Orthodox Council of Jassy in 1642 and by the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem in 1643. It was reaffirmed by the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

Here is an excerpt from the confession of the Council of Jerusalem (1672), commonly called The Confession of Dositheus (Dositheus was Patriarch of Jerusalem):

"In the celebration of this we believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is present, not figuratively, or in an image, or by superabundant grace, as in the other mysteries, nor by a simple presence, as some of the Fathers have said concerning Baptism, nor by conjunction, as that the Deity of the Word is personally united to the bread of the Eucharist which is set forth, as the LUTHERANS MOST IGNORANTLY AND MISERABLY THINK; but really and actually, so that after the consecration of the bread and the wine the bread is changed, TRANSUBSTANTIATED, transmade, and reordered, into the real body of the Lord itself, which was born in Bethlehem of the Ever-Virgin, was baptized in Jordan, suffered, was buried, rose, ascended, sitteth at the right hand of God the Father, and will come on the clouds of heaven; and the wine is transmade and TRANSUBSTANTIATED into the real blood of the Lord itself, which was poured forth for the life of the world when He hung on the cross.

Further, we believe that after the consecration of the bread and the wine the SUBSTANCE of the bread and the wine NO LONGER REMAINS, but there is the body itself and the blood of the Lord in the species and form of the bread and the wine, that is to say, under the ACCIDENTS of the bread. Further, that the all-pure body itself and blood of the Lord are distributed and enter the mouth and stomach of the communicants, both pious and impious, only they convey to the pious and worthy remission of sins and eternal life, but they involve to the impious and unworthy condemnation and eternal punishment.

Further that the body and the blood of the Lord are severed and divided by the hands and teeth by way of ACCIDENT, that is, in the ACCIDENTS of the bread and the wine, in which they are acknowledged to be visible and tangible, while in themselves they remain altogether unsevered and undivided. Wherefore also the Catholic Church says, 'He is separated and distributed who being separated is not divided, who is ever eaten and never consumed, but sanctifies those who partake' [from the Liturgy of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom], that is, worthily.

Further, that in every part and the smallest fragment of the changed bread and wine there is not a part of the body and blood of the Lord, for that would be blasphemous and wicked, but the whole Lord Christ wholly in SUBSTANCE, that is, with His soul and Godhead, perfect God and perfect Man. Wherefore, though there may be many celebrations in the world at one and the same hour, there are not many Christs or many bodies of Christ, but one and the same Christ is present really and actually, and His body and His blood are one in all the several churches of the faithful; and this not because the body of the Lord which is in heaven descends on the altars but because the bread which is offered and set forth in all the several churches, being transmade and TRANSUBSTANTIATED, becomes and is after the consecration one and the same as that which is in heaven. For the body of the Lord is one in many places, and not many bodies....

Further, that the body itself and the blood of the Lord which are in the mystery of the Eucharist ought to be honored in the highest way, and WORSHIPPED WITH DIVINE ADORATION. For the WORSHIP of the Holy Trinity and of the body and blood of the Lord is ONE. Further, that it is a REAL AND PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE offered for all the orthodox living and dead, and for the benefit of all....Further, that before the use immediately after the consecration and after the use that which is kept in the holy pyxes for the reception of those who are about to depart is the real body of the Lord, and not in any respect different from it; so that before the use after the consecration, in the use, and after the use, it is altogether the real body of the Lord.

Further, that by the word TRANSUBSTANTIATION the manner in which the bread and the wine are transmade into the body and blood of the Lord is not explained; for this is altogether incomprehensible and is impossible except for God Himself; and attempts at explanation bring Christians to folly and error. But the word denotes that the bread and the wine after the consecration are changed into the body and blood of the Lord not figuratively or by way of image or by superabundant grace or by the communication or presence of the Deity alone of the Only Begotten. Neither is any ACCIDENT of the bread and of the wine transmade in any way or by any change into any ACCIDENT of the body and blood of Christ; but REALLY AND ACTUALLY AND SUBSTANTIATIALLY the bread becomes the real body of the Lord itself, and the wine the blood of the Lord itself, as has been said above."

 

[Maximus]

Here is a bit of St. Cyril of Jerusalem on the Eucharist.

"7. Moreover, the things which are hung up at idol festivals, either meat or bread, or other such things polluted by the invocation of the unclean spirits, are reckoned in the pomp of the devil. For as the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist before the invocation of the Holy and Adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, while after the invocation the Bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ, so in like manner such meats belonging to the pomp of Satan, though in their own nature simple, become profane by the invocation of the evil spirit" (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 19:7).

"2. He once in Cana of Galilee, turned the water into wine, akin to blood, and is it incredible that He should have turned wine into blood? When called to a bodily marriage, He miraculously wrought that wonderful work; and on the children of the bride-chamber, shall He not much rather be acknowledged to have bestowed the fruition of His Body and Blood?" (Ibid, 22:2).

"6. Consider therefore the Bread and the Wine not as bare elements, for they are, according to the Lord's declaration, the Body and Blood of Christ; for even though sense suggests this to thee, yet let faith establish thee. Judge not the matter from the taste, but from faith be fully assured without misgiving, that the Body and Blood of Christ have been vouch-safed to thee" (Ibid, 22:6).

"9. Having learned these things, and been fully assured that the seeming bread is not bread, though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ . . ." (Ibid, 22:9).

 

[Rilian]

Yes. I have personally argued with Dr. Alex Roman (whoopee!).

Why am I not surprised.

 

[Rilian]

who said anything about unconcecrated?

John, it basically boils down to this. We don't prostrate ourselves before the unconsecrated elements because to do so would be to engage in an act of idolatry. When do we prostrate ourselves before the consecrated elements, such as during the presanctified liturgy, we do so knowing we are worshipping God alone. It is not God mixed with something else, because that would be no different in reality than doing so before the unconsecrated bread and wine.

This is why Lutherans and all but a small handful of Anglicans do not in engage in western style eucharistic adoration or hold the sacrament in reserve in the tabernacle. They believe something different, and not always the same thing among themselves, about what is going on. This is as I said why I personally find the term "real presence" not to be a very useful one.

 

[Maximus]

John, it basically boils down to this. We don't prostrate ourselves before the unconsecrated elements because to do so would be to engage in an act of idolatry. When do we prostrate ourselves before the consecrated elements, such as during the presanctified liturgy, we do so knowing we are worshipping God alone. It is not God mixed with something else, because that would be no different in reality than doing so before the unconsecrated bread and wine.

This is why Lutherans and all but a small handful of Anglicans do not in engage in western style eucharistic adoration or hold the sacrament in reserve in the tabernacle. They believe something different, and not always the same thing among themselves, about what is going on. This is as I said why I personally find the term "real presence" not to be a very useful one.

That's true.

As I recall, as a former LCMS Lutheran, the Lutheran doctrine is that Christ is present in the Eucharist only to those who have faith. In other words, it's kind of a subjective presence.

For us, the Eucharist is Christ, regardless of the faith - or lack thereof - of the recipient.

That is why, as St. Paul said, one who receives the Eucharist in an unworthy manner may become sick or even die.

 

[Dust and Ashes]

So you see, Michael, any Protestant can argue theological issues but if you really want to split theological hairs, you have to become Orthodox.



J/K guys! I have found this thread to be very informative and have thoroughly missed all of this banter.