The Theology and Idea of Transubstantiation

      The idea of ordinary bread and wine taking on the form of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ has been around since the birth of the Church.  At the Last Supper, Christ directed Peter and the Apostles to consecrate bread and wine in memory of him, hence his words, “Do this in memory of me.”  In one moment, Christ gifted his Church two gifts: the priesthood and the Eucharist, two gifts which we still enjoy today.  But where did this word transubstantiation come from?

     The issue in the Early Church was less about terminology and more about the idea of ordinary bread and wine becoming the consecrated body and blood of our beloved Lord, Jesus Christ.  Did it really change into something other than bread and wine or was the change more symbolic?  What was Christ’s intention in giving us bread and wine as his body and blood?

Many of the early Church fathers, such as Justin Martyr, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Clement of Alexandria regarded the change as a more symbolic one, rather than a literal one.

      The word transubstantiation can find its roots in the philosophy of Aristotle, primarily in his ideas of substance and accidents.  In the study of metaphysics, according to Aristotle, “substance” is defined as the same essence considered as that which renders a being apt to exist in itself and not in another.[1] “Accidents” are that which can exist not in itself but only in another. Transubstantiation translates into “cross substances”, where a substance crosses over from reality to another but still maintaining its appearance.[2]  This seems like too much a technical term to apply to such a significant theological concept.  It was not until the 16^th century that the Church identified the transformation of bread and wine under the identifier, transubstantiation, which lives on in the modern Church today.

      In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, transubstantiation is regarded as the following:

-          “Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us,” is present in many ways to his Church.  He is present…most especially in the Eucharistic species.[3]

-          The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique.  It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as “the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend.”[4]

-          It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood that Christ becomes present in the sacrament.  The Church Fathers strongly affirmed the faith of the Church in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion.[5]

-          The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist.[6]

      With regards to transubstantiation, St. John Chrysostom declared:

         It is not man that causes the things offered to become the Body and Blood of Christ, but he who was crucified for us, Christ himself.  The priest, in the role of Christ, pronounces these words, but their power and grace are God’s.  This is my body, he says.  This word transforms the things offered.[7]

       St. Ambrose on transubstantiation:

         Be convinced that this is not what nature has formed, but what the blessing has consecrated.[8 

  How do we reconcile other Christian churches including a eucharist in their worship, but only regard it in a symbolic sense?  What makes our Eucharist true, while others are symbolic?  As mentioned earlier, two things happened at the Last supper: priesthood and Eucharist.  The priesthood of Christ is what is necessary to facilitate the transformation of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.  No other institution can facilitate such a change.

    

     

     

---

[1] Clarke, S.J., W. Norris, The One and the Many, (Indiana: UND Press, 2001) 159.

[2] Clarke, The One and the Many, 159.

[3] Catechism of the Catholic Church, (Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994) CCC 1373.

[4] CCC 1374.

[5] CCC 1375.

[6] CCC 1377.

[7] Chrysostom, St. John, De proditione Judae, Judas’ Betrayal, 1:6 PG 49, 380.

[8] Ambrose, St., De mysteriis, The soundness, PL 16 (1880), 405-406.