Chapter e24 Medieval Period [1200-1299]

Bibliography

Recent links, books, and articles

The Statement of the USCCB, issued June 15, 2001 "The Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist:  Basic Questions and Answers"  can be found at http://www.usccb.org/dpp/realpresence.htm

An important article about US Catholics' belief in "Real Presence" can be found at www.commonwealmagazine.org/112001/october%2012,%202001/1012ar.htm

Fink, Peter, S.J., "Perceiving the Presence of Christ," in Worship: Praying the Sacraments. Washington DC: Pastoral Press, 1991, pp 81-93.

Kenan B. Osborne, O.F.M., Sacramental Guidelines: A Companion to the New Catechism for Religious Educators. Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1995. ISBN 0-8091-3565-5  12.95

Mitchell, Nathan.  "The Amen Corner," Worship 74:2 (March 2000), pp 173-182.

Classic texts

Thomas Aquinas.  Summa Theologica  http://www.newadvent.org/summa   The works of St. Thomas Aquinas have been digitized and indexed on CD by the members of the Association for the Computerization of Lexicological Hermeneutical Analyses (CAEL), which sponsored the production of the Index Tomisticus, a complete glossary of the linguistic terms (some 9 million words) taken from St. Thomas´ works.  The completion of the Index Tomisticus in 2002 was due to the tireless work of Jesuit Father Roberto Busa, a pioneer in the computerization of human sciences.

Cabié, Robert. The Eucharist, New Edition 1986. Vol II of The Church at Prayer, G. Martimort editor. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1986, pp 127-148.

Deiss, Lucien.  It’s the Lords Supper Eucharist of Christians, New York: Paulist Press, 1976. [The author gives a good summary of how the eucharist was celebrated from the time of early Christians up to the present.]

Dix, Gregory . The Shape of the Liturgy. London: Dacre Press, 1970, pp 434-612.

Hay, Leo. Eucharist: A Thanksgiving Celebration. Volume 3-A of Message of the Sacraments. Michael Glazier, Inc., 1989. ISBN 8-89453-280-4.

Jasper and Cuming. Prayers of the Eucharist: Early and Reformed. Third Revised Edition 1987. New York: Pueblo Publishing Company, 1987, #20-24, pp 147-173.

Edward J. Kilmartin, S.J., The Eucharist in the West, Edited by Robert J. Daly, S.J., Pueblo, 1998,

Martos, Joseph. Doors to the Sacred, New York: Image Books,1982. [Chapter 8 describes the history of the eucharist.]

Mitchell, Nathan.   Cult and Controversy: The Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press [A Pueblo Book], 1982, pp 66-200.

Mitchell, Nathan.  Real Presence:  The Work of Eucharist.  Chicago:  Liturgy Training Publications, 1998.  ISBN 1-56854-265-8.  $12.00. 

Osborne, Kenan.  The Christian Sacraments of Initiation (New York: Paulist Press, 1987), pp 190-211.

White, James. Introduction To Christian Worship, Nashville: Abington Press, 1980.

[Return to top of this page]

Presence of the Risen Lord

Eucharist Jesus With Us #10, December 2005. Q1205

The following is a draft of a published article ©2005 by St. Anthony Messenger Press, 28 w. Liberty St., Cincinnati, OH 45202.  1-800-488-0488.  The article may not be reproduced or sold without written permission from the publisher. 

“Is Christ really present in the Eucharist?”  I am sure that you would answer “yes” to that question.  I can’t imagine why you would be spending the time and effort needed to read these articles if you were not already convinced of this central mystery of our Catholic faith.  The presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the topic of this month’s article, and because you already believe this doctrine, I thought we might approach the subject in a slightly different way.  Let’s talk about icebergs and shoeboxes.  

Icebergs

Several times in these newsletters I have used the metaphor of an iceberg.  I don’t know how familiar you are with icebergs---I must admit I have never seen a real one myself ---but all you need to know about icebergs to understand this article is that the biggest part of the iceberg (about 87%) lies unseen below the surface of the water.  The part that we see is literally only the “tip of the iceberg.”  

Your understanding of the Real Presence is something like an iceberg. There is a conscious, reasoned, logical part which embraces all the things you “know” about the Eucharist---the things you have been taught in school, catechisms, the writings of the Popes, Sunday homilies, etc.  But all of these “facts” rest on top of a much larger body of experiences and meanings which---like the submerged part of the iceberg---lie unseen below the surface of our consciousness.  Sometimes we are not even aware of this vast body of memories, feelings and emotions.  Yet they are very important because of the way they support and interpret the “facts,” the things we “know” about the Eucharist (the “top of the iceberg” part of our understanding). 

Recently I saw a spectacular photograph of a whole iceberg, top and bottom.  The picture was taken by a diver when the water was especially calm and the sun was almost directly over head.  The photo revealed not only the beauty of the iceberg as we normally see it, floating exposed on top of the water line, but also showed the great mass of ice hidden below the surface of the water.  In this article I invite you to put on your “theological wetsuit” and stick your head in the icy waters to take a look at the bottom of your “Eucharist Iceberg.”  Together we will attempt to look at some of the meanings and images that lie “underneath” the statements we make about the Eucharist.   

As Catholics we believe that in the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist our Lord Jesus Christ “is truly, really, and substantially contained.”  (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1347)  This is a “top of the iceberg” type of statement:  conscious, reasoned, intelligible.  But what happens when we look “underneath” those words and try to see what they mean for you.  For example, when you say that Jesus is contained in the Blessed Sacrament, who is this “Jesus”?  What unconscious images and memories shape your understanding of Jesus? 

Imagining Jesus 

When I close my eyes and imagine “Jesus”, the pictures that first come to my mind are images of Jesus of Nazareth, the man born of Mary.  Jesus looks something like the statue of the Sacred Heart that gazed down on me each morning at Mass during my grade school days at Saint Anthony’s parish.

I know that Jesus was not only a human being; he was also truly God, the Word who “became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” (John 1:14)  It’s hard to “image” the Second Person of the Trinity.  I have seen frescos in old Spanish churches of the Trinity pictured as an old man, a younger man, and a dove arranged in a triangle, but that “image” can mislead me into thinking that there are three separate gods rather than one God in three Persons.  It’s hard to “picture” God. 

Jesus of Nazareth, the historical Jesus – truly God and fully human – passed through death and is now our Risen Lord.  While I know that Jesus’ risen body “is the same body that had been tortured and crucified” I also know that it now “possesses the new properties of a glorious body.”  (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 645)  Jesus did not die and then simply come back to life like Lazarus (see John 11:43).  Jesus passed through death and is now “the man of heaven.” (Catechism 646)   How do you picture this Jesus?   

We believe that Jesus, “the man of heaven” is truly, really, and substantially contained in the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist.  How do you picture the Jesus present in the Eucharist?  Does he look like the host at Mass – a small, round, white, piece of unleavened bread?  Or do you think of an image of the Last Supper and picture Jesus of Nazareth holding a loaf of bread? 

At Mass we pray that the Holy Spirit “gather all who share this one bread and one cup into the one body of Christ.”  (Eucharistic Prayer IV)  How do you picture this Body?  When I close my eyes and imagine the Body of Christ that is the Church it sort of looks like a group of ordinary people.  It really doesn’t look much like my other images of Jesus.  This brings us to the second metaphor:  shoeboxes. 

Shoeboxes 

In my bedroom closet I have several pairs of shoes, each neatly put away in shoeboxes.  I have a pair of black dress shoes that I wear for Mass.  I have a new pair of sneakers I wear to the gym and an old pair I wear when working in the yard.  I have a pair of sandals and a comfortable pair of slippers for lounging around the house.  These “shoes” all have some things in common---they are all the same size, they all have a left and a right foot---but they don’t “interact” one with the other.  They are five distinct pairs of shoes each in its own shoebox.  This is OK for shoes, but it is not OK for our “image” of Jesus.  Sometimes when I listen to Catholics talk about Jesus present in the Eucharist I am led to suspect that the speaker has five different “Jesus” operative below the surface of their “Eucharist Iceberg” and each is kept in its own separate shoe box.   

There is one Lord Jesus Christ.  The task of the mature Catholic is to work to get those “below the surface” images integrated into one, coherent, integrated understanding of the Body of Christ.   

Jesus’ Eucharistic Body 

When I look back on my childhood days and examine my “under the iceberg” understanding of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, I think that I imagined the historical Jesus making himself real small and getting into the host.  That is why I worried about hurting Jesus if I chewed the host.  And I wondered if Jesus was lonely in the tabernacle at night?  Only later did I finally “put together” the historical Jesus and Word made Flesh and come to realize that the Risen Lord is beyond suffering.  He reigns glorified at the right hand of the Father.   I can’t physically hurt Jesus in the Eucharist.   

But even more importantly, I don’t think I “put together” the Eucharistic Body and Christ’s Body the Church.   Integrating the way I treat the people around me with the way I understand the Eucharist came later in my faith journey.     

For Saint Paul it came first.  His very first encounter with the Risen Lord was in and through actual Christian people – the people he was persecuting and sending to prison.  “On that journey as I drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from the sky suddenly shone around me.  I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?' I replied, 'Who are you, sir?' And he said to me, 'I am Jesus the Nazorean whom you are persecuting’” (Acts 22:6-8) 

Paul’s conversion experience is the key to understanding why he is so insistent that we have one, integrated understanding of the Body of Christ.  The vision taught him that the Risen Lord is so identified with his disciples that they cannot be separated.  This unity comes about through Baptism --- “
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body” (I Cor 12:13) and the Eucharist --- “Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.” (I Cor 10:17)  

When Paul writes to the Corinthians regarding their conduct at the Eucharistic Supper he is not concerned about their reverence toward the Risen Lord.  He is concerned about their reverence toward the Body of Christ, the Church.  “I hear that when you meet as a church there are divisions among you ... for in eating, each one goes ahead with his own supper, and one goes hungry while another gets drunk.”  (I Cor 11:18-22)  The Corinthians were celebrating the Eucharist without due regard for their fellow Christians, especially the poor and those on the margins of society.  Paul reproaches them for not “putting together” the Eucharistic Body of the Risen Lord and the Body of Christ the Church. 

Stopping Short at the First Epiclesis 

Today, each time we gather to celebrate the Eucharist our petition (epiclesis) at the Eucharistic Prayer asks the Spirit to change the bread and wine into the Body of Christ and to change us into the Body of Christ.  The words change depending on the prayer, but the point of the request is always the same:  that we who feast on the Body of Christ, become the Body of Christ!   We must not limit our reverence and our concern so that they are directed only to the first part of the epiclesis (the change in the gifts, and the resulting presence of Christ in the Eucharist); we must follow through to the second part of the epiclesis (the change in us and the resulting concern for Christ in our neighbor).  

One day when Saint John Chrysostom (347-407 C.E.) was preaching on the parable of the sheep and the goats (“For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink ...” Mt 25:31-46) he told his congregation:  “You want to honor Christ’s body?  Then do not neglect him when he is naked.  Do not honor him here [at Mass] with silk garments while you leave him outside perishing from cold and nakedness.  For he who said, ‘This is my body,’ and by his word confirmed the fact, also said, ‘For I was hungry and you gave me no food,’ and, ‘Just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me’.  Here, [at the Eucharist] the body of Christ needs no clothing but pure souls; there, it needs great solicitude.”   

As Catholics we believe that the Eucharist is truly the Body of Christ.  As Catholics we struggle to integrate our love for the Body of Christ present in the Eucharist and our love for the Body of Christ which we encounter day by day in the people with whom we live and work, pray and play.

How have we celebrated this Mystery throughout the centuries of Christian History?  That will be the topic of our next article.

Jasper and Cuming

20. The Gallican Rite – David Sanchez

A.  PRAYER
The Gallican Rite applies to the Rite use in France, before the Roman Rite.
It is organized in sets of prayers.
It is more similar with Eastern Rites.

B. TO WHOM ADDRESS?
To Christ rather than the Father (147-d).

C.  WHO IS SPEAKING?
The priest is who talks.
He always extols God's glory (148-d).
He is a supplicant (150-b).

D.  EUCHARISTIC MODEL
Naming 148d
Preface 149b
Sanctus 149c
Post-Sanctus 149d
Anamnesis- Holy Thursday 149d

NO Epiclesis
NO Paschal Victory
 
E.  WHAT IS REMEMBERED?
Creation Story , Last Supper, and Original Sin 148d and 149b

F.  CHRIST SACRIFICE
It is a gift to be imitate (149c).
It is for the salvation of us (149d).  

G.  INTERCESSIONS
YES 148c

H.  CONTEMPORARY SIGNIFICANCE    
This Eucharistic Prayer is very powerful.  It is based in a Cosmological Theology, which has been forgotten in the Roman circles.    

[Return to top of this page]

21. The Mozarabic Rite –

This particular Eucharistic Prayer is from the Mozarabic rite.  This is the rite that
is still practiced in a chapel of the Cathedral in Toledo, Spain.  It is for use in a
daily mass.  The prayer is addressed to God.  

The dialogue begins a little differently than what we use today, but it is still very
similar.  This preface, they are variable, leans on the Letter to the Hebrews and it
remembers the act of redemption and nothing else.  There is a Pre-Sanctus and
Sanctus as normal.  Next, there is the Post-Sanctus, a very short and the only
part of the epiclesis, and the Institution Narrative.    Note that in the portion of the
Institution Narrative  pertaining to the bread the priest says, “...which is betrayed
for you” rather than “...given up for you.”  The priest alone says the acclamation,
and the people give their assent.  There is a short offertory and intercessions for
those present.  There are no intercessions for the Church, pope, bishops, nor the
dead.  There is also no invocation of the saints.

This prayer fits the model of the Eucharistic Prayer up to the acclamation
following the Institution Narrative.  After that, the prayer comes to a very quick
end with an offertory and short intercessions for those present.

22. Non-Roman versions –

[Return to top of this page]

23. The Roman Rite –

The Scottish Communion prayer is on page 303 and is based on Episcopalian and Presbyterian public worship.  
The prayer is addressed to the Father. Angels and Archangels come in the beginning after proper preface. Words of institution come right after remembrance of Angels. After that fallow Oblation  and Invocation.  The offertory contains words “offer up” the bread and wine, the text of the prayer for church and the text of the epiclesis. The prayer for the church come between eucharistic prayer and communion. The act of oblation and the epiclesis followed the Institution narrative.  

24. Ordo Romanus Primus –

This text is not a eucharistic prayer, but a ceremonial used for a stational mass by the Pope in Rome about the year 700.  It is cited here to offer background information on the Roman Canon.  
Prior to the beginning of the eucharistic prayer, various deacons assist in setting the altar and the archdeacon prepares the chalice and does the co-mingling.  At this time, the Pope washes his hands.  

This ceremonial mentions parts of the Dialogue (e.g., The Lord be with You, Lift up your hearts, Let us give thanks) in reference to the district sub-deacon responding to them.  In the same way the Sanctus is mentioned.  The Pope says the last part of the intercessions (Through whom all these things) just prior to the Doxology.   Mention is also made of the sign of peace (The peace of the Lord be always with you).  There is also a fraction rite in which the pope breaks off a fragment from the right side of the host and leaves it on the altar.  After this, several acolytes and subdeacons prepare little bags in which to receive the offerings – interesting that they should incorporate the offerings in such a concrete way  (instead of just mentioning the offertory in the eucharistic prayer).   After the presbyters break the hosts the choir says O Lamb of God.  It is also mentioned that the presbyters would offer the people communion under both species.  

This is an interesting document in that it follows fairly closely the Roman Canon as we have it today.  The exception might be the offertory, which, instead of just mentioning the people’s offerings, seems to be embodied through ritual actions (although without the text, it is impossible to say this for sure).  As this document is a ceremonial which is used to coordinate the liturgy and its ministers, it is hard to say what is and is not present in this eucharistic liturgy, with the exception of those parts which are explicitly mentioned in order to offer direction to the assisting ministers

[Return to top of this page]

How the Eucharistic Prayers Speak of the Change of the Elements

Using the ancient maxim Lex orandi legem credendi constituit, examine the texts of the currently approved Eucharistic Prayers and see how the epiclesis describes the "change" in the bread and wine and the "change" in the people/Church. 

Eucharistic Prayer I (The Roman Canon) "Let it [= our offering] become for us the body and blood of Jesus Christ, your only Son, our Lord." – "Then, as we receive from this altar the sacred body and blood of your Son, let us be filled with every grace and blessing." [ Note: There is no mention of the Holy Spirit effecting this change.]

Eucharistic Prayer II "Let your Spirit come upon these gifts to make them holy, so that they become for us the body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ." – "May all of us who share in the body and blood of Christ be brought together in unity by the Holy Spirit."

Eucharistic Prayer III "We ask you to make them holy by the power of your Spirit, that they may become the body and blood of your Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at whose command we celebrate this eucharist." – "Grant that we, who are nourished by his body and blood, may be filled with his Holy Spirit, and become one body, one spirit in Christ."

Eucharistic Prayer IV "Father, may this Holy Spirit sanctify these offerings. Let them become the body and blood of Jesus Christ our Lord as we celebrate the great mystery which he left us as an everlasting covenant." – "Lord, look upon this sacrifice which you have given your church; and by your Holy Spirit, gather all who share this one bread and one cup into the one body of Christ, a living sacrifice of praise."

Eucharistic Prayer for Children I "We bring you bread and wine and ask you to send your Holy Spirit to make these gifts the body and blood of Jesus your Son." – "Father because you love us you invite us to come to your table. Fill us with the joy of the Holy Spirit as we receive the body and the blood of your Son."

Eucharistic Prayer for Children II "God our Father, we now ask you to send your Holy Spirit to change these gifts of bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, our Lord." – "Send the Holy Spirit to all of us who share in this meal. May this Spirit bring us closer together in the family of the Church ...."

Eucharistic Prayer for Children III "Father, we ask you to bless these gifts of bread and wine and make them holy. Change them for us into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, your Son." [Note: There is no mention of the Holy Spirit.] – Eucharistic Prayer for Children III "Father in heaven, you have called us to receive the body and blood of Christ at this table and to be filled with the joy of the Holy Spirit. Through this sacred meal give us strength to please you more and more."

Eucharistic Prayer for Reconciliation I "...send forth the power of your Spirit so that these gifts may become for us the body and blood of your beloved Son, Jesus the Christ, in whom we have become your sons and daughters." – "Father, look with love on those you have called to share in the one sacrifice of Christ. By the power of your Holy Spirit make them one body, healed of all division."

Eucharistic Prayer for Reconciliation II "We ask you to sanctify these gifts by the power of your Spirit, as we now fulfill your Son’s command." – "Fill us with his Spirit through our sharing in this meal. May he take away all that divides us."

Eucharistic Prayer for Masses for Various Needs and Occasions  "Great and merciful Father, we ask you to send down your Holy Spirit to hallow these gifts of bread and wine, that they may become for us the body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ."  "Through the power of your Spirit of love include us now and for ever among the members of your Son, whose body and blood we share."

Eucharistic Prayer "A" "Father, let your Holy Spirit move in power over us and over our earthly gifts of bread and wine, that they may become the body and blood of Christ." – "May his coming in glory find us ever-watchful in prayer, strong in love, and faithful to the breaking of the bread. Rejoicing in the Holy Spirit, your whole Church offers thanks and praise ... Then at last, will all creation be one and all divisions healed."

[Return to top of this page]

Eucharist in the Summa of Thomas Aquinas, Part Three, Questions 73 to 83

Before studying the following Questions, it might be helpful to review Thomas' understanding of the philosophical concepts of hylomorphism, substance, accident.  Review also the theological categories, Res, Sacramentum, Res et Sacramentum.

The Summa Theologica can be found on line at http://www.newadvent.org/summa

Question and Article number
73. Of the Sacrament of the Eucharist
73-1. Whether the Eucharist Is a Sacrament?
73-2. Whether the Eucharist Is One Sacrament or Several?
73-3. Whether the Eucharist Is Necessary for Salvation?
73-4. Whether this Sacrament Is Suitably Called by Various Names?
73-5. Whether the Institution of this Sacrament Was Appropriate?
73-6. Whether the Paschal Lamb Was the Chief Figure of this Sacrament?

74. Of the Matter of this Sacrament
74-1. Whether the Matter of this Sacrament Is Bread and Wine?
74-2. Whether a Determinate Quantity of Bread and Wine Is Required for the Matter of this Sacrament?
74-3. Whether Wheaten Bread Is Required for the Matter of this Sacrament?
74-4. Whether this Sacrament Ought to Be Made of Unleavened Bread?
74-5. Whether Wine of the Grape Is the Proper Matter of This Sacrament?
74-6. Whether Water Should Be Mixed with the Wine?
74-7. Whether the Mixing with Water Is Essential to this Sacrament?
74-8. Whether Water Should Be Added in Great Quantity

75. Of the Change of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ
75-1. Whether the Body of Christ Be in this Sacrament in Very Truth, or Merely as in a Figure or Sign
75-2. Whether in this Sacrament the Substance of the Bread and Wine Remains After the Consecration
75-3. Whether the Substance of the Bread or Wine Is Annihilated after the Consecration of this Sacrament, or Dissolved into Their Original Matter?
75-4. Whether Bread Can Be Converted into the Body of Christ?
75-5. Whether the Accidents of the Bread and Wine Remain in this Sacrament after the Change?
75-6. Whether the Substantial Form of the Bread Remains in this Sacrament after the Consecration?
75-7. Whether this Is Wrought Instantaneously?
75-8. Whether this Proposition Is False: the Body of Christ Is Made out of Bread?

76. Of the Way in Which Christ Is in this Sacrament
76-1. Whether the Whole Christ Is Contained under this Sacrament?
76-2. Whether the Whole Christ Is Contained under Each Species of this Sacrament?
76-3. Whether Christ Is Entire under Every Part of the Species of the Bread and Wine?
76-4. Whether the Whole Dimensive Quantity of Christ’s Body Is in this Sacrament?
76-5. Whether Christ’s Body Is in this Sacrament as in a Place?
76-6. Whether Christ’s Body Is in this Sacrament Movably?
76-7. Whether the Body of Christ, as it Is in this Sacrament, Can Be Seen by Any Eye, at Least by a Glorified One?
76-8. Whether Christ’s Body Is Truly There When Flesh or a Child Appears Miraculously in this Sacrament?

77. Of the Accidents Which Remain in this Sacrament
77-1. Whether the Accidents Remain in this Sacrament Without a Subject?
77-2. Whether in this Sacrament the Dimensive Quantity of the Bread or Wine Is the Subject of the Other Accident?
77-3. Whether the Species Remaining in this Sacrament Can Change External Objects?
77-4. Whether the Sacramental Species Can Be Corrupted?
77-5. Whether Anything Can Be Generated from the Sacramental Species?
77-6. Whether the Sacramental Species Can Nourish?
77-7. Whether the Sacramental Species Are Broken in this Sacrament?
77-8. Whether Any Liquid Can Be Mingled with the Consecrated Wine?

78. Of the Form of this Sacrament
78-1. Whether this Is the Form of this Sacrament: "This Is My Body," And, this Is the Chalice of My Blood?"
78-2. Whether this Is the Proper Form for the Consecration of the Bread: this Is My Body?
78-3. Whether this Is the Proper Form for the Consecration of the Wine: this Is the Chalice of My Blood Etc.
78-4. Whether in the Aforesaid Words of the Forms There Be Any Crated Power Which Causes the Consecration?
78-5. Whether the Aforesaid Expressions Are True?
78-6. Whether the Form of the Consecration of the Bread Accomplishes its Effect Before the Form of the Consecration of the Wine Be Completed?

79. Of the Effects of this Sacrament
79-1. Whether Grace Is Bestowed Through this Sacrament?
79-2. Whether the Attaining of Glory Is an Effect of this Sacrament?
79-3. Whether the Forgiveness of Mortal Sin Is an Effect of this Sacrament?
79-4. Whether Venial Sins Are Forgiven Thought this Sacrament?
79-5. Whether the Entire Punishment Due to Sin Is Forgiven Through this Sacrament?
79-6. Whether Man Is Preserve by this Sacrament from Future Sins?
79-7. Whether this Sacrament Benefits Others Besides the Recipients?
79-8. Whether the Effect of this Sacrament Is Hindered by Venial Sin?

80. Of the Use or Receiving of this Sacrament in General
80-1. Whether There Are Two Ways to Be Distinguished of Eating Christ’s Body?
80-2. Whether it Belongs to Man Alone to Eat this Sacrament Spiritually?
80-3. Whether the Just Man Alone May Eat Christ Sacramentally?
80-4. Whether the Sinner Sins in Receiving Christ’s Body Sacramentally?
80-5. Whether to Approach this Sacrament with Consciousness of Sin Is the Gravest of All Sins?
80-6. Whether the Priest Ought to Deny the Body of Christ to the Sinner Seeking It?
80-7. Whether the Seminal Loss That Occurs During Sleep Hinders Anyone from Receiving this Sacrament?
80-8. Whether Food or Drink Taken Beforehand Hinders the Receiving of this Sacrament?
80-9. Whether Those Who Have Not the Use of Reason Ought to Receive this Sacrament?
80-10. Whether it Is Lawful to Receive this Sacrament Daily?
80-11. Whether Is Lawful to Abstain Altogether from Communion?
80-12. Whether it Is Lawful to Receive the Body of Christ Without the Blood?

81. Of the Use Which Christ Made of this Sacrament at its Institution
81-1. Whether Christ Received His Own Body and Blood?
81-2. Whether Christ Gave His Body to Judas?
81-3. Whether Christ Received and Gave to the Disciples His Impassible Body?
81-4. Whether, If this Sacrament Had Been Reserved in a Pyx, or Consecrated at the Moment of Christ’s Death by One of the Apostles, Christ Himself Would Have Died There?

82. Of the Minister of this Sacrament
82-1. Whether the Consecration of this Sacrament Belongs to a Priest Alone?
82-2. Whether Several Priests Can Consecrate One and the Same Host?
82-3. Whether the Dispensing of this Sacrament Belongs to a Priest Alone?
82-4. Whether the Priest Who Consecrates Is Bound to Receive this Sacrament?
82-5. Whether a Wicked Priest Can Consecrate the Eucharist?
82-6. Whether the Mass of a Sinful Priest Is of Less Worth than the Mass of a Good Priest?
82-7. Whether Heretics, Schismatics, and Excommunicated Persons Can Consecrate?
82-8. Whether a Degraded Priest Can Consecrate this Sacrament?
82-9. Whether it Is Permissible to Receive Communion from Heretical, Excommunicate, or Sinful Priests, and to Hear Mass Said by Them?
82-10. Whether it Is Lawful for a Priest to Refrain Entirely from Consecrating the Eucharist?

83. Of the Rite of this Sacrament
83-1. Whether Christ Is Sacrificed in this Sacrament?
83-2. Whether the Time for Celebrating this Mystery Has Been Properly Determined?
83-3. Whether this Sacrament Ought to Be Celebrated in a House and with Sacred Vessels?
83-4. Whether the Words Spoken in this Sacrament Are Properly Framed?
83-5. Whether the Actions Performed in Celebrating this Sacrament Are Becoming?
83-6. Whether the Defects Occurring During the Celebration of this Sacrament Can Be Sufficiently Met By Observing the Church’s Statutes?

[Return to top of this page]

The Council of Trent

The Council of Trent treated the Eucharist in its 13th Session, being the third under the Sovereign Pontiff, Julius III., celebrated on the eleventh day of October, MDLI.

The text is available online as part of the Hanover Historical Texts Project, The Thirteenth Session.

The sacred and holy, ecumenical and general Synod of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the same Legate, and nuncios of the Apostolic See presiding therein, although the end for which It assembled, not without the special guidance and governance of the Holy Ghost, was, that It might set forth the true and ancient doctrine touching faith and the sacraments, and might apply a remedy to all the heresies, and the other most grievous troubles with which the Church of God is now miserably agitated, and rent into many and various parts; yet, even from the outset, this especially has been the object of Its desires, that It might pluck up by the roots those tares of execrable errors and schisms, with which the enemy hath, in these our calamitous times, oversewn the doctrine of the faith, in the use and worship of the sacred and holy Eucharist, which our Saviour, notwithstanding, left in His Church as a symbol of that unity and charity, with which He would fain have all Christians be mentally joined and united together. Wherefore, this sacred and holy Synod delivering here, on this venerable and divine sacrament of the Eucharist, that sound and genuine doctrine, which the Catholic Church, instructed by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and by His apostles, and taught by the Holy Ghost, who day by day brings to her mind all truth, has always retained, and will preserve even to the end of the world, forbids all the faithful of Christ, to presume to believe, teach, or preach henceforth concerning the holy Eucharist, otherwise than as is explained and defined in this present decree.

CHAPTER I
On the real presence of our Lord Jesus Christ in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist

In the first place, the holy Synod teaches, and openly and simply professes, that, in the august sacrament of the holy Eucharist, after the consecration of the bread and wine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and man, is truly, really, and substantially contained under the species of those sensible things. For neither are these things mutually repugnant, that our Saviour Himself always sitteth at the right hand of the Father in heaven, according to the natural mode of existing, and that, nevertheless, He be, in many other places, sacramentally present to us in his own substance, by a manner of existing, which, though we can scarcely express it in words, yet can we, by the understanding illuminated by faith, conceive, and we ought most firmly to believe, to be possible unto God: for thus all our forefathers, as many as were in the true Church of Christ, who have treated of this most holy Sacrament, have most openly professed, that our Redeemer instituted this so admirable a sacrament at the last supper, when, after the blessing of the bread and wine, He testified, in express and clear words, that He gave them His own very Body, and His own Blood; words which, recorded by the holy Evangelists, and afterwards repeated by Saint Paul, whereas they carry with them that proper and most manifest meaning in which they were understood by the Fathers,-it is indeed a crime the most unworthy that they should be wrested, by certain contentions and wicked men, to fictitious and imaginary tropes, whereby the verity of the flesh and blood of Christ is denied, contrary to the universal sense of the Church, which, as the pillar and ground of truth, has detested, as satanical, these inventions devised by impious men; she recognizing, with a mind ever grateful and unforgetting, this most excellent benefit of Christ.


CHAPTER II
On the reason of the Institution of this most holy Sacrament

Wherefore, our Saviour, when about to depart out of this world to the Father, instituted this Sacrament, in which He poured forth as it were the riches of His divine love towards man, making a remembrance of his wonderful works; and He commanded us, in the participation thereof, to venerate His memory, and to show forth his death until He come to judge the world. And He would also that this sacrament should be received as the spiritual food of souls, whereby may be fed and strengthened those who live with His life who said, He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me; and as an antidote, whereby we may be freed from daily faults, and be preserved from mortal sins. He would, furthermore, have it be a pledge of our glory to come, and everlasting happiness, and thus be a symbol of that one body whereof He is the head, and to which He would fain have us as members be united by the closest bond of faith, hope, and charity, that we might all speak the same things, and there might be no schisms amongst us.

See the remainder of the text online

[Return to top of this page]

Concomitance

"Concomitance" refers to the presence of Christ’s Body and Blood under either consecrated bread or wine by virtue of the fact that a glorified living body cannot be divided; the presence of the Body of Christ in the eucharistic bread, together with the Blood, Soul and Divinity, because these are inseparable from the Body; the presence of Christ, whole and entire, in both species of the sacrament. (See Nathan Mitchell. Cult and Controversy: The Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass. New York: Pueblo Publishing Company, 1982. page 94) 

Concomitance is the "fact of the presence of the body and blood of Christ presumes also the presence of the whole Christ under each species (i.e., concomitantly).  Consequently, the same effect results whether one receives one or both species.  To Luther, this argument seemed to be founded merely on human logic, not on the will of Christ. ...  The Commentary of Pope Gelasius on the necessity of reception of Holy Communion under both species is well known."  (Kilmartin, page157; for the condemnation of receiving sub una by Pope Gelasius, see page 157 footnote 2)

The wiktionary (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Concomitance) states that the earliest we find the word is in 1607 and comes through the French “concomitant” meaning “accompanying.” 

History of concomitance in the Roman Church  (NOTE:  The following presumes that you are familiar with the history of the Eucharist and can put the following bits and pieces into their historical context. And it is the history of the “Roman” Church because in the other Catholic Churches Eucharist is celebrated with both bread and wine and concomitance is not an issue.)

1.  Stage one  Jesus says “this is my body, take and eat; this is by blood, take and drink.”  That is what Christians do.

2.  Stage two  The Jesus of the Gospels becomes the German Pantocrator and moves from earth to heaven (transcendence overpowers immanence) [and the inter-mediating space is filled by Mary and the Saints].  Church separates into the “clergy” and the “merely baptized.”  As Jesus is seen to be more transcendent, humankind is seen to be more sinful – and hence unworthy to eat so great a gift.  The “merely baptized” are unworthy to receive the Eucharist.  [The clergy might be unworthy also, but they are forbidden to enter the Order of Penitence because they must say Mass.]  First the laity are denied the cup (except infants, who received only the wine) and then they are denied the cup and the bread and no one eats and drinks except the priest.

3.  Stage three  As there is no meal, Eucharist moves from “Holy Thursday”/meal and “Good Friday”/sacrifice to mainly [exclusively] “Good Friday”/sacrifice.  Eucharist is no longer a meal.  Action shifts from eating and drinking to looking – looking at the host at the elevation following the “moment of consecration” and we have “ocular Communion” first of the host, and later of the host and cup.

4.  Stage four  The host is “exposed” as a relic of Jesus’ body (not the wine/blood).  When people (rarely) receive Communion they receive only the Bread (not the cup).   To explain why this is possible, the theory of concomitance is elaborated. 

5.  Stage five  Some biblical scholars, theologians, and pastors begin to ask why we don’t drink from the cup.  Luther, wishing to recover the values in Stage One, suggests that the laity receive from the cup.  The Pope is happy with the way things are.  Luther says the Pope should get with it.  The Pope is happy with the way things are.  Luther says that Christ said we should eat and drink, and therefore the Pope should change his mind.  The Pope is happy with the way things are.  Luther says that we have to drink because Jesus told us to.  The Pope says that he is the vicar of Christ and he says we are not going to drink.  The arguments shifts from liturgy and Eucharist to authority and power.  They fight.  Trent decides that the Pope has power over the rubrics and can say no if he wants to.  They part ways.  Lutherans drink, Papists don’t.  For the Papists, concomitance rules the theological day!

6.  Stage six  Five hundred years later, things calm down a bit, and the liturgical movement (1900 – 1960) suggests drinking from the cup.  Père Gy [then president of the ISL] told me that they asked the Institut Pasteur (who invented germs) if this was dangerous to do.  They said it was; but not as dangerous as handling money or riding the subway.

7.  Stage seven  The Vatican Council II says OK – provided we remember the teachings of Trent (i.e. that the Pope has power over the sacraments.) 

“The dogmatic principles which were laid down by the Council of Trent remaining intact, communion under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See, as, for instance, to the newly ordained in the Mass of their sacred ordination, to the newly professed in the Mass of their religious profession, and to the newly baptized in the Mass which follows their baptism.”  (Constitution on the Liturgy, 55)

8.  Stage eight  As the sacramental vision of the Council begins to be elaborated, the Eucharist is present as “sacrament” / “visible sign” – and the “sign” is a better sign when we all eat and drink.  The occasions when the Cup is permitted are extended until they become “always.” 

9.  Stage nine  Some begin to incorporate “sign” and “meal” into their unconscious understanding of Eucharist.  Receiving from the cup becomes “normal” for them.  But a change in “facts” and “attitudes” does not necessarily result in a change in behavior, especially group behavior.  Many continue to only eat the host and bypass the cup – they have been well taught that Christ is whole and entire body and soul, blood and divinity in even the tiniest particle of bread.  Concomitance still rules. 

I think this is where we are today – some drink, some don’t.  Some think meal, some think sacrifice.  Some think action, some think object.  Some think food for humankind, some think bread of angels.

10.  Stage ten  The Church will come to what Jesus wants.  This might happen shortly after he comes again in glory, but probably not before. 

The word concomitance is seldom used today because we approach Eucharist by way of sacrament/symbol rather than substance/thing.  However, there are times when the Church finds it is still a useful word.  For example in the US Bishops Committee on the Liturgy Newsletter of April-May 2000, regarding those Catholics who have Celiac-Sprue Disease: 

 “Given the need for total abstention from hosts containing gluten, the common advice given to Celiac-Sprue sufferers is to receive the Precious Blood alone. Priests are thus well advised to clearly teach the doctrine of concomitance, the Church's belief that under either species the whole Christ is received. Likewise, priests should recall the right which each Catholic in good standing has to receive Holy Communion (Canon 843). In the light of this right, the Precious Blood must be made available to sufferers of this disease who request it, even if it is not offered to the rest of the congregation.”  [This response skirts the more important and fundamental issue of whether or not it is possible to receive the Eucharist by means of bread that is not made from wheat.]

Martin Barrack (on his website defending the traditional Catholic Faith) explains the word as follows:  “Concomitance is the doctrine that the whole Christ is present under the appearance of bread and also under the appearance of wine. Christ is indivisible. His body cannot be separated from His blood, His human soul, His divine nature, and His divine personality. So He is wholly present in each Eucharist.”  Barrack then goes on to explain that “During the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the first consecration transubstantiates the bread into the substance of His body. His blood, soul, and divinity become present by concomitance, their inseparable connection with his body, not precisely because of the words of consecration.  The second consecration transubstantiates the wine into the substance of His blood. His body, soul, divinity, and personality become present by the same concomitance, not precisely because of the words of institution.  Therefore, if the priest validly consecrates the bread, but then for some reason does not validly consecrate the wine, neither is transubstantiated. God, who sees past, present and future all in one unbounded now, knows at the moment of the first consecration whether the second will be validly completed.”  (Copyright © 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 by Martin K. Barrack, www.secondexodus.com  All rights reserved) 

Some theologians and canonists would disagree with Barrack’s last statement.  The supreme authority of the Church has never definitively ruled on this issue. That is why canon 927 does not say that it is invalid to celebrate Mass using only one element; it says: "It is absolutely wrong (nefas est) to do it."  Since there is a doubt of law here, legal obligations do not bind. So, if it were a Sunday when this Mass was celebrated, it would not be necessary for the people to return for another Mass that day.

Case A:   If you believe in concomitance, what theological reason do you have for not saying "The Body and Blood of Christ" when presenting the Eucharistic Bread for the communion of the faithful.

Case B:  The pastoral council at Holy Apostles Parish has asked their pastor to allow Holy Communion from the Cup as an option on Sundays but the pastor, Fr. George, told them that because of the traditional Catholic teaching on Concomitance there are no more graces received by receiving the Precious Blood than by receiving only the Bread -- and drinking from the cup is a good way to spread AIDS.  Consequently, as there are no reasons for drinking and many reasons against drinking [e.g. there is danger of spilling the Precious Blood and it is better that no one receives from the cup than permit the Precious Blood to be desecrated], there will be no Communion from the Cup at Holy Apostles.  Discuss the pastor's decision.

[Return to top of this page]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

(Note:  these texts are reprinted here in accord with the "fair use" act.  All my students who will be using these paragraphs are presumed to have purchased their own copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  These paragraphs are taken from the online version of the text.

The presence of Christ by the power of his word and the Holy Spirit

1373

"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:¹⁹⁷ in his word, in his Church's prayer, "where two or three are gathered in my name,"¹⁹⁸ in the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned,199 in the sacraments of which he is the author, in the sacrifice of the Mass, and in the person of the minister. But "he is present . . . most especially in the Eucharistic species."²⁰⁰
 

1374

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."²⁰¹ In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained."²⁰² "This presence is called ‘real'—by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be ‘real' too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present."²⁰³
 

1375

It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood that Christ becomes present in this 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. Thus St. John Chrysostom declares:
 

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.²⁰⁴

Be convinced that this is not what nature has formed, but what the blessing has consecrated. The power of the blessing prevails over that of nature, because by the blessing nature itself is changed. . . . Could not Christ's word, which can make from nothing what did not exist, change existing things into what they were not before? It is no less a feat to give things their original nature than to change their nature.²⁰⁵

1376

The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."²⁰⁶
 

1377

The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.²⁰⁷
 

1378

Worship of the Eucharist. In the liturgy of the Mass we express our faith in the real presence of Christ under the species of bread and wine by, among other ways, genuflecting or bowing deeply as a sign of adoration of the Lord. "The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers to the sacrament of the Eucharist the cult of adoration, not only during Mass, but also outside of it, reserving the consecrated hosts with the utmost care, exposing them to the solemn veneration of the faithful, and carrying them in procession."²⁰⁸
 

1379

The tabernacle was first intended for the reservation of the Eucharist in a worthy place so that it could be brought to the sick and those absent, outside of Mass. As faith in the real presence of Christ in his Eucharist deepened, the Church became conscious of the meaning of silent adoration of the Lord present under the Eucharistic species. It is for this reason that the tabernacle should be located in an especially worthy place in the church and should be constructed in such a way that it emphasizes and manifests the truth of the real presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.
 

1380

It is highly fitting that Christ should have wanted to remain present to his Church in this unique way. Since Christ was about to take his departure from his own in his visible form, he wanted to give us his sacramental presence; since he was about to offer himself on the cross to save us, he wanted us to have the memorial of the love with which he loved us "to the end,"²⁰⁹ even to the giving of his life. In his Eucharistic presence he remains mysteriously in our midst as the one who loved us and gave himself up for us,²¹⁰ and he remains under signs that express and communicate this love:
 

The Church and the world have a great need for Eucharistic worship. Jesus awaits us in this sacrament of love. Let us not refuse the time to go to meet him in adoration, in contemplation full of faith, and open to making amends for the serious offenses and crimes of the world. Let our adoration never cease.²¹¹

1381

"That in this sacrament are the true Body of Christ and his true Blood is something that ‘cannot be apprehended by the senses,' says St. Thomas, ‘but only by faith, which relies on divine authority.' For this reason, in a commentary on Luke 22:19 (‘This is my body which is given for you.'), St. Cyril says: ‘Do not doubt whether this is true, but rather receive the words of the Savior in faith, for since he is the truth, he cannot lie.'"²¹²
 

Godhead here in hiding, whom I do adore
Masked by these bare shadows, shape and nothing more,
See, Lord, at thy service low lies here a heart
Lost, all lost in wonder at the God thou art.

Seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived;
How says trusty hearing? that shall be believed;
What God's Son has told me, take for truth I do;
Truth himself speaks truly or there's nothing true.²¹³

[Return to top of this page]

Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry
Faith and Order paper No. 111
World Council of Churches, Geneva, 1982

The text [Copyright 1982 World Council of Churches, ISBN 2-8254-0709-7, 30th printing, 1996] can be viewed and ordered from  http://www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/what/faith/bem1.html

I. THE INSTITUTION OF THE EUCHARIST

E1. The Church receives the eucharist as a gift from the Lord. St Paul wrote: "I have received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said: ‘This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance (anamnesis) of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying: ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’" (I Cor. 11:23-25; cf. Matt. 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-20).

The meals which Jesus is recorded as sharing during his earthly ministry proclaim and enact the nearness of the Kingdom, of which the feeding of the multitudes is a sign. In his last meal, the fellowship of the Kingdom was connected with the imminence of Jesus’ suffering. After his resurrection, the Lord made his presence known to his disciples in the breaking of the bread. Thus the eucharist continues these meals of Jesus during his earthly life and after his resurrection always as a sign of the Kingdom. Christians see the eucharist prefigured in the Passover memorial of Israel’s deliverance from the land of bondage and in the meal of the Covenant on Mount Sinai (Ex. 24). It is the new paschal meal of the Church, the meal of the New Covenant, which Christ gave to his disciples as the anamnesis of his death and resurrection, as the anticipation of the Supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9). Christ commanded his disciples thus to remember and encounter him in this sacramental meal, as the continuing people of God, until his return. The last meal celebrated by Jesus was a liturgical meal employing symbolic words and actions. Consequently the eucharist is a sacramental meal which by visible signs communicates to us God’s love in Jesus Christ, the love by which Jesus loved his own "to the end" ( John 13:1). It has acquired many names: for example, the Lord’s Supper, the breaking of bread, the holy communion, the divine liturgy, the mass. Its celebration continues as the central act of the Church’s worship.

E2. The eucharist is essentially the sacrament of the gift which God makes to us in Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. Every Christian receives this gift of salvation through communion in the body and blood of Christ. In the eucharistic meal, in the eating and drinking of the bread and wine, Christ grants communion with himself. God himself acts, giving life to the body of Christ and renewing each member. In accordance with Christ’s promise, each baptized member of the body of Christ receives in the eucharist the assurance of the forgiveness of sins (Matt. 26:28) and the pledge of eternal life (John 6:51-58). Although the eucharist is essentially one complete act, it will be considered here under the following aspects: thanksgiving to the Father, memorial of Christ, invocation of the Spirit, communion of the faithful, meal of the Kingdom.

E3. The eucharist, which always includes both word and sacrament, is a proclamation and a celebration of the work of God. It is the great thanksgiving to the Father for everything accomplished in creation, redemption and sanctification, for everything accomplished by God now in the Church and in the world in spite of the sins of human beings, for everything that God will accomplish in bringing the Kingdom to fulfillment. Thus the eucharist is the benediction (berakah) by which the Church expresses its thankfulness for all God’s benefits.

E4. The eucharist is the great sacrifice of praise by which the Church speaks on behalf of the whole creation. For the world which God has reconciled is present at every eucharist: in the bread and wine, in the persons of the faithful, and in the prayers they offer for themselves and for all people. Christ unites the faithful with himself and includes their prayers within his own intercession so that the faithful are transfigured and their prayers accepted. This sacrifice of praise is possible only through Christ, with him and in him. The bread and wine, fruits of the earth and of human labour, are presented to the Father in faith and thanksgiving. The eucharist thus signifies what the world is to become: an offering and hymn of praise to the Creator, a universal communion in the body of Christ, a kingdom of Justice, love and peace in the Holy Spirit.

E5. The eucharist is the memorial of the crucified and risen Christ, i.e. the living and effective sign of his sacrifice, accomplished once and for all on the cross and still operative on behalf of all humankind. The biblical idea of memorial as applied to the eucharist refers to this present efficacy of God’s work when it is celebrated by God’s people in a liturgy.

E6. Christ himself with all that he has accomplished for us and for all creation (in his incarnation, servanthood, ministry, teaching, suffering, sacrifice, resurrection, ascension and sending of the Spirit) is present in this anamnesis, granting us communion with himself. The eucharist is also the foretaste of his parousia and of the final kingdom.

E7. The anamnesis in which Christ acts through the joyful celebration of his Church is thus both representation and anticipation. It is not only a calling to mind of what is past and of its significance. It is the Church’s effective proclamation of God’s mighty acts and promises.

E8. Representation and anticipation are expressed in thanksgiving and intercession. The Church, gratefully recalling God’s mighty acts of redemption, beseeches God to give the benefits of these acts to every human being. In thanksgiving and intercession, the Church is united with the Son, its great High Priest and Intercessor (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25). The eucharist is the sacrament of the unique sacrifice of Christ, who ever lives to make intercession for us. It is the memorial of all that God has done for the salvation of the world. What it was God’s will to accomplish in the incarnation, life, death, resurrection and ascension of Christ, God does not repeat. These events are unique and can neither be repeated nor prolonged. In the memorial of the eucharist, however, the Church offers its intercession in communion with Christ, our great High Priest.

COMMENTARY (E8) It is in the light of the significance of the eucharist as intercession that references to the eucharist in Catholic theology as "propitiatory sacrifice" may be understood. The understanding is that there is only one expiation, that of the unique sacrifice of the cross, made actual in the eucharist and presented before the Father in the intercession of Christ and of the Church for all humanity.

E9. The anamnesis of Christ is the basis and source of all Christian prayer. So our prayer relies upon and is united with the continual intercession of the risen Lord. In the eucharist, Christ empowers us to live with him, to suffer with him and to pray through him as justified sinners, joyfully and freely fulfilling his will.

E10. In Christ we offer ourselves as a living and holy sacrifice in our daily lives (Rom. 12:1; 1 Peter 2:5); this spiritual worship, acceptable to God, is nourished in the eucharist, in which we are sanctified and reconciled in love, in order to be servants of reconciliation in the world.

E11. United to our Lord and in communion with all the saints and martyrs, we are renewed in the covenant sealed by the blood of Christ.

E12. Since the anamnesis of Christ is the very content of the preached Word as it is of the eucharistic meal, each reinforces the other. The celebration of the eucharist properly includes the proclamation of the Word.

E13. The words and acts of Christ at the institution of the eucharist stand at the heart of the celebration; the eucharistic meal is the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, the sacrament of his real presence. Christ fulfills in a variety of ways his promise to be always with his own even to the end of the world. But Christ’s mode of presence in the eucharist is unique. Jesus said over the bread and wine of the eucharist: "This is my body . . . this is my blood . . . " What Christ declared is true, and this truth is fulfilled every time the eucharist is celebrated. The Church confesses Christ’s real, living and active presence in the eucharist. While Christ’s real presence in the eucharist does not depend on the faith of the individual, all agree that to discern the body and blood of Christ, faith is required.

COMMENTARY (E13) Many churches believe that by the words of Jesus and by the power of the Holy Spirit, the bread and wine of the eucharist become, in a real though mysterious manner, the body and blood of the risen Christ, i.e., of the living Christ present in all his fullness. Under the signs of bread and wine the deepest reality is the total being of Christ who comes ‘to us in order to feed us and transform our entire being. Some other churches, while affirming a real presence of Christ at the eucharist, do not link that presence so definitely with the signs of bread and wine. The decision remains for the churches whether this difference can be accommodated within the convergence formulated in the text itself.

[Return to top of this page]

E14. The Spirit makes the crucified and risen Christ really present to us in the eucharistic meal, fulfilling the promise contained in the words of institution. The presence of Christ is clearly the centre of the eucharist, and the promise contained in the words of institution is therefore fundamental to the celebration. Yet it is the Father who is the primary origin and final fulfillment of the eucharistic event. The incarnate Son of God by and in whom it is accomplished is its living center. The Holy Spirit is the immeasurable strength of love which makes it possible and continues to make it effective. The bond between the eucharistic celebration and the mystery of the Triune God reveals the role of the Holy Spirit as that of the One who makes the historical words of Jesus present and alive. Being assured by Jesus’ promise in the words of institution that it will be answered, the Church prays to the Father for the gift of the Holy Spirit in order that the eucharistic event may be a reality: the real presence of the crucified and risen Christ giving his life for all humanity.

COMMENTARY (E14) This is not to spiritualize the eucharistic presence of Christ but to affirm the indissoluble union between the Son and the Spirit. This union makes it clear that the eucharist is not a magical or mechanical action but a prayer addressed to the Father, one which emphasizes the Church’s utter dependence. There is an intrinsic relationship between the words of institution, Christ’s promise, and the epiclesis, the invocation of the Spirit, in the liturgy. The epiclesis in relation to the words of institution is located differently in various liturgical traditions. In the early liturgies the whole "prayer action" was thought of as bringing about the reality promised by Christ. The invocation of the Spirit was made both on the community and on the elements of bread and wine. Recovery of such an understanding may help us overcome our difficulties concerning a special moment of consecration.

E15. It is in virtue of the living word of Christ and by the power of the Holy Spirit that the bread and wine become the sacramental signs of Christ’s body and blood. They remain so for the purpose of communion.

COMMENTARY (15) In the history of the Church there have been various attempts to understand the mystery of the real and unique presence of Christ in the eucharist. Some are content merely to affirm this presence without seeking to explain it. Others consider it necessary to assert a change wrought by the Holy Spirit and Christ’s words, in consequence of which there is no longer just ordinary bread and wine but the body and blood of Christ. Others again have developed an explanation of the real presence which, though not claiming to exhaust the significance of the mystery, seeks to protect it from damaging interpretations.

E16. The whole action of the eucharist has an "epicletic" character because it depends upon the work of the Holy Spirit. In the words of the liturgy, this aspect of the eucharist finds varied expression.

E17. The Church, as the community of the new covenant, confidently invokes the Spirit, in order that it may be sanctified and renewed, led into all justice, truth and unity, and empowered to fulfill its mission in the world.

E18. The Holy Spirit through the eucharist gives a foretaste of the Kingdom of God: the Church receives the life of the new creation and the assurance of the Lord’s return.

[Return to top of this page]

E19. The eucharistic communion with Christ who nourishes the life of the Church is at the same time communion within the body of Christ which is the Church. The sharing in one bread and the common cup in a given place demonstrates and effects the oneness of the sharers with Christ and with their fellow sharers in all times and places. It is in the eucharist that the community of God’s people is fully manifested. Eucharistic celebrations always have to do with the whole Church, and the whole Church is involved in each local eucharistic celebration. In so far as a church claims to be a manifestation of the whole Church, it will take care to order its own life in ways which take seriously the interests and concerns of other churches.

COMMENTARY (E19) Since the earliest days, baptism has been understood as the sacrament by which believers are incorporated into the body of Christ and are endowed with the Holy Spirit. As long as the right of the baptized believers and their ministers to participate in and preside over eucharistic celebration in one church is called into question by those who preside over and are members of other eucharistic congregations, the catholicity of the eucharist is less manifest. There is discussion in many churches today about the inclusion of baptized children as communicants at the Lord’s Supper.

E20. The eucharist embraces all aspects of life. It is a representative act of thanksgiving and offering on behalf of the whole world. The eucharistic celebration demands reconciliation and sharing among all those regarded as brothers and sisters in the one family of God and is a constant challenge in the search for appropriate relationships in social, economic and political life (Matt. 5:23f., I Cor. 10:16f; I Cor. 11:20-22; Gal. 3:28). All kinds of injustice, racism, separation and lack of freedom are radically challenged when we share in the body and blood of Christ. Through the eucharist the all-renewing grace of God penetrates and restores human personality and dignity. The eucharist involves the believer in the central event of the world’s history. As participants in the eucharist, therefore, we prove inconsistent if we are not actively participating in this ongoing restoration of the world’s situation and the human condition. The eucharist shows us that our behavior is inconsistent in face of the reconciling presence of God in human history: we are placed under continual judgment by the persistence of unjust relationships of all kinds in our society, the manifold divisions on account of human pride, material interest and power politics and, above all, the obstinacy of unjustifiable confessional oppositions within the body of Christ.

E21. Solidarity in the eucharistic communion of the body of Christ and responsible care of Christians for one another and the world find specific expression in the liturgies: in the mutual forgiveness of sins; the sign of peace; intercession for all; the eating and drinking together; the taking of the elements to the sick and those in prison or the celebration of the eucharist with them. All these manifestations of love in the eucharist are directly related to Christ’s own testimony as a servant, in whose servanthood Christians themselves participate. As God in Christ has entered into the human situation, so eucharistic liturgy is near to the concrete and particular situations of men and women. In the early Church the ministry of deacons and deaconesses gave expression in a special way to this aspect of the eucharist. The place of such ministry between the table and the needy properly testifies to the redeeming presence of Christ in the world.

E22. The eucharist opens up the vision of the divine rule which has been promised as the final renewal of creation, and is a foretaste of it. Signs of this renewal are present in the world wherever the grace of God is manifest and human beings work for justice, love and peace. The eucharist is the feast at which the Church gives thanks to God for these signs and joyfully celebrates and anticipates the coming of the Kingdom in Christ (1 Cor. 11:26; Matt. 26:29).

E23. The world, to which renewal is promised, is present in the whole eucharistic celebration. The world is present in the thanksgiving to the Father, where the Church speaks on behalf of the whole creation; in the memorial of Christ, where the Church, united with its great High Priest and Intercessor, prays for the world; in the prayer for the gift of the Holy Spirit, where the Church asks for sanctification and new creation.

E24. Reconciled in the eucharist, the members of the body of Christ are called to be servants of reconciliation among men and women and witnesses of the joy of resurrection. As Jesus went out to publicans and sinners and had table-fellowship with them during his earthly ministry, so Christians are called in the eucharist to be in solidarity with the outcast and to become signs of the love of Christ who lived and sacrificed himself for all and now gives himself in the eucharist.

E25. The very celebration of the eucharist is an instance of the Church’s participation in God’s mission to the world. This participation takes everyday form in the proclamation of the Gospel, service of the neighbour, and faithful presence in the world.

E26. As it is entirely the gift of God, the eucharist brings into the present age a new reality which transforms Christians into the image of Christ and therefore makes them his effective witnesses. The eucharist is precious food for missionaries, bread and wine for pilgrims on their apostolic journey. The eucharistic community is nourished and strengthened for confessing by word and action the Lord Jesus Christ who gave his life for the salvation of the world. As it becomes one people, sharing the meal of the one Lord, the eucharistic assembly must be concerned for gathering also those who are at present beyond its visible limits, because Christ invited to his feast all for whom he died. Insofar as Christians cannot unite in full fellowship around the same table to eat the same loaf and drink from the same cup, their missionary witness is weakened at both the individual and the corporate levels.

[Return to top of this page]

E27. The eucharistic liturgy is essentially a single whole, consisting historically of the following elements in varying sequence and of diverse importance:

– hymns of praise;

– act of repentance;

– declaration of pardon;

– proclamation of the Word of God, in various forms;

– confession of faith (creed);
– intercession for the whole Church and for the world;

– preparation of the bread and wine;

– thanksgiving to the Father for the marvels of creation, redemption and sanctification (deriving from the Jewish tradition of the berakah);

– the words of Christ’s institution of the sacrament according to the New Testament tradition;

– the anamnesis or memorial of the great acts of redemption, passion, death, resurrection, ascension and Pentecost, which brought the Church into being;

– the invocation of the Holy Spirit (epiclesis) on the community, and the elements of bread and wine (either before the words of institution or after the memorial, or both; or some other reference to the Holy Spirit which adequately expresses the "epicletic" character of the eucharist);

– consecration of the faithful to God;

– reference to the communion of saints;

– prayer for the return of the Lord and the definitive manifestation of his Kingdom;

– the Amen of the whole community;

– the Lord’s prayer;

– sign of reconciliation and peace;

– the breaking of the bread;

– eating and drinking in communion with Christ and with each member of the Church;

– final act of praise;

– blessing and sending.

E28. The best way towards unity in eucharistic celebration and communion is the renewal of the eucharist itself in the different churches in regard to teaching and liturgy. The churches should test their liturgies in the light of the eucharistic agreement now in the process of attainment. The liturgical reform movement has brought the churches closer together in the manner of celebrating the Lord’s Supper. However, a certain liturgical diversity compatible with our common eucharistic faith is recognized as a healthy and enriching fact. The affirmation of a common eucharistic faith does not imply uniformity in either liturgy or practice.

COMMENTARY (E28) Since New Testament days, the Church has attached the greatest importance to the continued use of the elements of bread and wine which Jesus used at the Last Supper. In certain parts of the world, where bread and wine are not customary or obtainable, it is now sometimes held that local food and drink serve better to anchor the eucharist in everyday life. Further study is required concerning the question of which features of the Lord’s Supper were unchangeably instituted by Jesus, and which features remain within the Church’s competence to decide.

E29. In the celebration of the eucharist, Christ gathers, teaches and nourishes the Church. It is Christ who invites to the meal and who presides at it. He is the shepherd who leads the people of God, the prophet who announces the Word of God, the priest who celebrates the mystery of God. In most churches, this presidency is signified by an ordained minister. The one who presides at the eucharistic celebration in the name of Christ makes clear that the rite is not the assemblies’ own creation or possession; the eucharist is received as a gift from Christ living in his Church. The minister of the Eucharist is the ambassador who represents the divine initiative and expresses the connection of the local community with other local communities in the universal Church.

E30. Christian faith is deepened by the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. Hence the eucharist should be celebrated frequently. Many differences of theology, liturgy and practice are connected with the varying frequency with which the Holy Communion is celebrated.

E31. As the eucharist celebrates the resurrection of Christ, it is appropriate that it should take place at least every Sunday. As it is the new sacramental meal of the people of God, every Christian should be encouraged to receive communion frequently.

E32. Some churches stress that Christ’s presence in the consecrated elements continues after the celebration. Others place the main emphasis on the act of celebration itself and on the consumption of the elements in the act of communion. The way in which the elements are treated requires special attention. Regarding the practice of reserving the elements, each church should respect the practices and piety of the others. Given the diversity in practice among the churches and at the same time taking note of the present situation in the convergence process, it is worthwhile to suggest:

– that, on the one hand, it be remembered, especially in sermons and instruction, that the primary intention of reserving the elements is their distribution among the sick and those who are absent, and

– on the other hand, it be recognized that the best way of showing respect for the elements served in the eucharistic celebration is by their consumption, without excluding their use for communion of the sick.

E33. The increased mutual understanding expressed in the present statement may allow some churches to attain a greater measure of eucharistic communion among themselves and so bring closer the day when Christ’s divided people will be visibly reunited around the Lord’s Table.

[Return to top of this page]

Osborne’s Summary on Transubstantiation

1. The primary objective of a theology of transubstantiation is to safeguard the real presence of Jesus in the eucharist.  This is true from the time of Bererngar down to the present. The real presence, not transubstantiation, is the key to the doctrine on the eucharist.

2. Only the Roman Catholic tradition has maintained in some way or another an understanding of transubstantiation. It is not part of the Eastern Churches’ approach to the eucharist, nor is it part of the Anglican or Protestant approach to the eucharist. These Churches, however, maintain a belief in the real presence of Jesus in the eucharist without a doctrine of transubstantiation.

3. Until the eleventh century, it should be remembered, the Latin Church itself professed its belief in the real presence of Jesus in the eucharist, without a doctrine of transubstantiation. This indicates that for an entire millennium a doctrine of transubstantiation was not part of a theology of the eucharist in the Roman Church.

4. Official statements, both by individual popes and by councils, have been very circumspect in this matter. The real presence of the body and blood of Jesus in the eucharist has been solemnly defined. That the word "transubstantiation" should be retained and is most apt is, theologically, only doctrina catholica.

5. The position of theologians that there is a necessary and intrinsic relationship between real presence and transubstantiation is not part of the solemnly defined Catholic faith, but only a theological opinion.

6. Both the ecumenical dialogues of our present times and the eucharistic theology of competent Roman Catholic theologians who suggest alternatives to transubstantiation (transignification, transfinalization, etc.) Indicate that the fact (in faith) of real presence is the central issue, not the how of this real presence.

7. The contemporary theology of the Church as the basic sacrament (Vatican II documents) and of Jesus as the primordial sacrament indicates that the foundation for real presence is not the eucharist, but (a) the real presence of the Logos in the humanness of Jesus and (b) the real presence of Jesus in the Church. Only on the basis of these instances of real presence will the real presence of Jesus in the eucharist make theological sense.

[Return to top of this page]

Questions of "Real Absence"

"Real Presence" must be explained in such a way that it leaves room for the "Real Absence"  See: Donald Gray, "The Real Absence: A Note on the Eucharist", p 190, Living Bread, Saving Cup: Readings on the Eucharist, edited by R. Kevin Seasoltz.

1. Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again. [Acclamation A]

2. Dying you destroyed our death, rising you restored our life. Lord Jesus, come in glory. [Acclamation B]

3. When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory. [Acclamation C]

4. "Father, calling to mind the death your Son endured for our salvation, his glorious resurrection and ascension into heaven, and ready to greet him when he comes again, we offer you in thanksgiving this holy and living sacrifice." [Anamnesis, Eucharistic Prayer III]

5. "Deliver us, Lord, from every evil, and grant us peace in our day. In your mercy keep us from sin and protect us from all anxiety as we wait in joyful hope for the coming of our Savior, Jesus Christ." [Embolism following the Lord’s Prayer]

[Return to top of this page]

Nathan Mitchell on Transubstantiation

[The following is the conclusion of an essay by Nathan Mitchell in Worship 74:2 (March 2000), "The Amen Corner," pp 178-182.]

But it is precisely such fears and obsessions [i.e. that American Catholics no longer have an orthodox belief in the real presence] that ultimately erode faith and endanger "traditional doctrine."

A case in point is transubstantiation itself, as that word has been used over the centuries by Catholic theologians and teachers. The Catechism of the Catholic Church has reasserted its use in a catechetical context (especially in #1413), but of course that same document also insists upon commitment to the poor as an essential condition for receiving "in truth the Body and Blood of Christ given up for us" (#1397). Nevertheless, because the language of transubstantiation is sometimes used today as a "text" [or "test"] to distinguish "Catholics who genuinely believe the truths of our tradition" from those who do not, it may be valuable to remind ourselves of what this familiar Catholic teaching does – and does not – mean.

1. It is widely – and wrongly – assumed by many that transubstantiation offers an "Aristotelian" explanation for the kind of "change" (or transformation, or "conversion") that happens to the elements of bread and wine in the Eucharist. In fact, of course, neither transubstantiation nor the Christian doctrine of creation would have made any sense to Aristotle. (See Herbert McCabe O.P., "Transubstantiation," in God Matters [London: Chapman 1987] 146-54.) For Aristotle, a "substantial change" is what happens when a dog dies or my body metabolizes a slice of bread. Clearly, these biochemical changes are not what we believe occurs at the Eucharist.

Moreover, as Aquinas held, transubstantiation is not strictly speaking a "change" at all. (Summa Theologiae III a, 75, 4, c: Nec continetur inter species motus naturalis and see McCabe’s commentary, 147) Why? Because the entire system of language that seeks to explain change on the basis of natural phenomena breaks down when we attempt to say how Christ becomes present to us in the ritual food and drink of a meal. Transubstantiation is thus a perfect example of speech that literally "does not know what it is saying!" As Father Herbert McCabe puts it, to use words analogically (a strategy that theological language always requires) means paying a penalty, and "the penalty we pay is . . . that we do not, strictly speaking, know what we are talking about. . . . [We do not know what we are talking about when we speak of transubstantiation; it is a change which, rather like creation, takes place neither at the level of accident nor of substance but of existence itself." (McCabe, 149)

2. So in the Eucharist, Christ’s presence is "substantial," but the change is not. What happens at Eucharist is not that one kind of "substance" (e.g., bread) is exchanged, through a divine sleight-of-hand, for another kind of "substance" (e.g., Christ’s body). "Transubstantiation is not a matter of a masked, or camouflaged substantial change," writes McCabe; "it is not being said that what was bread has been substantially changed into human flesh (as it might be by metabolism) which is then miraculously concealed from us. The stupendous act that takes place in the consecration lies not in the concealment of the results of the change, but in the change itself. The notion of transubstantiation depends on the idea that there can be a kind of transformation in what it means to exist which is not simply a change in what it is that exists." (McCabe, 150. emphasis TRR) In other words, Thomas Aquinas (and others who used his ideas when speaking about the eucharistic presence) believed (that word is important!) that there is a kind of change – a kind of "coming to be" – that depends utterly upon God’s power and is thus more fundamental, more radical, than anything Aristotle might have envisioned in the category of "natural" or "substantial" (what we might today call "biochemical") change. Quite simply, what occurs to bread and wine at Eucharist has no equivalent of any kind in the everyday, natural world.

But such a change – unprecedented except for the possible parallel of God’s creating a world by bringing non-existence into existence – is beyond language and almost beyond intelligibility. That is why Thomists like McCabe warn against the careless assumption that when we use words like transubstantiation "we really know what we are saying." Transubstantiation, he wisely notes, is a difficult and dangerous term, for "it sounds as though we were concerned with a quasi-chemical change within the host, . . . that the Eucharist can be discussed in terms of an exact account of what happens within this piece of bread." (McCabe, 151) And that, of course, is precisely what cannot be done. "I myself would dissent," writes McCabe, "from the opinion of the Council of Trent that transubstantiation is a ‘fitting and suitable’ name for what happens in the Eucharist. I think it is a dangerous and misleading name, at any rate in our post-scholastic age." (Ibid.)

It is important, then, not to become so obsessed by a term (even one hallowed by long use) that we are more concerned about its potential as a test of "ideological purity" than about its actual meaning for people today. In the Eucharist, bread and wine indeed "suffer a revolutionary change" – not because they "change into something else" but because "they become more radically food and drink," just as, in his resurrection, Christ becomes "not less but more bodily than he was before." (McCabe, "Transubstantiation and Real Presence," in God Matters, 116-29; here 125-26) At Eucharist, Christ – the food and drink of the future world – becomes the food and drink of our own, for "Christ has a better right to appear as food and drink than bread and wine have. Why? . . . Because food and drink have a role of bodily communication . . . . At every level from the milk I receive from my mother’s breast to the martini I receive from my host, food and drink is a communication of life. Food is a medium in which we communicate, come together, become more human. It is for this reason that Christ can say that he is the true bread that comes down from heaven; since he is the medium in which we finally meet each other, in which we are finally able to communicate ourselves to each other, he is more intensely food than meat and drink can be!’ (Ibid., 127)

3. The ultimate goal of Eucharist, then, is not to change bread but to change people, to transform the celebrating assembly into what it receives, viz., the body of Christ. As McCabe puts it, in a succinctly evocative sentence, "Christ is present to us because our language has become his body." ("Transubstantiation and the Real Presence," 117) Because the Risen Christ has now become "more bodily than he was when he walked in Galilee," we have a new and unprecedented way to experience him. "The way in which we encounter . . . Christ, the way we come into his bodily presence, the way, in your life, in which his body touches ours, is through a transformation of the extension of our bodies which we call our media of communication – in shorthand, through a transformation of our language!" (Ibid.) Language here should not be confused with the endless stream of verbiage that pours out of garrulous talk-show hosts. To say that Christ is "present to us because our language has become his body" is to say, in a way that is intelligible to men and women of our time, that Christ’s body is "present to us ‘sacramentally’ . . by being our sign." (Ibid., 117-18) Here is how McCabe summarizes the point: "[T]he effect of the resurrection is that Christ (the bodily Christ) can be present to all men and not just to a few . . . just because of his increased or deepened bodiliness he is more available than he was . . . . There are certain things we want to say about Christ in the Eucharist because he is the Risen Christ, and certain things we want to say about him because he is the sacramental Christ and we should be careful not to muddle these up. Thus the reason why Christ cannot be damaged by anything we do to the Eucharist is not precisely because Christ being risen is beyond being damaged (though this is true) but because his body is present sacramentally, as sign, as language." (Ibid., 118)

To say that Christ is sacramentally present to us "as sign, as language" is in no way to render that presence "merely subjective" or "unreal." There is, after all, no such thing as purely private meaning; meaning "belongs to language itself." (See H. McCabe, "The Eucharist as Language," Modern Theology 15:2 [April 1999] 131-41; here 134) There is, then, an objectivity to language, a "symbiotic relationship between language and society; one cannot exist without the other." (Ibid., 134) The sacraments, centering on Eucharist, are the language that makes a certain kind of society possible. That society, in turn, makes sacramental language both meaningful and distinctive precisely because "the society in question is the mystery of the People of God." (Ibid.) This people of God is not simply a random collection of misfits (though misfits we may be!), but is rather the outcome of God’s "personal covenantal love, the Holy Spirit, so that we are children of God sharing by grace in . . . divine life. The sacramental language is the language granted to us in which this mystery is to be expressed and lived out in human and material terms." (Ibid.)

Consequently, to treat sacramental language as though it were merely a "litmus test of orthodoxy" is manipulative, cynical and little short of sacrilegious. For the language in question is itself God’s gift to a pilgrim people. The language of the Eucharistic Prayer is not a platform for proclaiming dogmas; it is doxology whose goal is praise of the God "who lives in unapproachable light, Source of life and goodness." (EP IV) The goal of eucharistic activity is thus not to change bread but to transform both gifts and people through "the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit," to quote a formula found in the Catechism of the Catholic C