McBrien, Catholicism, HarperSanFrncisco 823-834.
HISTORY OF THE EUCHARIST
1. General view
Elaborated from the pattern of the
Lord’s Supper, the Eucharist was in the beginning as a meal. The use of Latin
word missa (dismissal) was introduced to identify the Eucharist in the 2nd
and 3rd century. This structure focused on the canon or the
thanksgiving prayer, currently known as Eucharistic
Prayer. Indeed, it was during this prayer that the bread and wine were
consecrated. The Eucharist was usually celebrated every Sunday and on other few
occasions. Even though daily masses were not the rule, all the Christians
attended the mass before work since Sunday was still an ordinary workday. Part
of the traditional synagogue service survived and the end of persecution
offered opportunity for expansion of the Church with cultural diversification.
“For many centuries, the canon, or Eucharistic Prayer, was recited in the West
in undertone not audible to the congregation”[1].
However, in the Eastern Church it was always said aloud. Various introductions
of petitions were made in the course of time. The Carolingian liturgists wished
to have a sort of sanctuary where the Priest alone could enter. To compensate
this elevation of the host and chalice was added after consecration in the 13th
century for the congregation.
In the 17th century due
to Jansenism frequent communion had fallen into disrepute. It came to be
revived by Pope Pius X. Only the altar boy or server responded on behalf of the
congregation during mass. “The ‘dialogue mass’ was introduced in the late 1950s
just before the Second Vatican Council, but the Latin language was still used”[2].
In the 18th century, choirs were elaborated and inserted during mass
that encouraged people to sing even vernacular hymns, which stopped in the 20th
century.
In the 16th century
appeared the celebration of private mass, without congregation, mainly in form
of votive Masses or Masses for the necessity of the faithful.” The Mass was
perceived increasingly as an act of petition, something to be performed to
receive some particular benefit from God, or it was often regarded as a rite,
however complicated, to produce hosts for the tabernacle.”[3]Private
Masses became frequent. However, Vatican II eventually declared communal
celebration preferable to individual and quasiprivate celebrations.
2. Eucharistic doctrines
Generally the
Catholic Eucharistic doctrine is based on two issues: “the sacrificial nature
of the mass and the real presence of Christ in the consecrated elements of
bread and wine”[4]. The
Catholic teaching stresses that the mass is truly a sacrifice, not only of
praise and thanksgiving and of commemoration but also of expiation for the
living and the dead. Through the Eucharist, the Sacrifice of Jesus is repeated
as it was on the cross, with the same fruits. The Catholic teaching underlines
also that Christ is really present in the consecrated elements of bread and
wine, in contrast to some reformers who talked of the spiritual presence
(Berenguar of Tours, 1088). The Catholic Church went further by introducing the
notion of transubstantiation with the
Fourth Lateran Council (1215), “the belief that the substance of bread and wine
is changed into the body and blood of Christ”[5].
The same teaching was reaffirmed by Constance (1415) and Trent (1551). Zwingli and Calvin on their side denied
transubstantiation while Luther held consubstantiation,
“the belief that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ but
that they remain also bread and wine”[6].
We don’t intend to give here exhaustive and detailed notes regarding the scope
of Christ’ presence, subject of many controversies.
3. Intercommunion
Known
as communication in sacris (communication in sacred realities), this referred
to the Eucharistic sharing between and among separated Christians. It expresses
the full reciprocity between Churches, even in term of communion. This
principle was endorsed by Vatican II as common worship which brings about unity
of Church and sharing in the means of grace. Admission to this worship was
conditioned by the criteria of sharing the same faith as Catholic Church and
such Christians should have a serious spiritual need of Eucharist sustenance,
proper disposition of a worthy Christian life… Even if these conditions are
fulfilled it remains a pastoral responsibility to see that admission of these
other Christians will not disturb or endanger the faith of Catholics. Exception
is made to the orthodox Christians who have true sacraments, accept apostolic
succession, the priesthood and the Eucharist which unite them to us.
4. Ecumenical Consensus Today
The
sacrificial nature of the Church was in the past believed and affirmed only by
catholic (exception to orthodox). However, form the ecumenical dialogue and
consultations at both international and national level since 1965 showed that
the same was true for these churches (Anglican-Roman Catholic,
Orthodox-Catholic, Lutheran-Catholic, and Presbyterian-Reformed-Catholic
consultations and in a 1970 consensus statement of study commission of the National
council of Churches in the United States. The consensus is even wider and
affirms the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
5. Jesus, the Church, and Eucharist
The
first fruit of the Eucharist is the incorporation in the Church, which is the
Body of Christ. For St. Thomas Aquinas, the
Church is the sacrament of unity. In the Eucharist, the Church appears as a
community listening to the word of God and continues carrying out the mission
of Jesus. This aims in bringing about the kingdom of God
[1]R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 824.
[2] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 825.
[3]R.P. McBrien, Catholicism,
825.
[4] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 826.
[5] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 826.
[6] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 827.
[7] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 830.
The EUCHARIST
R.P. McBrien, Catholicism, Harper SanFrancisco 1994, 590-591
Like
Baptism, the development on the origin of the Eucharist is thin in the New
Testament from the context of the Christian community. The Lord’s Supper is the
oldest term used in the oldest account in 1 Cor 11:20, from the very beginning
of the Church. The tradition of the Last Supper is very ancient, and it is
given in four variants versions: 1 Cor 11:23-25; Mk 14:22-25; Mt26:26-29 and Lk
22:15-20. As for the Pauline account from 54-56, it also shows how Paul handed
on this tradition to the Corinthians from the beginning of missionary activity
in Corinth
(about 49). As related, Paul describes its origin as coming directly from the
Lord. It could have been repudiated if it were inaccurate since Peter was still
alive. Moreover, having lived many years with members of the Jerusalem Church Kingdom
of God Kingdom of God
Obviously,
the structure was taken from the Jewish ritual meal: “the words over the bread,
followed by its breaking and sharing, and the blessing over the wine”[3].
However, at this last Supper, Jesus identified himself with the bread and wine,
in reference to his body which is broken and his blood which is poured for our
sin and the establishment of a New Covenant. All the above mentioned four texts
agree on this particularity of the Last Supper. Again, the Jewish context
regarded the death of an innocent one as having the atonement character, the
same was seen in Jesus’ death. In fact, Jesus was also the innocent suffering
one in the same way. This was not connected to the post resurrection theology
of the Church. In the distribution of the bread and wine as his flesh, Jesus
gave to his disciples a share in the power of his death to make atonement and
establish a new covenant. Seemingly, eating and dirking communicated the divine
gifts. Moreover, after the resurrection the disciples gathered again and again
to share this meals, but now with new conviction that the risen Christ was in
their midst as they gathered in his name (Mt 18:20). This was the reason of
their joy in their new fellowship; joy over the presence of the risen Christ
and joy over the approach of the Kingdom
of God
[1] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 590.
[2] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 590.
[3] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 590.
[4] R.P.
McBrien, Catholicism, 591.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION
Book: D.A.VO NIER, A key to the Doctrine of the Eucharist, pp.176-192.
By: SANGUPAMBA KASIALA Francois (11091 T).
The
purpose of this article is to grasp the significance of transubstantiation in
the Eucharist and understand how the change of the bread and wine into body and
blood of Christ happens. Christian
tradition used to provide only a literal interpretation to the words of the
Eucharistic rite. “It was not first said that bread was being changed into Christ’s Body and that
wine was being changed into Christ’s Blood; what was said first and is said at
all times, is: “ This is my Body, this is my Blood””[1].
The major change is the addition of the concept change. The change of the
substance is not sacrament in itself, rather the hidden power that makes the
sacrificial a reality not a mere symbol, something concrete for the livings.
Accordingly, Catholic theology holds that “God creates directly every human
soul, and unites it with the Human embryo”[2]. Even though this doctrine can not justify the
whole process, it explains the human nature, as a being endowed with an
intellectual soul, spiritual soul… Not any of our action or word brings Jesus
down from heaven, nor do they raise him up from the depth. How does it happen
that we have Jesus in the Bread and wine? How did happen that through the
simple fiat of Mary, God took human nature, perfectly in mind and body? As
God’s act, transubstantiation is “the hidden act of God, which is absolutely
indispensable if the sacramental consecration be true”[3]. St. Thomas Aquinas[4]
states that God’s divinity does not remain in the Bread and Wine, rather makes
the change happens. Transubstantiation is the transient act and the power.
Truly, transubstantiation doest not only endear the Eucharistic mystery but
holds also the eternal and mystical wisdom of God. What priests do now is
nothing new, since Jesus himself, during the Last Supper, did at all first and
utmost.
Now how can Jesus be present
simultaneously at all the altars were masses are celebrated. Does he possess a
multiplicity of presence or any kind of power to be present everywhere? From
his Divine power, Christ is not subjected nor conditioned to the categories of
time and space. Only God’s grace brings about the real presence of Jesus
through the Eucharistic formula said by the priest. His body is present in the
Bread and Wine through a special manner, beyond the understanding of human
mind, but proper to the sacrament:
(Corpus
Christi non est eo modo in hoc sacramento, sicut corpus in loco, quod suis
dimensionibus loco commensuratur, sed quodam speciali modo, qui est prprius
huic sacramento: unde dicimus, quod corpu Christi est in diversis altaribus,non
sicut in diversis locis, sed sicut in sacramento
[1] D.A.VO
NIER, A key to the Doctrine of the
Eucharist, 176.
[2] D.A.VO
NIER, A key to the Doctrine of the
Eucharist, 177.
[3] D.A.VO
NIER, A key to the Doctrine of the
Eucharist, 180.
[4] “Deus conjugavit divinitatem suam, idest
divinam virtutem, pani et vino, non ut remaneant in hoc sacramento, sed ut
faciat inde corpus et sanguine suum”, 180.
[5] D.A.VO
NIER, A key to the Doctrine of the
Eucharist, 186.
***
The Un-Eucharistic Eucharist of the
Reformers:
ZWINGLI, OECOLAMPADIUS, FAREL AND CALVIN
Book: L. BOUYER, Eucharist, pp. 391 – 396.
By: SANGUPAMBA KASIALA Francois (11091 T).
The mixture of traditional spirit
and freedom was not at all the taste wanted and shared by all the reformers
particularly those who called themselves reformed. They were opposed not only
to the Lutherans but also and more importantly to the Catholics, the like of
Zwingli and Calvin. For them it was not a question of reforming the mass while
keeping its structure, but rather a complete abolition. They sort to replace it
with the Holy Supper, while returning
to the original Eucharist, retaining only the institution narrative, immersed
in more wordy celebration and less religious exhortations. Only could be added
prayers, “constantly developing in accordance with the very medieval impetus of
the apologies and the affective meditations on the passion”[1].Thus,
this break stressed the gospel alone and separated itself with tradition.
Zwingli and Oecolampadius denied not only the sacrificial character of the mass
but also and more importantly the idea of real presence of Jesus in the
Eucharist. Zwingli in particular understood eating the body and drinking the
blood of Jesus as being nourished by faith with the word of the Gospel. The
Eucharist is therefore only a communal meal of remembrance of the last supper,
a sign of gratitude to God. There is no question of sacrament for the
reformers, but Eucharist is only a communal meal. At least Zwingli agreed the Latin structure of
the Mass up to the sanctus inclusively.
Furthermore,
in the roman canon, he substituted four Latin prayers leading up to the
institution account, by using St Paul ’s
terminology “the proclamation of death of Christ in the Eucharist”[2]. The same year in Basel , Oecolampadius made similar attempt. In
fact, Zwingli’s first attempt was meant to be transitional for the final
setting. Having grown in confidence, after 1525, he published his Action oder Bruch des Nachtmahls, that underlines
zwinglism’s character whereby all singing were banned. There was no more any
trace of Eucharistic prayer, which led to having the Eucharistic liturgy
without a Eucharist, only for yearly celebrations (Christmas, Easter, with
Sunday and once during the autumn). The meal shared during the celebration was
not the Eucharist, but a meal meant to express the solidarity of the community
and its members. This became more of a socio-religious gathering. Then, Calvin
attempted to restore the religious character of this Last Supper, without
teaching lie the Lutherans on the real presence of Jesus. This meal was not ac
communal sign of faith in the word of the Gospel, but also the expression of
unity in the Body and Blood of Christ. Zwingli maintained that the body of
Jesus existed only in heaven and could not come down again. Farel on his side
kept a lengthy Zwingli structure with inclusion of the formula of confession of
sin, Lord’s prayer, Apostles’ creed, second exhortation leading to the
institution narrative, a third exhortation, distribution of communion and fourth and last exhortation
before the blessing and dismissal. Excommunication was a particular addition
made by Calvin in case of series of scandalous sins. This was a practice
borrowed from the composition of Buccer of Strasbourg. In a long exhortation,
Calvin explained completely his doctrine on the Last Supper. After the
distribution of communion followed immediately, the singing of a psalm or
biblical verses recited by the minister, and thanksgiving prayer to renew the
commitment of fidelity ended the service with the Nunc Dimittis with the blessing. For Calvin, this Supper should be
celebrated every Sunday after the services of readings and prayers. Despite all
the change to make it more didactic, this service was not much celebrated as
Zwingli’s. Calvin did not change the outlook of the Eucharistic meal despite
his theoretical sacramental realism. People were left still with a
non-Eucharistic Eucharist.
[1] L.
BOUVER, Eucharist, 392.
[2] L.
BOUVER, Eucharist, 392.
****
THE EUCHARIST, AN INTEGRAL PART OF
CHRISTIAN INITIATION
Book: K. B., OSBORNE, The Christian Sacraments of Initiation,
pp.226-233.
By: SANGUPAMBA
KASIALA Francois (11091 T).
The
Eucharist as part of the Christian tradition and spirituality is a multi-faceted
reality and mystery which can be dealt with from the historical perspective,
sacrificial perspective or from the perspective of real presence. However, our current preoccupation is the
integration of the Eucharist in as part of the Christian rite of Initiation. It
is worthnoting that since the post Vatican II
period, various changes haven taken place in the Latin mass celebration. A
committee was formed and which subsequently divided the mass into two important
parts: the liturgy of the word and the Eucharistic liturgy. The first part, the
liturgy of the word is a practice borrowed from the Jewish synagogue service.
This was more or less a time consecrated to a reflection and instruction of the
community on the word of God. This first part is also identified as “Mass of
the Catechumens, and they were not allowed to stay for the mass of Eucharist”[1].
In fact, particular instructions were given to Catechumens during lentern
Sundays in connection with the readings. The second part, namely the
Eucharistic liturgy is structurally closely related to the Baptismal, resulting
from the long historical development process and as a practice inherited from
Eastern Churches. According to Krister Stendhal, in the Lutheran/Catholic
dialogue on Baptism, Baptism is the point of departure among the sacraments of
Initiation; Baptism, Eucharist and Confirmation. A modern and contemporary
approach shows clearly how limited it is for not considering the humanity of
Jesus as primordial sacrament and the Church as sacrament as well. Therefore,
it appears appropriate to start with Jesus and the Church as sacraments of
Initiation. Questions may arise to know what are they initiated to. What is the
content of such initiation? Historical studies on Baptism show that Initiation
was a procedure of being introduced into Jesus’ community and into
Christianity, as group separated from Jewish religious world. The newly
baptized had share with old members on the Eucharistic table and their
spirituality. One might have not been united fully with the Church through Baptism;
therefore initiation can take place in the unity of faith as part of the
Eucharistic fellowship shared by believers. Evidently, on the ground of
ecumenical dialogue, some criteria on the understanding of the Eucharist should
be fulfilled in order to attain unity of faith, particularly between
Protestants and Catholics. Baptism is the sacrament of faith, which faith is
celebrated in its mystery through Eucharist. This introspective relation
Baptism-Eucharist offers the real presence of Jesus, celebrated and
commemorated in the Church as sacrament of Jesus. The whole initiation process
is en entry into the life of Jesus.
No comments:
Post a Comment