transubstantiation

[Dasha8]

Do people really believe in transubstantiation (the substance of the bread and wine in the Eucharist becomes Christ's real presence)?

Thank you! I’m drawn to deep diving and trying to prove things- I usually pull myself back with John 20:29 “…blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed.”

We’re more blessed if we believe without proof.

Why is believing in literal transubstantiation essential for Catholicism? It seems an oddly specific thing to pin a whole category of faith on? Surely there are plenty of other aspects of faith and tradition that differentiate Catholicism from other Christian faiths?

All Christians believe in an omnipotent God who could perform the miracle of transubstantiation if He willed it. That same God inspired passages from Scripture that (if taken literally) teach that the Communion meal is truly Jesus’ body and blood. That God who inspired Scripture built a Church based on the Eucharist, and that Church taught the dogma for 1,200 years before Aquinas explained it philosophically, and it remained virtually unquestioned until the sixteenth century, during the Reformation. Denial of the dogma of transubstantiation is contrary to both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
As Thomas Aquinas wrote,

does any unbeliever profess that the changing of bread and wine into the body and blood of the Lord is impossible? Then let him consider God’s omnipotence. Admit that nature can transform one thing into another, then with greater reason should you admit that God’s almighty power, which brings into existence the whole substance of things, can work not as nature does, by changing forms in the same matter, but by changing one whole thing into another whole thing (Concerning Reasons of Faith 8).

What is perhaps an even larger problem, though, is that arguments against transubstantiation based on appearance seem to work equally well against the incarnation of the Son of God. Being made in the form of a man (Phil. 2:5-8), Jesus’ divinity could not be detected by any empirical means, and one could say his dual nature is even harder to believe than a transubstantiated Communion meal! Jesus was clearly a human being with all the limitations of humanity, yet Christianity teaches that he was also God, the second person of the Holy Trinity. These are not just big differences—without the faith as authoritatively taught by the Church since its origin, they can appear to be logically contradictory.

Hope this helps. 🙏

It's far from odd, it's absolutely crucial to a true Catholic faith.
The best, clearest and most fun explanations of Catholic faith are in the short videos by Father Mike Schmitz on Ascension Presents on YouTube.
I watched so many of his videos before I went ahead with joining the Catholic Church (I'd considered it for years and he answered so many questions that I felt silly asking in real life 😄)
He will have one about the Eucharist.
I promise it's not some weird overly wordy video, it's concise and easy to follow!

This seems like one of the few places that will appreciate this Private Eye cartoon. As a Reformation historian & GC feminist, I had buy the original.

😂

I ought not to laugh but 😆

It's amazing how so many people don't even understand their own religion. Transubstantiation is the belief that it TRANSforms into the body and blood of christ. Consubstantiation is when you take the bread and wine to be symbols of the body and blood of christ.

@Habreathmint I think it's when you are brought up with it but your not very interested in all the details.
I was forced to church every Saturday night or Sunday for the first 16 years of my life.
After that I could choose myself and only go a few times per year.
Tbh I know the mass routine like the back of my hand... it's ingrained.
I do pray, I do believe in god.
I don't agree with everything the Catholic Church represents and I'm not interested in exploring it further.
Transubstantiation I something I didn't find out till I was late teen (after being a Catholic school and my mam being a strict Catholic) and at the time I didn't agree.

I'm more culturally Catholic rather than practicing.

@Habreathmint ... Consubstantiation means much more than symbol.. it means presence on or around ... so still a belief that there is a real presence. "doctrine, especially in Lutheran belief, that the substance of the bread and wine coexists with the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist".

Yes, I believe in transubstantiation.

It is a way to try and describe what Christians believed since the time of Christ as described in John 6 ...and documented as early as the Didache (pre 100ad) and throughout the early generations of Christians from Justin Martyr (post 100ad) right up to the present day. Nobody in the early writings from the church claimed the Eucharist was a symbol. In fact it is easier to see when the beliefs around the real presence began to change after the Reformation and which Protestant theologians/church leaders began to change the views and beliefs of their followers as to the real presence in the Eucharist.

To me Transubstantiation is a mystery... but no bigger a mystery than the concept of God... the Trinity... Jesus with all the appearence and elements of man but also being God... Jesus healing the sick and raising the dead... Jesus resurrection etc etc.

Tell me you know nothing about Church history, without telling me you know nothing about Church history...

Right from the formation of an organised church, the clergy have been shocked by the laity's ignorance of theology. It's a consistent theme throughout the ages, not helped by the RC insistence on services being in Latin until 1967. Never mind anything as esoteric as transubstantiation: most Catholics, when asked, only had the haziest idea about the Trinity.

If having heard of transubstantiation, let alone believing in it, was essential to be regarded as a Roman Catholic, then maybe 0.1% of members of the Church have ever been truly RC.

As I posted above, I do agree that, if you understand transubstantiation, and consciously reject it, you are not really RC any more, but that's very different from not understanding it or not having heard of it.

To me Transubstantiation is a mystery... but no bigger a mystery than the concept of God... the Trinity... Jesus with all the appearence and elements of man but also being God... Jesus healing the sick and raising the dead... Jesus resurrection etc etc.

I agree. I don't believe in it personally, but I agree it's not inherently less believable than other tenets of Christian faith.

I think I’m on the road away from RC to something else. I’m uncomfortable with what to me, is almost idolatry in the worship of the Virgin Mary and the various Saints. I understand that they’re meant to be intercessors but I see many people (including myself) effectively worshiping them at times…

I also take issue with the current Pope.

@HamptonCaught In what way do you find yourself idolising and worshipping saints.

I'm interested as I am Catholic and understand the veneration of Mary and the special relationship due to her being the Mother of Jesus . I always understood that the " prayer" was an "ask" for her to pray for us ... rather than a prayer to "worship" her. Although I do agree, that sometimes people's language is not precise and its had to know if it is their language or if they believe Mary has "special powers" like God 😉

Also.. . what issues do you have with Pope Francis?

@HamptonCaught but there isn't idolatry of Mary or any saints. Are you maybe mixing it up with veneration? Venerating is that you respect and ask for their intercession.
Which is basically like when something happens for a friend and they'd maybe ask you to pray for their health. Intercession is when we ask Mary or other saints to pray for us in that same way a friend would ask you to pray for them.
It wouldn't mean the friend is idolising you if you pray for them, so why would it be idolising Mary to ask her to pray for you?
No idea what issue there would be with Pope Francis but I can recommend the programme on Disney+ with Pope Francis meeting young people who ask him tough questions.

I would encourage anyone with questions or reservations about the Catholic faith to try their local RCIA group as that is where you'll find the most accurate answers to why things are as they are in our faith. It is not only for people joining the church, you can attend to seek answers too.

@Inkypot 1 Timothy 2:5
“There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus".

That was part of a debate in the early Church, though, which went on for centuries. Later RC doctrine, e. g. the Council of Trent upheld intercession.

In the modern RC Church, unless you are a martyr, you can’t be beatified without evidence of a miracle from having interceded for someone living, so it doesn’t really make sense for an RC to accept saints but not intercession (different for Protestants, who mostly don’t see intercession as part of recognising sainthood).

Yes there is one intercessor to the Father. Not Mary, not the saints, not the Pope, not the priests, clergy or religious but only Jesus Christ. Amen.

However, there are many intercessors for Jesus who intercedes Himself for us to the Father. Our Lady is prime amongst them and the glorious angels and saints and all the faithful. Jesus didn't lead me to God, my parents did and when I grew up and became lost it wasn't Jesus who led me to God it was Our Lady's intercession and the countless prayers of those who loved me. She led me to her beautiful Son and through His Grace the glory of the Holy Trinity was made manifest to a worthless soul like me.

This part of scripture is often misunderstood and its a shame because our own intercession is very important in the economy of salvation. God bless.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow Thanks, I'm now off to look into the ins and outs of Sainthood!

God bless and amen to you also @MaterDei.

If you’re interested in how RC theology developed, I recommend the History of the Papacy podcast. Despite the title, it pretty much covers the whole of Catholicism, and it’s much less dry than it sounds. It has helped me understand things that I never really grasped when I was taught about Catholicism at school/church - it makes so much more sense when you see how things have developed over time, and helps explain apparent contradictions.

@IronLikeaLioninZion if you're like me and maybe like a nice upbeat and welcoming explanation of things (I'm not great with written word, much prefer a video or audio) you might like the videos by Fr Mike Schmitz on YouTube. The way he explained things helped me so much in making sense of stuff back when I was on the fence about converting to Catholicism.

Not that I'm suggesting you're in the same situation I was, they would be good even for just giving an understanding of why things are how they are in the Catholic faith which can be nicer than trawling through the Catechism. Though he also does Catechism A Day for those that want it 😄

Oh thanks for this, I haven't heard his podcast as always love the Fr Mike Schmitz ones. Nice to have a bit of variety.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow and @Inkypot Great recommendations thanks, I'll go check them out.

If you believe it's symbolic then you don't believe in transubstanciation.

If you believe in transubstanciation then you believe that the "substance" of the bread and wine on the table has stopped being that of baked-wheatflour and fermented grape juice and started being the body and blood of Christ. "Substance" here having a meaning that is much more real than "represents and symbolises" and is the same word as in the Creed where we say that Jesus is "of one substance with The Father". The sacraments are no longer base manmade matter but something transfigured.

Some people believe in "consubstanciation" which means that the bread retains its baked wheat flour breadiness and the wine retains its fermented grape juice wineimess but the additional divine substance is added to these things so that they are still elevated to the divine but have not lost all their mundane qualities.

In churches where transubstanciation or consubstanciation is prevalent you will see a lot more careful protection of what happens to the sacraments of eucharist because if anything happens other than being reverently consumed by s believer that's a bad thing