Church and Society: The Laurence J. McGinley Lectures, 1988-2007

33. How Real Is the Real Presence?: February 15, 2005

33 How Real Is the Real Presence? February ,  L ast fall, at the beginning of this year of the Eucharist, I devoted my McGinley Lecture to the subject ‘‘The Eucharist and the Church.’’ Because a number of the questions had to do with the real presence of Christ in this sacrament, I promised to take the real presence as the topic for my next lecture. There have been moments when I almost regretted the promise, because the subject is very profound and mysterious. It taxes the human mind to the utmost. In the end we have to exclaim that we have here an ineffable mystery, which only the mind of God can fully understand. Nevertheless, something should be said, because God has not revealed himself simply to mystify us. He wants us to imitate the Blessed Virgin, who pondered deeply the words spoken to her. Meaning of Real Presence At the very outset it must be said that the Church believes the real presence as a matter of faith, simply because it is taught by Christ, as attested by Scripture and tradition. Jesus said clearly, ‘‘This is my body . . . this is my blood,’’ and in controversy with the Jews he insisted that he was not just using metaphors. ‘‘My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me’’ (Jn 6:55–57). Many of the disciples found this a hard saying and parted from his company, but Jesus did not moderate his statements to win them back. 455 456 兩 Church and Society The Fathers and medieval doctors have confidently proclaimed the real presence century after century, notwithstanding all objections and misconceptions. Then in 1551 the Council of Trent gave a full exposition of the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist in which the real presence receives special emphasis. Repeated by many popes and official documents since that time, the teaching of Trent remains today as normative as ever. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is content to quote it verbatim several times (CCC 1374, 1376–77). In describing Christ’s presence in this sacrament, the Council of Trent used three adverbs. He is contained in it, said the council, ‘‘truly, really, and substantially’’ (DS 1651). These three terms are the keys that open the door to Catholic teaching and exclude contrary views, which are to be rejected.1 In saying in the first place that Christ is truly contained under the Eucharistic species, the council repudiated the view that the sacrament is a mere sign or figure pointing away from itself to a body that is absent, perhaps somewhere in the heavens. This assertion is made against the eleventh-century monk Berengarius and some of his Protestant followers in the sixteenth century. Second, the presence is real. That is to say, it is ontological and objective : ontological because it takes place in the order of being, not merely in the order of signs; objective because it does not depend on the thoughts or feelings of the minister or the communicants. The body and blood of Christ are present in the sacrament by reason of the promise of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit, which are attached to the proper performance of the rite by a duly ordained minister. In so teaching, the Church rejects the view that faith is the instrument that brings about Christ’s presence in the sacrament. According to Catholic teaching, faith does not make Christ present, but it gratefully acknowledges that presence and allows Holy Communion to bear fruit in holiness. To receive the sacrament without faith is improper, even sinful, but the lack of faith does not render the presence unreal. Third, Trent tells us that Christ’s presence in the sacrament is substantial . The word ‘‘substance’’ as here used is not a technical philosophical term, such as might be found in the philosophy of Aristotle. It was used in the early Middle Ages long before the works of Aristotle were current. ‘‘Substance’’ in commonsense usage denotes the basic reality of the thing—that is, what it is in itself. Derived from the Latin root sub-stare, How Real Is the Real Presence? 兩 457 it means what stands under the...