D
Deacon_Joseph
Guest
Which was the first council to say the real presence of Christ is in the Eucharist.
- Status
C
Cluny
Guest
Since all the pre-Nicene fathers speak of this as an accepted truth already, it was never an issue until the Protestant Reformation.
L
LilyM
Guest
So it was first officially defined at the Council of Trent then?
P
palmas85
Guest
"The Council of Trent defined transubstantiation by stating
'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."
It had always been the belief of the Church but it was defined by name at Trent. This was done to combat the heresies floating around the reformers camps concerning the validity of the Real Presence which the protestants rejected and still reject,
G
Genesis315
Guest
In terms of ecumenical Councils before Trent, there are a couple examples. I’ll have to check Denzinger to see if there are an papal teachings on this subject from even earlier–I’m pretty sure there are, but I can’t check now. 
The Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 also included it in its profession of faith (concilliar professions of faith are generally considered solemn definitions–Nicea I is a perfect example):
“His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been changed in substance, by God’s power, into his body and blood, so that in order to achieve this mystery of unity we receive from God what he received from us. Nobody can effect this sacrament except a priest who has been properly ordained according to the church’s keys, which Jesus Christ himself gave to the apostles and their successors.”
The Council of Constance also solemenly condemned this error in 1414:
“The material substance of bread, and similarly the material substance of wine, remain in the sacrament of the altar.”
The Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 also included it in its profession of faith (concilliar professions of faith are generally considered solemn definitions–Nicea I is a perfect example):
“His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been changed in substance, by God’s power, into his body and blood, so that in order to achieve this mystery of unity we receive from God what he received from us. Nobody can effect this sacrament except a priest who has been properly ordained according to the church’s keys, which Jesus Christ himself gave to the apostles and their successors.”
The Council of Constance also solemenly condemned this error in 1414:
“The material substance of bread, and similarly the material substance of wine, remain in the sacrament of the altar.”
J
Joannm
Guest
I have to look it up, but I know duing the 9th century there was a big eucharistic controversy between the teaching of Paschasius Radbertus and his student Ratramnus over the way Christ is present in the Eucharist. This carried over into the 11th Century with the teachings of Lanfranc, which eventually opened the door to Aquanis’ teaching on transubstantiation and the mode of Christ’s presence. I know there were some writing of popes or other high officials with regard to these controversies but I am not in my office so I can’t look them up right now.
C
CradleCath
Guest
You’re correct. I believe that Radbertus was the first who wrote about & actually taught the Real Prescence, though it was widely accepted by Catholics of that time period (9th century) already. He wrote a book “on the Body and Blood of the Lord,” in the year 831, and afterwards reedited it in a more popular form, and dedicated it to the Emperor Charles the Bald, as a Christmas gift. “The substance of bread and wine is effectually changed into the flesh and blood of Christ,” so that after the priestly consecration…though the host still appears as bread & the wine as wine…there is nothing there except for the Body & the Blood of Christ.
V
Verbum_Caro
Guest
However, Deacon Joseph asked about the first council. I think Genesis got it with Lateran IV?
If we don’t confine ourselves to councils, we could go back pretty far.
VC
If we don’t confine ourselves to councils, we could go back pretty far.
VC
L
lizaanne
Guest
J
Joannm
Guest
Charles the Bald, however, found Radbertus’ ideas on real presence to be overly realistic. Ratramus wrote using the same title as Radbertus but focused more on a sacramental presence.
There was a Synod in Rome in the 11th century that addressed these issues and forced Berengarius of Tours to recant his own theory of real presence, however that did not squelsh the discussion. I think we can agree that it was Thomas Aquinas’ teaching on transubstantiation that led the way to the dogmatic teaching that came out of Trent.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Yes, Lateran IV was the first ecumenical council to define the Eucharist with transubstantiation, and yes, if we didn’t confine ourselves to councils we could go back to “This is My Body.”
Radbertus’ ideas were indeed considered by various parties to be overly realistic in terms of physicality, and Aquinas’ position does not follow him down that same path.
- Status