Transubstantiation, when?

[Magicsilence]

I realize it happens, but when EXACTLY does it happen.

When the priest puts his hand over the bread/wine.

OR

When they are lifted and, in my church they ring a bell at this point.

Or is it some other time?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Magicsilence:

I realize it happens, but when EXACTLY does it happen.

When the priest puts his hand over the bread/wine.

OR

When they are lifted and, in my church they ring a bell at this point.

Or is it some other time?

It happens during the Anaphora (or Eucharistic Prayer).

My answer is from the Byzantine perspective.

The Latin perspective will most likely say after the Words of Consecration.

It is important to note that the Eucharistic Prayers in the Mass (all but the first one) have the Epiclesis (or Invocatoin Of The Holy Spirit) before the Words of Consecration. In the Divine Liturgy the Epiclesis follows the Words of Consecration, hence our answer that it occurs during the Anaphora, as we believe it takes both the Epiclesis and the Words of Consecration.

The first Eucharistic Prayer is said to contain an implicit Epliclesis instead of an explicit one.

May I ask you a question?

Why does the exact moment matter?

 

[Della]

Magicsilence:

I realize it happens, but when EXACTLY does it happen.

When the priest puts his hand over the bread/wine.

OR

When they are lifted and, in my church they ring a bell at this point.

Or is it some other time?

When the priest says: “This is my body which will be given up for you” and “This is my blood…”. The ringing of the bells is a tradition that alerts the people to the fact that the consecration has taken place. It was more necessary when the Mass was in Latin and people’s minds tended to wander from the altar. In any case, I think it a lovely custom and am happy to say my parish rings the bells during consecration, too.

 

[SMHW]

As I understand it, the Latin perspective is also that it happens during the Eucharistic Prayer. The exact moment is not specified.

A better question might be, if for some reason the priest is not able to finish the Eucharistic Prayer is it possible that the elements have actually become the Body and Blood of Christ?

 

[Detroit_Sue]

When God is invoked by the priest saying, “May your Spirit come upon these gifts so that they may become the Body and Blood of Christ,” (Epiclesis) is at least the very beginning of the Transubstantiation.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Detroit Sue:

When God is invoked by the priest saying, “May your Spirit come upon these gifts so that they may become the Body and Blood of Christ,” (Epiclesis) is at least the very beginning of the Transubstantiation.

Its not that easy though, as in the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom the Epiclesis occurs after the Words of Institution.

Here is the Epiclesis from the Divine Liturgy

PRIEST: Moreover, we offer You this spiritual and unbloodly worship, and we ask, pray and entreat: sand down your Holy Spirit upon us and upon these gifts offered.
DEACON: Bless the holy bread, Master.
PRIEST: +And make this bread the precious Body of your Christ.
DEACON: Amen. Bless the holy chalice, Master.
PRIEST: +And that which is in this chalice the precious Blood of your Christ.
DEACON: Amen. Bless them both, Master.
PRIEST: +Changing them + by your Holy Spirit.
DEACON: Amen. Amen. Amen.

Also the Epiclesis you give comes from Eucharistic Prayer II

Eucharistic Prayer III and Eucharistic Prayer IV have something that is roughly simular but Eucharistic Prayer I does not have any explicit Epiclesis. So I am not sure that can be used to nail this down.

As I said, the easiest thing to say it that it occurs during the Anaphora (Eucharistic Prayer). I do not see a need to shorten this period down any or to attempt to give an exact time.

 

[Magicsilence]

May I ask you a question?

Why does the exact moment matter?

Well, during todays mass, the priest put his hands over the bread/wine, and then he lifted the bread and then in between him putting the bread down and lifting the cup to say that part a fly landed in the cup and stayed in it, the priest reached in, removed the fly and continued, i just wonder if the wine had already been converted whether it was right for him to reach in and get the fly. And also, what does one do when a fly goes into the cup!

Also, i was wondering when because i feel like i should bow my head at the time the change that takes place. At present i bow my head at the ringing of the bells, does that suffice?

 

[JimG]

Before the Eucharistic Prayer it is bread and wine; after the Eucharistic Prayer, it is the body and blood of Christ.

The Latin Church considers the consecration to occur at the words of institution (“This is my body; this is my blood”), the Eastern Church generally considers the consecration to occur at the Epiclesis (the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon the elements).

Since we cannot see the change, it is not important for us to know.

Liturgically, once the Eucharistic Prayer is begun, it must be completed.

During the Eucharistic Prayer–at whatever point, the Holy Spirit comes down upon the elements of bread and wine, and Jesus uses the person of the priest as His own in enacting the Sacrifice of Calvary.

How to handle flies is at the discretion of the priest. (That’s one reason the chalice is generally kept covered by the pall.)

 

[Brendan]

The Church has never definitively defined the exact momment.

The Church HAS on the other hand, definitively said that the Sacrament is Present upon completion of the Eucharisitic Prayer\Anaphora.

The Church has also defined the critical components of a Valid Eucharistic Prayer\Anaphora.

1. Epiclesis
2. Words of Institution.

(there are cases where one of the this is implicit, if not explicit, like the Epiclesis in the Roman Canon and the Institutional Narrative as in the Anaphora of Adai and Mari )

Therefore, most Theologians hold that the Eucharist is present when the two main elements of the Eucharistic Prayer have been said.

In the Roman Church, that happens when the Words of Institution have been said ( Epiclesis is First, followed by the Institutional Narrative)

In the East, the Epiclesis follows the Institutional Narrative, so it is held that the Eucharist is present after the Epiclesis.

In either case, the Church had made no official declaration on the exact moment, it remains in the realm of speculative theology.

 

[muledog]

JimG:

Before the Eucharistic Prayer it is bread and wine; after the Eucharistic Prayer, it is the body and blood of Christ.

Close. I’ve heard a lot of guessing, but not much quoting from official magisterial documents. Let’s take a look at the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). Paragraph 79 lists the chief elements of the Eucharistic Prayer. They are (in chronological order):
GIRM 79:

a. Thanksgiving
b. Acclamation
c. Epiclesis
d. Institution narrative and consecration
e. Anamnesis
f. Offering
g. Intercessions
h. Final Doxology

This should pretty much put an end to those who claim that the consecration occurs during the Epiclesis in the Latin Rite, or during the entire Eucharistic Prayer.

The GIRM goes further in clarifying what constitutes the proper form for the consecration. When explaining how to consecrate wine outside of the Eucharistic Prayer, the GIRM states:
GIRM 324:

If the priest notices after the consecration or as he receives Communion that not wine but only water was poured into the chalice, he pours the water into some container, then pours wine with water into the chalice and consecrates it. He says only the part of the institution narrative related to the consecration of the chalice, without being obliged to cnsecrate the bread again.

To simplify, the priest/celebrant has only to say “this is the cup of my blood…” to confect the blessed wine into the Blood of Christ.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) also has this to say about the consecration:
CCC 1353:

In the institution narrative, the power of the words and the action of Christ, and the power of the Holy Spirit, make sacramentally present under the species of bread and wine Christ’s body and blood, his sacrifice offered on the cross once for all.

'Nuff said.

JimG:

Since we cannot see the change, it is not important for us to know.

It is important, especially from sacramental theological point-of-view. In former times, a plenary indulgence was granted when a person exclaimed “My Lord and My God!” during the elevation of the Host during the Consecration. This elevation elicits adoration from the faithful, and would sacraligious if the Host were still merely bread.

In Manibus Dei,

• Mike M.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Sorry Mike but the Church has not make any dogmatic statement as to when the Change occurs.

I stand by my statement that it occurs during the Anaphora.

 

[Pug]

It is important, especially from sacramental theological point-of-view. In former times, a plenary indulgence was granted when a person exclaimed “My Lord and My God!” during the elevation of the Host during the Consecration. This elevation elicits adoration from the faithful, and would sacraligious if the Host were still merely bread.

I find it disconcerting to really think about not knowing when the consecration takes place. If we don’t know, then when are we supposed to start to worship Jesus present there? I suppose it could just be postponed until the Eucharistic prayer is over, but, honestly, I have always started after the double consecration (note the invoking of HS which came before). It seems strange to be worshiping thin air? (unless there are previously consecrated hosts in the tabernacle nearby).

 

[JimG]

Pug:

I find it disconcerting to really think about not knowing when the consecration takes place. If we don’t know, then when are we supposed to start to worship Jesus present there? I suppose it could just be postponed until the Eucharistic prayer is over, but, honestly, I have always started after the double consecration (note the invoking of HS which came before). It seems strange to be worshiping thin air? (unless there are previously consecrated hosts in the tabernacle nearby).

In the Roman Rite, the common belief (inclulding mine) is that transubstantiation occurs at the words of consecration. Also, in the Roman Rite, the epiclesis always occurs shortly before the consecration, so even if one were to believe that it occured at the epiclesis, there is no doubt that one is worshiping the Lord present at the altar when the chalice and host are raised after the consecration.

 

[muledog]

ByzCath:

Sorry Mike but the Church has not make any dogmatic statement as to when the Change occurs.

I stand by my statement that it occurs during the Anaphora.

I never claimed it as DOGMA that transubstantiation occurs during the Institution Narrative. I just re-stated current authoritative Catholic teaching as it effects the LATIN RITE.

If someone can demonstrate from AUTHORITATIVE DOCUMENTS anything to the contrary, I am always willing to listen.

I completely understand, though, the belief of several Eastern Rite Churches that the consecration occurs at a different position in the Order of Mass.

In Manibus Dei,

• Mike M.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

muledog:

I never claimed it as DOGMA that transubstantiation occurs during the Institution Narrative. I just re-stated current authoritative Catholic teaching as it effects the LATIN RITE.

If someone can demonstrate from AUTHORITATIVE DOCUMENTS anything to the contrary, I am always willing to listen.

I completely understand, though, the belief of several Eastern Rite Churches that the consecration occurs at a different position in the Order of Mass.

In Manibus Dei,

• Mike M.

Mike,
Well said and something I can fully agree on.

 

[muledog]

ByzCath:

Sorry Mike but the Church has not make any dogmatic statement as to when the Change occurs.

I stand by my statement that it occurs during the Anaphora.

I was just reading through the Lineamenta and Instrumentum Laboris for the upcoming bishops’ synod in October, and I came across these pertinent statements:

According to our Catholic faith, the form of the Sacrament is the words of consecration, which are essential and solely necessary.

The Institution of the Eucharist
From the beginning, the Church solemnly fulfills the Lord’s actions, coming to understand them by meditating on them one by one, as if to be instructed over and over again in their meaning: the presentation of the Gifts, the consecration, the breaking of the bread and the distribution of Holy Communion.[138] For this reason, the words “Take and eat” are not followed by the breaking of the host. If this be done, that moment would immediately become communion. Instead, at this highly charged mystical moment, the liturgy indicates that the celebrant is to bow his head and pronounce the words with a clear, moderate voice so as to promote contemplation, as does the Bishop on Holy Thursday, when he breathes over the Oil of Chrism. “By his actions and by his proclamation of the words, he (the celebrant) should impress upon the faithful the living presence of Christ.”[139] At this moment, indeed, the sacramental Sacrifice is accomplished.

Lineamenta:

The Epiclesis over the Consecrated Gifts

The Church Fathers, who maintained the importance of the epíclesi to the Spirit, thought to unite it to the words of institution to render the sacramental sign complete. The Lord’s words are spirit and life (cf. Jn 6:63). Christ works together with the Holy Spirit, while remaining the one consecrator of the Eucharist and the dispenser of the Spirit. The Council of Trent has established that the epiclesis is not essential to the validity of the Eucharis.

Transubstantiation takes place in the consecration of the bread and wine.

At the centre of the Eucharistic Prayer are the Lord’s words of institution over the bread and wine. This is the consecration, the solemn moment when the Risen Lord becomes really present under the elements of bread and wine.

In Manibus Dei,

• Mike M.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Nice find but it still does not explicitly state that the change occurs with the Words of Institution.

and if these words are so important, then why does the Catholic Church recoginize the Anaphora of Addai and Mari of the Assyrian Church of the East where the exact Words of Institution are not explicit?

And lastly, who really cares, it happens that is all that matters to me.

 

[Fidelis]

Nice find but it still does not explicitly state that the change occurs with the Words of Institution.

Seems pretty clear to me…

 

[Caesar]

Transubstantiation happens during the Words of Consecration, when the priest says,

Hoc est enim Corpus Meum
For this is My Body
and then,

Hic est enim Calix Sánguinis Mei, novi et ætérni testaménti: Mystérium Fídei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundétur in remissiónem peccatórum
For this is the Chalice of My Blood, of the new and eternal testament: the Mystery of Faith: which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins.

At the moment the priest utters these words, recalling those of Christ, the Bread and Wine changes into the Body and Blood of Our Lord.

 

[Breach_Repairer]

Hello,

How does knowing the exact moment of transubstantiation improve parishioners relationship with Jesus?

It’s good to know Roman Catholic Theology has assisted parishioners to have faith that when asked, Jesus will transubstantiate the Wine and the Host.

Knowing the exact moment is comparative to studying the microfacets of the theology of God. Where as knowing by faith the macrofacet work or Theology of Jesus’s Transubstantiation is to know that, who ever part takes of Holy Communion is blessed to have that sacred moment in time with God.

PAX