Transustantiation-When Does it Happen?

[Tigg]

I asked a question in the Apologist forum and did not receive an answer. As this is very important to me, I ask it to those of you who can direct me to a valid answer.

In three different sources I have read, it states that Transubstantiation happens at the words of consecration; further, that after the words are spoken, only the appearances of bread and wine remain. The CCC, No. 1376 states,

“…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…
No. 1377 states the Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the Consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist.”

Here is the confusion. I heard a priest state in an RCIA class that Transubstantiation starts with the Offeratory and ends after the Our Father is recited. At our bible study last week, a woman stated she had heard our bishop say the very same thing. As I live in a very liberal area, under a very liberal bishop, I always research the strange things I hear. Does this statement by both a priest and bishop encompass part of “liberation theology?” Or perhaps there was something that was not explained or simply misunderstood.

Can anyone clarify? Thank you - your comments are most appreciated.

 

[joshua1]

When the priest raises the host, and says, “This is my Body”, at that very instant the bread becomes the Body of Christ. When he raises the chalice and says “This is my Blood”, it in that very instant becomes the Blood of Christ. At that moment, the priest is persona christi. In the eastern or maybe the greek traditions, it is believed that the transformation takes place at the epiclesis or when the priest says, "may it become for us the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. It does not start at the offeretory, because remember what the offeretory preparation says. "Blessed are you lord God of all creation, through your goodness we have this BREAD to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made, IT WILL become for us the Bread of Life. The same with the wine. Only after the epeclesis does the Priest say, THIS IS MY BODY.

 

[FrDavid96]

I asked a question in the Apologist forum and did not receive an answer. As this is very important to me, I ask it to those of you who can direct me to a valid answer.

In three different sources I have read, it states that Transubstantiation happens at the words of consecration; further, that after the words are spoken, only the appearances of bread and wine remain. The CCC, No. 1376 states,
Here is the confusion. I heard a priest state in an RCIA class that Transubstantiation starts with the Offeratory and ends after the Our Father is recited. At our bible study last week, a woman stated she had heard our bishop say the very same thing. As I live in a very liberal area, under a very liberal bishop, I always research the strange things I hear. Does this statement by both a priest and bishop encompass part of “liberation theology?” Or perhaps there was something that was not explained or simply misunderstood.

Can anyone clarify? Thank you - your comments are most appreciated.

On the one hand, there is the exact “moment” of Transubstantiation. That is indeed the words of Christ, “This is My Body…”

On the other hand, the entire Mass is a “process” if you will. We usually think of the “consecration” as the time between the offertory and the Our Father (or more technically, the Eucharistic Prayer). To say one is not necessarily to deny the other.

We may also that the entire Mass is consecratory. Again, this doesn’t mean that we are denying the moment.

It’s just different ways of explaining what happens at Mass. If one were to outright deny the moment of Consecration, that would be something different, and would be in error.

“Liberation Theology” refers to a very specific type of “theology” that the Church has declared to be in error. “Liberal thinking” however is something different.

 

[Tigg]

Thank you so much, Father!

This is the clarification I needed.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I believe Aquinas said it happened between the ME and UM as in

Hoc est enim corpus me ***** um.

 

[porthos11]

Oh I donno. Ask an Eastern Catholic, and he will tell you that it takes place at the Epiclesis. And the Church has no problem with that, either.

Moreover, the Catholic Church has recognized that the Anaphora of Addai and Mari of the Assyrian Church of the East is valid, but has not explicit Words of Institution.

In any case, the Sacraments are not magic, and I’m not too sure of the soundness of pinning an instant of consecration. All I know is this. When the priest says the words of Christ, “This is my Body…This is…my Blood”, he speaks the truth.

 

[FrDavid96]

Oh I donno. Ask an Eastern Catholic, and he will tell you that it takes place at the Epiclesis. And the Church has no problem with that, either.

Moreover, the Catholic Church has recognized that the Anaphora of Addai and Mari of the Assyrian Church of the East is valid, but has not explicit Words of Institution.

In any case, the Sacraments are not magic, and I’m not too sure of the soundness of pinning an instant of consecration. All I know is this. When the priest says the words of Christ, “This is my Body…This is…my Blood”, he speaks the truth.

With regard to the Eastern Churches, many would say that to point to the Epiclesis as the “moment” is itself a Westernization (that is, the very act of trying to define a moment is a foreign concept).
Of course my post above referred to the Latin usage.