Edited and compiled by Keith Green (with footnotes)
One might wonder why, in a scriptural look at the doctrines of the
Catholic Church, I would choose this subject - The Roman Interpretation of the Lord's
Supper (more commonly known as "Communion") for the first of the "Catholic
Chronicles." Most Protestants (1) would expect me to deal with what they might
consider the more obvious departures from biblical foundation - such as the worship of and
prayers to the Virgin Mary, the infallibility of the pope, purgatory and prayers for the
dead, or the history of the torture and burning of accused "heretics" and such
like that.
But for this first article I believe that we should get right to
the root, before we begin exploring the branches of Roman doctrine and practice. And any
Catholic who has even a small knowledge of his church knows that the central focus of each
gathering (known as the "Mass") is the Holy Eucharist.
The Eucharist
The word "Eucharist" is a Greek word that means
"thanksgiving." In the gospel accounts of the Last Supper, Jesus is described as
"giving thanks" before breaking the bread (Luke 22:19), and so this word became
a proper name for the Lord's Supper in the early Catholic Church. Today, it is more
commonly associated with the elements in communion, especially the host or
"wafer," although the ceremony itself is still called "The Holy
Eucharist."
Now, you might be wondering why I'm taking so much time and effort
to explain something as harmless as the ceremony known around the world as communion. If
you've probably taken part in a communion service. So why make all this fuss about bread
and wine? Why? Because that's where the similarity between evangelical communion services
and the Roman Catholic Mass ends - at the bread and the wine!
Transubstantiation
That 18-letter word above is a complete theological statement . . . and the name
of a doctrine, out of which springs the most astounding set of beliefs and practices that
has ever been taught in the name of religion. Very, very few people know what the Catholic
Church actually believes and teaches concerning this subject, and I am convinced that even
fewer Catholics realize themselves what they are taking part in. From earliest childhood,
"This is the body of Christ" is all they've ever heard when the priest gingerly
placed the wafer on their tongue. And as they grew up, it was such a natural and normal
part of religious life, that their minds never even questioned the fact that Jesus Christ,
Himself, was actually in their mouth!
It might be hard for you to believe, but that's exactly, literally,
what "transubstantiation" means. The Roman Catholic Church teaches their flocks
that the bread and the wine used in the Mass actually, physically, turn
into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ after the priest blesses them during the liturgy
(ceremony. Although this in itself might shock you, it is really only the beginning. For
the implications and practical conclusions of this doctrine are absolutely mind-boggling.
Exclusive Authority
For example, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that since their
priests are the only ones who have the authority from God (2) to pronounce the blessing
which changes the elements of communion into the actual body and blood of Jesus, that they
are the only church where Jesus "physically resides" even now!
Let me quote a letter written to one of the girls in our ministry from a devoted Catholic:
"To explain the Catholic Church would take volumes, but
basically the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ when He was here on earth. It is
the ONLY church founded by Jesus. The greatest asset of our church is that we have Jesus
present in the Holy Eucharist - He is really here, body, soul and divinity. He is God and
in His omnipotence can do anything He wishes, and He decided to remain with us until the
end of the world in the form of the host in Holy Communion."
If you think this is just the isolated opinion of someone on the
fringe of the church, or that the Catholic Church as a whole does not really believe or
teach this, I beg you to read on. For not only is this the official teaching of Rome, but
according to irreversible church decree (called dogma), anyone who does not hold to this
belief, in the most explicit detail, is accursed and damned forever!
The Council of Trent
When Europe was electrified by the eloquent preaching of the
sixteenth century reformation, the Roman Catholic hierarchy gathered together her
theologians who worked for three decades on the preparation of a statement of faith
concerning the doctrine of transubstantiation. This document remains, to this day, the
standard of Catholic doctrine.
As the Second Vatican Council commenced in 1963, Pope John XXIII
declared, "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council
of Trent." What did the Council of Trent decide and declare? Some of the first
sections are as follows:
CANON I - "If anyone shall deny that the body
and blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore
entire Christ, are truly, really, and substantially contained in the sacrament of the most
Holy Eucharist; and shall say that He is only in it as a sign, or in a figure - let him be
accursed!"
CANON II - "If anyone shall say that the
substance of the bread and wine remains in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist,
together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ - let him be accursed!"
CANON VI - "If anyone shall say that Christ,
the only begotten Son of God, is not to be adored in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist,
even with the open worship of Latria, and therefore not to be venerated with any peculiar
festal celebrity, not to be solemnly carried about in processions according to the
praiseworthy and universal rites and customs of the Holy Church, and that He is not to be
publicly set before the people to be adored, and that His adorers are idolators,
- let him be accursed!"
The Worship Of The Host
"Thou shall not make unto thee any graven image
(4)...
Thou shall not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them"
The Second Commandment (Ex.20:4-5)
"God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in
spirit and truth."
(John 4:23)
In Canon VI, a rite of worship called "Latria" was spoken
of. This is not just an "ancient custom," it is thoroughly practiced today in
many Masses. After the bread has been supposedly "changed" into the Christ by
the priest, it is placed in a holder called a monstrance. And before this monstrance the
Catholic must bow and worship (this act is called genuflecting) the little wafer as
God! Sometimes they have processions where they solemnly march, as the
congregation bows and offers praise and worship - to this piece of bread!
The Roman teaching that Jesus Christ is physically present in each
morsel of bread creates many other doctrinal and practical problems. For instance, when
the service is over, what happens to all those leftover wafers that have been
"changed into Christ?" Do they change back into bread again when the priest goes
home? I'm afraid not. For according to Canon IV of the Council of Trent, they stay
flesh! And don't think that 400 year-old decree is just some dusty old manuscript
in a museum case somewhere - it still is completely adhered to and passionately practiced.
As an example, here is a passage from an official Catholic home instruction book,
copyrighted 1978:
"Jesus Christ does not cease to exist under the
appearances of bread and wine after the Mass is over. Furthermore, some hosts are usually
kept in all Catholic churches. In these hosts, Jesus is physically and truly present, as
long as the appearances of bread remain. Catholics therefore have the praiseworthy
practice of `making visits' to our Lord present in their churches to offer Him their
thanks, their adoration, to ask for help and forgiveness: in a word, to make Him the
center around which they live their daily lives."
That is an incredible interpretation of how to make Jesus the
center of your daily life!
When Did This Teaching Begin?
The teaching of transubstantiation does not date back to the Last
Supper as most Catholics suppose. It was a controversial topic for many centuries before
officially becoming an article of faith (which means that it is essential to
salvation according to Rome). The idea of a physical presence was vaguely held by
some, such as Ambrose, but it was not until 831 A.D. that Paschasius Radbertus, a
Benedictine Monk, published a treatise openly advocating the doctrine. Even then, for
almost another four centuries, theological was was waged over this teaching by bishops and
people alike, until at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 A.D., it was officially defined
and canonized as a dogma (a teaching or doctrine that can never be reversed or repealed.
It is equal in authority to the Bible.) by Pope Innocent III.
Church historians tell us that when this doctrine first began to be taught, the
priests took great care that no crumb should fall - lest the body of Jesus be hurt, or
even eaten by a mouse or a dog! There were quite serious discussions as
to what should be done if a person were to vomit after receiving the sacrament. At the
Council of Constance, it was argued that if a communicant spilled some of the blood on his
beard, both beard and the man should be destroyed by burning!
How Rome Views the Bible
Before we proceed to look at what the Bible has to say on this
subject, it is important to understand the official Catholic view of the Scriptures.
According to unquestionable decree, they hold that "Church tradition has
equal authority with the Bible." This is not just a theological view, but it
was made an article of faith by the same Council of Trent in 1546! And again, this view is
completely held by the Church today:
"The teachings of the Church will always be in keeping
with the teachings of the Scripture...and it is through the teaching of the Church that we
understand more fully truths of sacred Scripture. To the Catholic Church belongs the final
word in the understanding and meaning of the Holy Spirit in the words of the Bible."
And explaining the premise used in interpreting the Bible:"
"...usually, the meaning of the Scriptures is sought out by those who are specially
trained for this purpose. And in their conclusions, they know that no explanation of the
Scriptures which contradicts the truths constantly taught by the infallible Church can be
true." (10)
Anyone can see how such a mode of interpretation can be dangerously
used to manipulate Scripture to mean absolutely anything at all! Who has not observed this
of the various cults? The Moonies, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses all back up their
false teachings with "new revelations" and "inspired interpretations"
of the Scriptures - each claiming that the Holy Spirit revealed these new truths to their
founders. One opens themselves to all kinds of deception when they judge the Bible by what
their church or pastor teaches, instead of judging what their church or pastor teaches by
the Bible!
Catholic Proof-Texts Explained
With this in mind, we will briefly discuss the two main passages of
Scripture that the Roman Church uses while trying to show that Jesus Himself taught
transubstantiation.
John 6:54-55: "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life; and I will
raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink."
Catholics are taught here, that Jesus is explaining how He is literally offering them His
flesh and blood, so that they may have eternal life by physically eating Him. With just a
little study of the whole passage (verses 27-71), it is clear that Jesus was not talking
about physical, but spiritual food and drink.
Food is eaten to satisfy hunger. And in verse 35 Jesus says, "He who cometh
to Me shall never hunger." Now, Jesus is not promising eternal relief from physical
hunger pains. He is, of course, speaking of the spiritual hunger in man for righteousness
and salvation, And He promises to those who will "come to Him" that He will
satisfy their hunger for these things forever - therefore, to
come to Him is to "eat"! (See also Matt. 5:6, 11:28; Jn. 4:31-34.)
We drink also to satisfy thirst, and again in verse 35 Jesus tells us, "He
that believeth on Me shall never thirst." Therefore, to believe on Him
is to "drink"! (See also John 4:13-14.) No one can say that Jesus was here
establishing the eating and drinking of His literal flesh and blood to give eternal life,
for in verse 63 He says, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing;
the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." Thus Jesus
makes clear what we should be eating and drinking to have eternal life! Matt. 26:26 and
28: "This is My body...this is My blood." (See also Matt. 4:4.)
Catholics base their whole religious system on their interpretation of these tow
verses. They adamantly teach that right here, Jesus is pronouncing the first priestly
blessing that mysteriously changes the bread and wine into His body and blood. The
absolute folly of such a conclusion is proved by this one observation: He was
literally still there before, during, and after they had partaken of the bread
and the cup! He was not changed into some liquid and bread - His flesh was still on His
bones, and His blood still in His veins. He had not vanished away to reappear in the form
of a piece of bread or a cup of wine!
Let's look closer at His words. No one can deny that here we have figurative language.
Jesus did not say TOUTO GIGNETAI ("this has become" or "is turned
into"), but TOUTO ESTI ("this is," i.e., "signifies,"
"represents" or "stands for"). (11) It is obvious that Jesus' meaning
was not literal but symbolic! And He wasn't the first in the Bible to
claim figuratively that a glass of liquid was really "blood."
One time, David's friends heard him express a strong desire for water from the
well of Bethlehem. In spite of extreme danger, these men broke through the enemy lines of
the Philistines and brought the water to him. When David found out that these men had
risked their lives in this way, he refused to drink the water, exclaiming, "Is not
this the blood of the men who went in jeopardy of their lives?" (2 Sam. 23:17)
Throughout the gospels we find similar metaphorical language: Jesus referring to
Himself as "the Door," "the Vine," "the Light," "the
Root," "the Rock," "the Bright and Morning Star," as well as
"the Bread." The passage is written with such common language that it is plain
to any observant reader that the Lord's Supper was intended primarily as a memorial and in
no sense a literal sacrifice. "Do this in remembrance of Me." (Luke 22:19)
True Pagan Origins
Where did this teaching and practice really come
from? Like many of the beliefs and rites of Romanism, transubstantiation was first
practiced by pagan religions. The noted historian Durant said that belief in
transubstantiation as practiced by the priests of the Roman Catholic system is "one
of the oldest ceremonies of primitive religion." (12) The syncretism and mysticism of
the Middle East were great factors in influencing the West, particularly Italy. (13) In
Egypt, priests would consecrate mest cakes which were supposed to become the flesh of
Osiris. (14) The idea of transubstantiation was also characteristic of the religion of
Mithra whose sacraments of cakes and haoma drink closely parallel Catholic Eucharist
rites. (15)
The idea of eating the flesh of deity was most popular among the people of
Mexico and Central America long before they ever heard of Christ; and when Spanish
missionaries first landed in those countries, "their surprise was heightened, when
they witnessed a religious rite which reminded them of communion...an image made of
flour...and after consecration by priests, was distributed among the people who ate
it...declaring it was the flesh of deity..." (16)
So Why Do They Teach It?
Before concluding our first chronicle, the question needs to be
asked, "Why does the Roman Catholic Church need to have such a doctrine - why do they
think that Jesus wants them to physically eat Him?" That is what
truly puzzled me as I read astounded through the catechism and doctrinal instruction
books. But the answer to that question is a sad one. As I said before, the implications
and practical conclusions of the teaching of transubstantiation are substantially worse
than the doctrine itself - and like a great web spun by an industrious spider, Rome's
teachings spiral out from this central hub like the spokes of a wheel.
In Catholic Chronicle II we will look intently at
the next direct result of transubstantiation in official Catholic systematic theology:
"The Sacrifice of the Mass."
- Footnotes
-
- 1] - Today, Protestants are considered to be members of any church or
church-group outside the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches.
-
- 2] - Passed down through "Apostolic Succession" from Peter the apostle-the
supposed "first pope."
- 3] - The "wafer."
- 4] - NASB reads, "You shall not make for yourself an idol."
- 5] - This act is called "genuflecting."
- 6] - "The Spirit of Jesus" Catholic Home Study Instruction Course. Book
#3, p.92.
- 7] - A "Dogma" is a teaching or doctrine that can never be reversed or repealed.
It is equal in authority to the Bible.
- 8] - The Other Side of Rome, p.21.
- 9] - By the end of the eleventh century, lest someone should spill God's blood, some in
the church began to hold back the cup from the people, and finally in 1415, the Council of
Constance officially denied the cup to laymen. Although today, by decree of the Vatican,
churches may now offer the cup optionally to communicants.
-
- 10] - "The Spirit of Jesus," pp.94-95.
-
- 11] - If I held up a picture of my son and said, "This is my son," I
am certainly not saying that the actual picture is literally my son.
-
- 12] - The Story of Civilization, p.741.
-
- 13] - Roman Society From Nero to Marcus Aurelius, by Dill.
-
- 14] - An ancient Egyptian god of the lower world and judge of the dead - Encyclopedia
of Religions, Vol.2, p.76.
-
- 15] - Ibid.
-
- 16] - Prescott's Mexico, Vol. 3.