Saturday, July 21, 2018

From Z to A: Zwingli to Aristotle

As there is not an Episcopal seminary in Madagascar, would-be Episcopal clergy usually study at the Catholic University of Madagascar.  Not surprisingly, the dominant understanding of the Eucharist at that university is the theory of Transubstantiation held by the Roman Catholic and Orthodox branches of the Christian church.

Roman Catholics usually seek to explain Transubstantiation using philosophical ideas that derive from Aristotle.   So it seemed to Bishop Todd that -- given my acquaintance with the relevant philosophy -- I might be a suitable person to lead a discussion on the various ways Christians have sought to understand the Eucharist.

The participants in the session, held yesterday morning, were the same as in the previous day's session on Augustine and Anselm.


The obvious starting point for such a discussion -- or so it seems to me -- is whether Jesus meant his words "This is my body" and "This is my blood" to be taken metaphorically, as in (e.g.) his saying "I am the gate" (John 10:9), or literally as in (e.g.) "Love one another as I have loved you" -- or at least near-literally.

The 16th century Swiss Reformer, Huldrych Zwingli, took Christ's words strictly metaphorically.  According to his Memorialist view, the Eucharist is a powerful remembrance of Christ's life and death -- no more, no less.   Most Christians, however, have experienced Christ as present in the Eucharist in some special way not fully captured by Memorialism; this majority view is usually referred to as involving the Real Presence of Christ in some way.  But in what way?  Where exactly?  And how is this Real Presence supposed to work?

There is a spectrum of views about Real Presence, ranging from the Receptionism espoused in the young Church of England, through to Transubstantiation.  Transubstantiation is one of two views which reckon we should take literally Christ's sayings "This is my body" and "This is my blood".  According to Transubstantiation, the "substance" of the bread and wine cease to exist when they are consecrated, being replaced by the body and blood of Christ -- though leaving behind their "accidents" such as their appearance, taste, and the power to nourish our bodies.   "Substance" and "accidents" here do not carry their everyday meanings, but are technical terms drawn from Aristotelian philosophy.

So there you have it -- albeit without spelling out the intermediate views, or elaborating the philosophy bit about "substance" and "accidents" -- Eucharist from Zwingli to Aristotle.   But you didn't really expect all the details for free and in a blog post of less that 500 words, did you?

No comments:

Post a Comment