Mass Talks 22, True, Real Substantial Presence

From time to time I hear that there are various non-Catholic Christians who believe in the “real presence” of Christ in the Eucharist. I find that very interesting and a real advance in their consistency of taking the entire New Testament as literally true. The Catholic Church, with various Eastern churches, has unfailingly held this truth. During her long history however, this belief–as many others–was challenged and denied, most significantly at the time of the Protestant revolt. During the Reformation, many things that directly touched upon the Catholic belief in the real presence were called into question: the sacrificial nature of the Mass; the priesthood; the gaining of merit for good works done; and the effectiveness of the Mass to aid the souls in purgatory. While there also have been some wayward Catholics who have had wrong notions about the Holy Eucharist, there’s an essential difference between a Catholic who denies or compromises belief in the real presence and non-Catholic who do the same. The difference is this: the Catholic Mass makes the presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist actually happen, regardless of whether or not one believes it, while a non-Catholic communion service conducted by a minister, cannot bring about the real presence regardless of whatever might be believed about it. There are, in other words, certain conditions that have to be met in order to have a valid Eucharist. Non-Catholic religions can’t pass that test for validity. Saying this is not an exercise in Catholic bigotry but the identification of a real defect that necessarily comes about when there is a breaking off from the line of Catholic affiliation and tradition.

In any case, no matter what various Christians believe about their communion (some believe it’s Jesus; some believe He’s there attached to the communion bread; some think He’s there only in spirit; while others hold that He’s symbolically present)–the fact is that the Catholic Church employs a terminology that leaves no doubt about its faith in this matter. We hold that Jesus is truly, really and substantially present in the Holy Eucharist. Commentary on these three terms constitutes our reflections today as we come near the end of our Eucharistic Year.

After the Consecration of the Mass, the priest says “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith. This expression, the mystery of faith, signals the fact that the Consecration is the greatest of Catholic beliefs, the mystery. Its meaning is, in other words, far beyond our telling of what it is. When Jesus first announced it, it was so hard a thing to take, that many of His disciples fell away from following him: ‘A bread that would become His body to be eaten? Impossible!’ The faithful ones stayed on with Him, trusting in Him, even though they could not have fully grasped His meaning at the time.

The finest theological explanation of the real presence was given at the Council of Trent in the 16th century. This Council was called to order on account of the various Protestant sects which were causing confusion about Catholic teaching. Here is where the three adverbs, truly really and substantially, were coined to express the reality of what the Church has always believed about the Holy Eucharist. Each of these three terms gives precision to our faith.

When we say that the presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist–in Communion–is true, we are excluding the false opinion that would think of Christ present only as a sign, while He Himself is actually present in heaven. I suppose this false doctrine might be likened to a ‘photographic sense’ of presence where the image of a person (also found in painting and sculpture) makes a person ‘present’ to one’s mind or in his memory. The Catholic insistence on the word ‘true,’ then, is used in opposition to a mere symbolic or representative sense of being present: surely this is an important qualification.

Next, the Church uses the word real. This means that the presence of Jesus is objectively there, independent of whether or not one believes it’s there. In a similar way, I might say this about the real presence of my guardian angel: he’s here with me, whether or not I am aware of it or even believe it. Thus, when our Lord commanded His apostles, “do this in memory of me,” He did not make His presence a matter of arbitrary, wishful thinking or personal preference. When the Consecration is made, using the correct materials, with the right words, and by a duly ordained priest, the Presence of Jesus Christ infallibly comes about because of the word of Christ guarantees it. So, then, it’s not the believing of the Church that makes Christ present–as if we could wish Him into being. (By the way, faith in the real presence is necessary for your Communion to be of any spiritual good to you. But that’s a distinct issue.)

The third term employed by the Church is substantial. This word is the hardest of the three to grasp, but is so very important. It means that the ‘substance,’–or, the thing that the Eucharist is–is Christ, no matter how it may look, feel or taste. An example may help: if a person puts on a disguise, his looks may deceive the viewer, but the person is really (or substantially) who he is in fact. Or, a medicine intermixed with candy is substantially medicine and not candy, regardless of sweet taste. Substance means ‘what a thing is.’ If then Christ is substantially present in the Host, then He may be (and should be) adored in it. While before the Consecration the substance of bread and wine were present, after the Consecration there is only the substance of our Lord’s Body and His Blood, His Soul and Divinity. This change-over of substances is rightly called transubstantiation. The whole Christ is present under each of the two forms, even though their appearances undergo no change. This change happens by a sacramental process that can’t be detected by a scientific analysis of the species. (Many Eucharistic miracles have happened in history, of course, which have convincingly demonstrated to the doubting that Christ is indeed present. These miracles have a special place and purpose in God’s plan, but they are distinct from the scientific explorations that I’m talking about here.) When a Host is broken, each part contains the whole Christ; a single drop from the chalice is the whole of Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

My final point today concerns some of the misleading talk about the Holy Eucharist circulating today. It’s really unworthy even to mention such silliness, except for the fact that it’s so often encountered nowadays. Some, for example, are saying that Christ is present in other senses at Mass: in His words read from the bible; in the gathered assembly of the Church; and in the person of the priest, etc. While all this is true, these other ‘senses’ of Christ’s presence are wholly subordinate to the true, real and substantial presence in the Holy Eucharist. The confusion generated by this over-emphasis on the ‘multi-presences’ of Christ has unfortunately caused a dropping off of Eucharistic adoration and piety in many parishes, and even of faith in the real presence. Too often the emphasis now has been on the dynamic, action-orientated experience of Jesus in the celebration of the Mass while dismissing His divine presence in the Host. The practice of adoration, even of perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, is now returning to many parishes, and so, negative trends have begun to reverse.

‘Real Presence’ is a crucial aspect of our Catholic belief in the Holy Eucharist. Yet there are a few other themes that we ought to explore as well in subsequent homilies as this Eucharistic Year comes to a close.