Tamayo, Niño School Year 2018-2019

Second Year Theology Eucharist

March 22, 2019

Chapter IV: The Lord’s Supper and the Modern Mass

A Summary

The chapter four is divided into three parts, namely—Protestant Revisions, Catholic
Solidification, Later Developments. The first paragraph of the chapter four presented that the early
protestant reformers faced with problems about the mass. They see that the private low mass was
nothing at all like the biblical descriptions of the last supper. Aside from that they read the words
of Jesus over the bread and wine, “do this in commemoration of me.” They had this difficulty
because they don’t have any idea as to how the Eucharistic worship had done in the first few
centuries. Because most of the manuscript recounting the Eucharistic worship had been lost and
forgotten. Though the protestant reformers were excommunicated and it means they are free to
reform the mass without the intervention of the Roman Catholic Church but for them they had a
hard time reforming the mass.

In fact, early protestant worship often look the same as the late medieval mass. Luther,
shortened the translated mass into German and he even insisted that the people have to receive
communion. Calvin, he divided the mass into two services; first, a service of scripture reading
followed by a sermon. Second, a service in which communion was distributed. During the
medieval times, Catholic teachings focuses on Christ’s passion in union with the sacrifice of the
mass. As we all know that the reformers rejected this kind of teaching, so they established the idea
that Christ’s death was the supremely important act in the salvation of the humanity. The Christians
during this time are seldom in receiving the communion, which is why the protestant concluded
that receiving the communion is not really necessary. Mostly of their services especially Sunday
worship had become a noneucharistic prayer service.

Many of the Protestants did not reject the Eucharist, because they are convinced that it was
Jesus Christ who instituted the Eucharist. What they only rejected was the Roman mass instead
they replaced it with other form of worship. The Protestants also rejected the superstitious beliefs
and practices connected with the consecrated host. They also change the name “mass” into “the
Lord’s supper” and “the Lord’s table” because for them it was more scriptural and more
appropriate for the service of the people. Any other churches did not change their belief about the
holy mass. Like for instance the Anglicans because they did not consider themselves as Protestants
but Catholics but the only difference is they do not acknowledge the authority of the Pope. Finally,
the Protestant really influence the England and the Anglicans adopted some of the Protestants
Practices.
PROTESTANT REVISIONS

Aside from Anglicans the reformer who has the heart toward the mass and Eucharist
was Martin Luther. At the beginning Martin Luther was more concern on correcting the abuses
than changing the form of prayer. Luther thought that the underlying cause of practicing the mass
was the scholastic concept of mass as a sacrifice that can only offered by the priest. Luther concept
of mass is not a sacrifice, but all that could be offered to God in the mass were prayers because
Christ had offered himself once and for all on Calvary. According to Luther’s own interpretation,
an ecclesiastical priesthood was not necessary since all believers were priest and so they offered
the sacrifice together.

Luther believes that the sacrifice of the mass is no longer Significant because he
was convinced that a person can be save through the grace of God and faith. He saw that
communion is the perfect sign of salvation and the perfect opportunity to respond to it is faith.
Through receiving communion Christian received the assurance of their salvation, for by faith they
understood the significance of the sacrament and experienced God’s forgiveness despite their
sinfulness. In the document (Large Catechism V,8) Luther was convinced that the sacrament was
the true body and blood of the Lord Christ in and under the bread and wine which we Christians
are commanded by Christ’s word to eat and drink. Luther added that the real presence of Christ in
the elements did not ultimately depend on faith. Somewhat, it depended on God’s word spoken
over the elements making them a sacraments. Luther did not hesitate to give us the explanation
with regard to the change in the elements.

Although Luther’s teaching was so convincing, there are many early reformers who
did not agree with him. Namely, John Calvin—rejected both the mass and the veneration of the
host because for him it was empty. Though he did not deny that Christ was somehow present in
the receiving of communion. The way Calvin perceived Christ’s words at the last supper was
figuratively rather than a literal sense. With regard to the question how then Christ present in the
sacrament? He was not able to provide his follower with a thorough discussion about the matter
because he did not developed a philosophical system that he could use to explain this experience,
he concluded that the Christ’s body and blood were made present through the action of the Holy
Spirit when the bread and wine were received. Calvin added that the body and blood were spiritual
realities which were received at the same time that the communion was taken. Therefore, Luther
experienced a personal presence of Christ in the sacrament. While Calvin experience the presence
of Christ’s strengthening and redemptive power in the sacrament. Aside from Luther and Calvin
there is also another reformer who on the other hand did not experience a sacred presence in the
Eucharist and interpreted it as purely mental or Psychological presence and that is Ulrich Zwingli.
CATHOLIC SOLIDIFICATION

The reformation made by the protestant reformers had made the Catholic Church
to re-think the meaning of the sacrament and come up with the unified teaching. The council
produced 3 documents on the Eucharist alone. Namely, on the Blessed Sacrament in the year 1551,
another is on the reception of the communion in the year 1562, lastly is on the mass as the sacrifice
on the same year. When we talk about sacrament at this period of time we meant as the consecrated
bread and wine, according to the bishops and because of the decree. This was the sacrament that
Christ instituted at the last supper and that he had given the church to remember him, to proclaim
his redemptive death, and to give spiritual nourishment to souls. Eleven years later the bishops
also declared that the mass had been instituted by Christ and regarded as a sacrifice and not as a
sacrament. On the first decree, the bishops declared that “Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and
man, is truly, really and substantially contained under the appearance of bread and wine.” The
second decree deals with communion. The bishops try to defend two catholic practices that were
being challenged by the reformers. The first is, catholic did not have to receive both bread and
wine in order to receive Christ in communion, because the whole Christ is found in every particle
and drop. Second, the children did not have to receive communion before they reached the age of
reason because they had been reborn through baptism. The third decree focuses on the mass as a
sacrifice and defended some of the liturgical practices. In the last supper Christ had offer his body
and blood to God the Father, and had commanded that it be continued so that through it his sacrifice
on the cross could be present in the church forever. Since it was Christ’s own suffering of himself,
it was a clean oblation that could not be defiled by any unworthiness of the minister, and it was
always just as satisfying to God as Christ’s death on the cross had been. Furthermore, its efficacy
as a sacrifice did not depend on the people’s participation in the mass and so they did not have to
receive communion or hear it offered in their own language. Lastly, the bishop listed a number of
contrary interpretations that had been developed by the reformers and condemned them as
heretical.

The council of Trent did a little arrangement to unite the Eucharistic theology of
the scholastics, the bishops defended some of the genuinely sacramental practices of the church,
and give that medieval theology and practice official ecclesiastical approval. The council’s actual
accomplishments were more doctrinal than practical. Because many bishops agreed on the
theology of the Eucharist and on the practices that should be retained, but many of them could not
agree on which practices should be eliminated. Because of that a commission was formed by the
council to uncover a variety of abuses and exaggerated practices. Here are some of the abuses
being addressed by the council; Priests extorting stipends, priest saying mass many times, etc. In
the year 1570 a normative edition of the Roman missal was issued under the authority of Pius V
and was made mandatory for all of Catholicism. In the year 1588 Pope Sixtus V established the
congregation of rites within the church’s administrative system to interpret the rubrics and make
decisions about their application. Basically the liturgy that Rome approved was the same as it had
been in the medieval ages. The low masses offered by the single priest and the high masses offered
by a priest with clerical assistants. This new developments led to renewed emphasis on church
music and architecture as additional sacraments with power to arouse in people a sense of sacred.
Like for instance, the plain music chant in medieval times developed into polyphony and elaborate
choral and orchestral works during the Baroque period. Church interiors also grew more elaborate.
Altars became more ornate, and tabernacles that has once been rather small containers for
consecrated hosts now became magnificent receptacles for Blessed Sacrament and the focal point
of Eucharistic piety. During this time also the congregation are less participative because many
could not understand Latin, because translations of the Latin missal were forbidden by Rome, for
it is a reaction to Protestants acclamation that people need to worship in their own language. During
the mass the congregation could pray the rosary or say their novenas, the only time that the
congregation was expected to stop their singing or interrupt their praying was when the host and
chalice were elevated. The laity during this time have little connection between communion and
the liturgy. Because holy communion was often distributed before and after the mass so as not to
interrupt the sacrifice of the mass. There was this movement that emphasized human sinfulness
before God and suggested that people should never receive the sacrament without first going to
confession—it is called Jansenism. For the Catholics it is a norm that we have to receive the
communion once a year, but preachers encouraged people to practice “spiritual communion” when
they are not prepared to receive Christ in the sacrament.

LATER DEVELOPMENTS

The twentieth century Eucharistic developments is very minimal, including the

doctrinal as well as liturgical aspect. The only task left to theology was to clarify the truth of what
the council of Trent had defined. The council had affirmed that Christ was present in the Blessed
Sacrament. The council had implied that the transubstantiation was the only acceptable explanation
for the change that took place at the consecration. Modern Eucharistic theology is mainly dogmatic
and metaphysical because it defended the dogmas of Trent against the heresies of the protestants
and was built solidly on that doctrinal foundation. It was metaphysical in the sense that it explained
things which could not been seen but which were nonetheless believed to be real. The modern
understanding of the Eucharistic sacrament is not only limited on how us catholic define the term
but also in the broader religious meaning of the sacrament. Yes, it was a sacred object made holy
by the words of consecration, which had power to reveal an experientially real presence to those
who contemplated it with the eyes of faith. The mass as a sacrifice can be understood as a
sacramental in the sense, for it opened the door of sacred time and sacred meaning for the faithful
to experience the transcendental meaning of Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary.

In this modern day, the church allows each individual faithful to acknowledge their
transcendental experiences both in receiving the communion and in adoring the Blessed
Sacrament, most especially after the mass. According to Martos, People might attended the mass
together but the spiritual benefit they derived from it depended only on their own individual
dispositions.
In the nineteenth century the Catholic scholars started to question as to the people’s
individualistic approach in their worship. Because the scholars discover that the liturgy before the
middle ages had been an act of public worship rather than private worship. They suggested that
faithful should participate in the liturgy aside from watching. It was then during this time that there
are moves or attempt to change of the Latin mass, though it will take some time before it will be
fully realized. And somehow it will be the beginning of the end of the scholastic theology of the
Eucharist.