1. Compare and contrast the positions of Radbertus, Ratramnus, and Berengar of Tours on the Eucharist. The controversy regarding the Eucharist as we learned in class, happened in the middle of the ninth century. One party in the controversy was Radbertus Paschasius, who become a teacher at the monastery of Corbie.
In his book entitled “The Lord’s Body and Blood” he expressed his position on: the relationship between the historical body of Christ and the body in the Eucharist; the nature of the bread and wine before and after consecration; and the relationship between the sacramental signs and the things signified. Radbertus idea was, that the body of Christ in the sacrament is the same body of Christ which suffered and died. He explain his position by appealing to the power of God to manipulate nature, the own words of Jesus Christ: “...
This is my body … This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you” (Luke 22:19-20) and the faith of the believers. Even if the bread and wine become the flesh and blood of Christ, they retain the appearance of bread and wine, because God make this happen even if is not visible for us, making this a miracle because there is no way to demonstrate scientifically, Furthermore, he insisted that believers, and only believers, receive the body and blood of Christ, and they do so by faith.
The second party was Ratramnus another monk at Corbie, who respond to Radbertus’ book on the Lord’s Supper by writing other book with exactly the same title: “The Lord’s Body and Blood”. He focuses on the relationship between the historical body of Christ and the body in the Eucharist, and the relationship between the sacramental signs and the things signified. In contrast with Radbertus’ opinion, Ratramnus positions is based in several ideas such as: God does not wish to subordinate nature; God does miracle in special circumstances; God does not work through human agency; It is not normative to be part of our daily activity, and finally that the Eucharist is not a miracle but a metaphorical (a symbol) of the body of Christ). Ratramnus’ view was that the body and blood offered in the sacrament are the spiritual flesh and blood of Christ, because there is a connection between the sacramental sign and the thing signified. The third party was Berengar’ of Tours, his position was expressed in his work “On the Holy Supper”, he applied to theological development the method of dialectic.
He based his argument on belief that Radbertus Paschasius’ view was contrary to the Scriptures, the Church Fathers, and reason. As we learned in class, the problem of the individual positions was creating a theology of the Eucharist in the philosophical system of Plato, who believes that the real thinks are only the heaven forms but the physical object are no real. Thanks to the crusades, they had access to Aristotle philosophy. Aristotle said, that forms are in heaven, but the form is also in the thing. Therefore, things also have reality.
More importantly, the thing is made of two parts: the form and accident who provides the qualities. Therefore, the controversy can be solved by using the Plato system if you want to explain the Eucharist. But if you want to understand it, you need to use Aristotle. St Thomas Aquinas explained more clearly, the presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper by saying: “All things of the world is made of substance and accident, in the Eucharist the substance is changed (transubstantiation) but the accidents remain”.
This happen when the priest invoke the Holy Spirit, using the epiclesis gesture (The Spirt come symbolically from their hands), so when the priest said: “this is my body and my blood” transubstantiation occurs by the word works (operatis, operanto). 2. Discuss Scholastic thought concerning the Eucharist including a discussion of particular practices which inform later practices in the West. In order to answer this question, is necessary to understand the event the traders brought with them, a fierce plague that swept through Europe from 1348 to 1352.
This pandemic, which killed approximately half of Europe’s population, came to be known as the Black Death. The disease was bubonic plague, present in two forms: one that infected the bloodstream, causing the buboes and internal bleeding, and was spread by contact; and a second, more virulent pneumonic type that infected the lungs and was spread by respiratory infection. In enclosed places such as monasteries and prisons, the infection of one person usually meant that of all, as happened in the Franciscan convents of Carcassonne and Marseille, where every inmate without exception died.
Throughout the many years of the Bubonic Plague, The fear propagated by the spread of the plague and its cyclical recurrence greatly affected the Church structure and more specifically the Church’s practices concerning the Eucharist. First, the increasing complexity of the theological questions such as: why God would ordain such devastation upon the world; if this was God’s punishment for the sinners, etc. Second, during the medieval era, knowledge for healing came from Church theology and spirituality, this provoke high demand of priests and other clergymen for healing the sick and pray for the dying (Masses for the dead).
Third, during this time in which the reception of the Eucharist in communion was on the decline. In its place, the laity had begun the practice of infrequent communion and the adoration of the Eucharist, a practice also known as “ocular communion”. The final outcome of this situation as we learned in class was the heresies of scrupulously or heresies of perception 3. Compare and contrast the 4 major reform movements in regards to the Eucharist. The four Protestant Reformations were related with: Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and the Anglican. The reformation was a response not about scandals but what the metaphysic of our faith (Plato) is.
This is promoted in five particular ways or crisis. First, in relationship in faith of works. – Luther objected to the notion that one had to merit God’s grace through pious practices in order to be saved. Luther was right on this point, yet contrary to popular opinion, that doesn’t make the Catholic Church wrong. At least not in the highest, official expression of her teaching. The trouble was, due to a host of problems that plagued the late medieval Church, the vast majority of Catholics were probably unsure of exactly what the Church had taught about such things.
Second, Relationship between tradition and scripture (Sola fide, sola scriptura). Reformers stays they Scripture contain what is needed for salvation. The Radical Reformers pressed the Reformation doctrine of sola Scriptura as far as they could. Where the Magisterial Reformation was, in principle, generally content to allow practices not contrary to Scripture, even if not explicitly affirmed by Scripture (infant baptism being a case in point), the Radical Reformation demanded explicit Scriptural warrant for everything.
Third, the role of the Magisterium (Denominational or national) for them is temporary for us is permanent. Fourth, Ordination and Sanctification. We believe the person is change by the act of ordination. They do not believe this. The congregations ordain their priest. Fifth, Sacramental system. They usually recognize only two of them: Eucharist and Baptism, in addition to deny the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To talk about the Anglican reformation, we need to understand the “primogenitor culture” in that time.
Due to lack of response for the annulment of his marriage, the king of England Henry VIII was excommunicated, his reaction was the “Act of Supremacy”, appointing the king as the only head of the Church of England, on Henry VIII’s death in 1547, under his son Edward VI who was only nine years old, the mass was abolished two years later and a new liturgy in English was implemented namely the “Book of common Prayer”. Later, when Mary Tudor, the daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon was crowned, she restored Catholicism in England under the pope’s authority.
When she died without an heir in 1558, Elizabeth succeeded her reinstituting the Supremacy Act. She appointed new bishops to revise the doctrine of the Church. The result was a text called “39 articles”, adopted as the official text by the Anglicans. The “articles” were derived from Luther, and Calvin. Elizabeth, however did not totally break away from the Catholic tradition. The service and the organization of the Church still kept traces of it. Elizabeth set a compromise between Protestant and Catholic components. This accounts for the name often given to Anglicanism the “middle way”.
Is evident the Catholic Church recognized that some Protestant criticisms were valid, and successive sessions of the Council of Trent (held between 1545 and 1563), aimed to tackle these issues. The council looked at some of the corruption then plaguing the church, including issues such as the sale of indulgences. In addition, the council defined many important aspects of church life, such as the nature of original sin, the number of sacraments and more importantly Christ’s presence in the Eucharist. This spiritual vitality of the Catholic renewal, won back many people to full communion with the Catholic Church.
