Search Results for Transubstantiation
The Roman Catholic dogma that the substance of bread and wine transforms into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ during the celebration of Holy Mass.
To make sense of the obvious fact that the communion wafer doesn’t change in outward appearance, Catholic theologians rely on the Aristotelian distinction between a thing’s form and its substance.
According to this belief, the form (what we can see) does not change but the substance (sometimes called the “essence”) does.
This is in opposition to the popular view, which from a Catholic perspective is inadequate, that the Eucharist is a mere symbol of remembrance or, as some New Age believers say, sign of human or cosmic unity.
While the sacrament of the Eucharist includes symbolic and unifying aspects, its essentially heavenly mystical quality supersedes these reductive interpretations concerning its meaning and character.
Symbolic and social realities aside, there is a current trend to equate the cosmic and/or astral realms with the heavenly. For Catholics, however, there is a qualitative difference among the cosmic (e.g. galaxies, stars, planets), the astral (spirits, gods, goddesses, energy fields), and the heavenly (experienced as the indwelling of grace).
» Agape, Aristotle, Consubstantiation, Grace, Quiddity
On the Web:
- While Catholics believe that the Eucharist need not change in physical appearance to be an effective sacrament, claims are sometimes made as to its miraculous transformation
Add more, fix errors, suggest edits or voice your opinion by commenting
Consubstantiation is the teaching about the Lord’s Supper that says Christ is “in, with, and under” the bread and wine, which themselves are not altered in substance.¹ It’s often associated with Martin Luther, even though he spoke in terms of “sacramental union.”
The teaching, however, resonates with Luther’s view that Christ’s divine and human aspects are so closely united that he is omnipresent within all of creation.
Wikipedia outlines the, perhaps, first visibly historical incidence of consubstantiation:
In England in the late 14th century, there was a political and religious movement known as Lollardy. Among much broader goals, the Lollards affirmed a form of consubstantiation—that the Eucharist remained physically bread and wine, while becoming spiritually the body and blood of Christ. Lollardy survived up until the time of the English Reformation.²
¹ An alteration of substance but not of form is key to the Catholic belief in transubstantiation.
Related Posts » Eucharist
- On Eucharist (intostillness.wordpress.com)
- The ‘Jesus’ the World Loves (pilgrimpassing.com)
- “I think I understand how the typical Protestant feels… (insightscoop.typepad.com)
- Confession of faith for Jewish converts to Christianity, from the Church of Constantinople (dailyminyan.com)
- Can a non-Catholic receive Communion at a Catholic church? (swordsoftruth.com)
A Dogma is a doctrine or a creed that can refer to religious or non-religious belief. The word “dogma” comes from the Greek dogma (“opinion” or “that which seems good”).¹ Dogma often refers to beliefs articulated and endorsed by the Papacy of the Roman Catholic Church, apparently derived from divine revelation, and to be accepted by believers despite the lack of conventional scientific evidence to support them.
But the word dogma has also been applied within the philosophy of science. For instance, Willard Quine wrote a seminal paper, Two Dogmas of Empiricism, which levels a devastating critique of those who uncritically accept truth claims made by scientists.²
In everyday usage, the word dogma can refer to any kind of authoritarian claim that demands or depends on unquestioning belief. For instance, we have dogmas about healthy eating habits, normal sleep patterns, the efficacy of some green products, what constitutes intelligence and success, to name a few.
¹ S. G. F. Brandon (ed.) Dictionary of Comparative Religion, 1971, pp. 244-245.
² Unfortunately, if someone is callow or careless enough to be uncritically blinded by science, they probably won’t take the time to try to understand what Quine is saying.
- Mary Ever-Virgin: Suggested Reading For ++ Mueller (mundabor.wordpress.com)
- I Am Not Looking for a Substitute Dogma (atheistrev.com)
- Ideas, Not Dogmas (murph929.wordpress.com)
- Archbishop Mueller Introduces Himself. (mundabor.wordpress.com)
- The necessity of the Assumption: Five reasons… (catholicexchange.com)
- The Ten Dogmas Of Modern Science (wariscrime.com)
- One Dogma For Another (dangeroustalk.net)
- Archbishop Mueller Still Hasn’t Explained Anything (mundabor.wordpress.com)
- The Ten Dogmas Of Modern Science: Rupert Sheldrake (talesfromthelou.wordpress.com)
- Karma or Dogma? (justinhohn.typepad.com)
The Eucharist (Greek eucharistia = thanksgiving) is a sacrament, also called Holy Communion (Catholic) and the Lord’s Supper (Protestant), in which Jesus is believed to be present under bread and wine.
It is based on the New Testament account of the Last Supper, in which Jesus asks his disciples to take and eat bread and wine in order to remember him (1 Corinthians 11.23-5; Matthew 26.26-8; Mark 14.22-4; Luke 22.17-20).
The bread and wine are consecrated by a priest or, in Protestantism, a minister and is given to disciples. Theological differences arise among different Christian groups as to whether the bread and wine become the real presence of Christ, coexist with the real presence of Christ or serve as mere symbols.
Drawing on a distinction from Aristotelian logic, Catholic theology indicates that the essence of the bread and wine are transformed but not the observable form. Moreover, Catholicism adheres to the position known as ex opere operato (by the action performed), which indicates that the sacrament is always effective when administered by a consecrated priest, regardless of the moral condition of his soul at the time.
If one believes that we’re all born with the taint of original sin and remain imperfect throughout our lives, ex opere operato seems a reasonable and, indeed, necessary position.
- Evening Mass of Thursday of the Lord’s Supper (doohan.id.au)
- Does John 6:63 Refute the Real Presence? (catholicdefense.blogspot.com)
- “I think I understand how the typical Protestant feels… (insightscoop.typepad.com)
- Gluten free and inclusive communion / eucharist / Lord’s Supper (loveandbelief.wordpress.com)
- GUEST ARTICLE:Augustine On The Eucharist By Dr. Joseph Mizzi (faithinspires.wordpress.com)
- The Eucharist and the Old Covenant (PrayTheMass.org)
- 40 Reasons Why It’s Cool to be Catholic #2 The Eucharist (deaconcast.com)
- Remembering, Being, and Becoming: Time and the Mass (PrayTheMass.org)
- The Eucharist in Wesleyan Chrsitianity (johnmeunier.wordpress.com)
- “Do You WANT The Eucharist to be True?” (catholicdefense.blogspot.com)
The word ‘mystic’ refers to one who engages in mysticism, and is often used pejoratively or as a caricature (e.g. wooly-headed mystic). This usage arguably arises, in part, from the worldly bias of contemporary consumer-oriented culture.
Many individuals, religious and secular, seem to value only that which they can buy, sell, and most of all, see. Subtle religious feelings may not be accessible to them, so naturally they’d think the whole idea of mysticism is hogwash.
Fortunately, this almost animalistic perspective of reality is not all pervasive–although it does seem to be dominant in the scientific, legal and political aspects of 21C culture.
There always have been and continues to be mystics who suggest there’s more, much more to life than meets the eye.
By the same token, some mystics seem to make grandiose claims and have allowed their sense of reason to be eclipsed by personal biases.
Related Posts » Alchemy, Anthroposophy, Asura, Aurobindo (Sri), Blake (William), Campbell (Joseph), Clairaudience, Darth Vader, Eleusinian Mysteries, Empath, Fasting, Francis of Assisi (St.), Gnosticism, Heaven , Hesse (Hermann), Inflation, James (William), Jedi, Jewish Mysticism, Joachim of Fiore, John of the Cross (St.), Kabbala, Karma Transfer, Kowalska (St. Maria Faustina Helena), Lévi-Bruhl (Lucien), Mishlove (Jeffrey), Numinous, Origen, Participation Mystique, Platonism, Jainism, Power, Ram Dass, Ramacharaka (Swami), Ramakrishna (Sri), Revealed Knowledge, Saint, Sankara, Seer, Solitude, Soul Loss, Spirit, Steiner (Rudolf), Sufism, Syntonic Counter-Transference, Swedenborg (Emanuel), Tantra, Taoism, Targ (Russell), Teresa of Ávila (St.), Theosophy, Transference, Transubstantiation, Watts (Alan), Wells (H. G.), Wisdom
- Thoughts on Christian Mysticism (simuleustisetpecator.wordpress.com)
- Mysticism (brighthub.com)
- Spotlight On Melissa Manfull’s Mystic Geometry On View At Taylor De Cordoba, Los Angeles (huffingtonpost.com)
- Intro to the Mystic from Greyhawk Grognard (greyhawkgrognard.blogspot.com)
- Crimson Mystical Mages… Why aren’t more people talking abou this? from The Dump Stat (thedumpstat.blogspot.com)
- Fringe Festival review: The Mad 7 – A Mystical Comedy with Ecstatic Dance (timeoutny.com)
- Rabbi Alan Lurie: The Mystical Experience: A Question of What’s Beyond (huffingtonpost.com)
- Mishlove, Jeffrey (earthpages.wordpress.com)
- Need a shakta novel! (ask.metafilter.com)
- “be love now” by ram dass – annoying or enlightening? (moritherapy.org)
Some contend that the idea of the ‘New Age’ originated as a marketing category in the 1980s, with New Age style ideas going back, of course, to the 70s and 60s.
Others note, more comprehensively, that the media also uses the term, as do many individuals and organizations. Whatever its origins, the ‘New Age’ refers to almost anything relating to contemporary spiritual discourse and practice.
New Age books, music, lectures, workshops, videos and websites deal with humanity’s development, usually with the goal of self-actualization and sometimes global transformation.
At the outset of the 20th-century, the American psychologist and philosopher William James outlined his The Varieties of Religious Experience several innovative spiritual trends remarkably similar to today’s concept of the New Age:
…for the sake of having a brief designation, I will give [it] the title of the ‘Mind-Cure movement.’ There are various sects of this ‘New Thought,’ to use another of the names by which it calls itself.¹
From the 1980s to around the new millennium religious fundamentalists, especially of the North American Christian variety, targeted the New Age as the workings of Satan. Important figures like C. G. Jung, Rudolf Steiner and Fritjof Capra were caricatured as Satanic hostiles to apparently ‘true’ fundamentalist versions of the Christian faith.
However, the emphasis of fundamentalist reactionary attacks has arguably shifted from perceived psychological and spiritual threats to scientific ones. Believers in evolution sans God are the new devils in the flesh to be countered and corrected by those single-minded Fundamentalists who believe they have a privileged interpretation of Christian scripture.
This shift is probably due to recent advances in mapping and sequencing genomes. The possibilities of this technology are staggering, and the new is always scary to those deeply entrenched and invested in longstanding cultural biases.
¹ William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience, Penguin, 1985 , p. 94.
Search Think Free » Akashic Records, Chakra, Channeling, Da Free John, Darwin (Charles Robert), Druids, Eno (Brian), Heart Sutra, Kali, Magnetizers, Maslow (Abraham), Medicine Wheel, Moses and Monotheism, Neo-Paganism, Pantheism, Peebles (Dr. James Martin), Platonism, Prime Directive, Reincarnation, Remote Viewing, Roberts (Jane), Rock and Roll, Spirit, Sufism, Third Eye, Transubstantiation
Add to this, report errors, suggest edits or voice your opinion by leaving a comment
Quiddity (Latin: quidditas = whatness) is a medieval scholastic term referring to the alleged primary substance of a thing (i.e. essence) in contrast to its secondary substance (i.e. observable form).
This kind of distinction can be confusing but goes back to both Plato and Aristotle¹ (the latter doing away with the former’s idea of eternal Forms), and plays an important part in understanding the Catholic Sacrament of the Eucharist, said to change in essence but (obviously) not in observable form.
That’s why Catholics can believe that Holy Communion is not just a memorial service but a sacrament in which one partakes of the living body and blood of Christ.
What differentiates the Catholic Eucharist from others is that, while taking the transformed host, one becomes more a part of the mystical body of Christ.
Here the eater becomes part of the eaten, this acting in reverse of purely natural eating, where the eaten becomes part of the eater.
It’s important to understand that, in the Catholic distinction between essence and form, essence is not to be understood as mere “energy”–i.e. the energy of the universe. For Catholics essence is a spiritual term, thus denoting something qualitatively different than the mere energy behind the apparent duality of matter/energy.
This is an important point so often overlooked by New Age / New Physics enthusiasts who think they have it all figured out when recasting the old myth of naturalistic pantheism in the latest scientific lingo, which really is just another set of mythic constructs.
¹ Thomas Aquinas’ philosophy owes a lot to Aristotle, and therefore to Plato. He uses the Aristotelian concept of substance to develop a rational basis for theology. For Aristotle, substance is what exists of itself, not depending on anything else for it to exist. For example, colours depend on the object in which they inhere for their existence, but not vice-versa. But how can this hidden substance of things be explained?
M. H. Abrams says that at the most fundamental level a symbol is anything that signifies something else.
Abrams also notes that a distinction is often made between the public and private symbol. The public symbol, such as the cross, is apparently understood by everyone in a given culture whereas the private symbol, such as an obscure poetic allusion, isn’t.
This distinction, however, seems open to debate: Surely not everyone in a given culture interprets the cross in the same way.
In literature a symbol is
a word or phrase that signifies an object or event which in turn signifies something, or suggests a range of reference, beyond itself (A Glossary of Literary Terms, 2005, p. 320).
In depth psychology, Carl Jung says the symbol is a meaningful image that mediates healing or destructive forces from the collective unconscious to ego consciousness–for example, the symbol of the Cross or Serpent.
Jung says symbols arise from the unknowable archetypes but are recognized as archetypal images. Archetypes interpenetrate among themselves; likewise, archetypal images are discrete but exhibit similarities. For Jung the flow of psychic energy between the collective unconscious and the symbol is a two-way process.
Jungian Erich Neumann says that the symbol acts as both as an “energy transformer” and as a “moulder of consciousness.” As an energy transformer the symbol facilitates the ego’s experience of the numinous, arising from the collective unconscious. As a moulder of consciousness, the symbol operates on the level of collective consciousness by contributing to the ideology of a given culture.
Jung says the interconnected conscious and unconscious aspects of humanity cannot be severed. He’s widely quoted as saying in The Undiscovered Self (1958):
You can take away a man’s gods, but only to give him others in return.
Likewise, political leaders of the mass state cannot avoid being glorified or demonized. This occurs through brute force, clever calculation and also through public fascination and projection.
Jung believes, for example, that a mass-produced placard image of Joseph Stalin expresses an archetypal force articulated on the conscious level that both sways and oppresses individuals.
A more contemporary example would be the disempowering psychological effect that massive bank towers (symbolizing ‘Big Business’) have on the poor and disenfranchised. And in ancient cultures such as Greece, Rome and Egypt, impressive architecture apparently had a similar effect on slaves, the exploited, the underprivileged and on less powerful visitors from foreign cultures.
» Abyss, Agape, Alchemy, Anima, Animus, Atlantis, Censor, Cirlot (J. E.), Cylons, Dean (James), Death and Resurrection , Denotation, Dreams, Eden, Ego, Eleusinian Mysteries, Eucharist, Felix culpa, Geertz (Clifford James), Goddess vs. goddess, Hero, Individuation Process, Jonah, Kraken, Kundalini, Labyrinth, Language, Mandala, Mead (George Herbert), Miracles, Object, Psychoid, Pyramids, Square Cross, Sublimation, Theosophy, Totem, Transubstantiation, Tree of Life, World Tree
Add to this, report errors, suggest edits or voice your opinion
One definition of the word spirit points to an incorporeal being which may not be seen, as compared to a ‘ghost’ which allegedly is seen by a living person.
Spirit has several other meanings, such as an animating or vital force within life, the soul or some some kind of invisible force or presence that permeates the created universe.
Spirit arguably becomes an ambiguous concept if assessed merely from a conceptual level of analysis.
Many New Age thinkers, for instance, equate the notion of spirit with that of matter/energy. This is a dubious analog when we consider Rudolf Otto and C. G. Jung‘s treatment of the term numinosity and, moreover, the Christian understanding of The Holy Spirit.
It almost seems as if those who haven’t experienced any difference between the perception of matter/energy and spirit tend to automatically equate the two, just as one might equate any seemingly similar variables without having had a significantly direct experience of them.
By way of analogy, if one had never drunk white wine they might look at its color, recognize it as a liquid and say white wine is equivalent to apple juice or perhaps urine. And so it is, many mystics content, with the experience of spirit. Those who know, they claim, realize that spirit’s character may vary significantly, not only because spirit is passing through psychological and cultural filters, but also because of the differences inherent to spirit itself.
Since the experience of ‘the spirit’ may be associated with a ‘particular spirit,’ as in the opening definition, we have the notion of ‘pure and impure,’ ‘holy and unholy,’ ‘good and evil’ spirits, along with their respective abilities to influence human beings for good or ill.
This tremendous diversity as to the meaning of spirit is not just found in Christianity but in most world religions. But again, some well-meaning but arguably unknowing individuals tend to simplify this diversity by making unsupportable claims, as did Sri Ramakrishna, that all paths involve the same type of spirit, lead to the same place, and so on.
This may have been Ramakrishna’s belief when dabbling in different religions from his master perspective of Hinduism but it certainly isn’t everyone’s.
» à Kempis (Thomas), Abyss, Active Imagination, Afterlife, Alchemy, Alice in Wonderland, Alien Possession Theory (APT), Ancestor Cults, Angels, Animism, Anselm (St.), Anthroposophy, Apollinarius, Aquinas (St. Thomas), Archangel, Arius, Ashram, Aurobindo (Sri), Avesta, Ba, Blake (William), Bowie (David), Brown (Michael), Castanada (Carlos), Celibacy, Chakras, Channeling, Clairaudience, Class, Collective Unconscious, Confirmation, Demons, Dionysius the Areopagite, Divination, Eleusinian Mysteries, Evil, Faeries, Fallen Angels, Fasting, Feng Shui, Grace, Hawking (Stephen), Heaven, Hegel, Hell, Henry of Ghent, Intercession, Jedi, Jinn, Kabbala, Karma Transfer, Kundalini, Lennox (Annie), Madness, Mana, Mental Illness, Michael (St.), Miracles, Mysticism, Near Death Experiences (NDE), Obsession, Paranormal, Pollution, Prayer, Psychosis, Quiddity, Randi (James), Roberts (Jane), Samkhya, Shaman, Shapeshifter, Siva, Soul Loss, Soul, Spiritual Attack, Swedenborg (Emanuel), Talbot (Michael), Tantra, Teresa of Ávila, (St.), Third Eye, Tibetan Book of the Dead, Totem, Totem Pole, Tradition, Tramp Souls, Transubstantiation, Trickster, Trinity (Holy Trinity), Underhill (Evelyn), Vampires, Virgin Mary, Voodoo, Wach (Joachim), Wave, Weber (Max), World Tree, Yoda, Yoni, Zombie
Add to this, report errors, suggest edits or voice your opinion
The Zodiac is derived from the visible part of the night sky, divided into 12 equal portions.
It contains the 12 major constellations associated with the 12 major signs of astrology, as well as the 12 major stages of transubstantiation as outlined in medieval alchemical lore.
While the validity of astrology has been variously championed, questioned and lampooned, in India commercially obtained horoscopes are frequently used to determine suitable marriages, a practice stemming back for decades.
As Calcutta grew in size and the social composition of the city became more mobile and diverse, matrimonial advertisements and marriage bureaus that served the function of matchmaking as well as various other types of marriage-related services such as matching horoscopes seemed better suited to the needs of the urban householder. In fact, many matrimonial bureaus combined the task of brokering marriages with astrological functions. Advertisements such as the following littered contemporary newspapers and journals: “Undertake marriage negotiations of respectable families-Jyotirbid Pundit K. Samajpati B. A. (Medical Astrologer)-Residence, 4 Guruprasad Chaudhury Lane, Calcutta” (Amrita Bazar Patrika, November 14, 1929, n.p.). Others were even more precise, stating, “if you send your date, year, and place of birth to the address below, you will be provided with your horoscope at the lowest possible price-Sri Motiranjan Kabyatirtha, P.O. Sarutiya, Jessore” (Bijali, February 18:6).
Rochona Majumdar, “Looking for Brides and Grooms: Ghataks, Matrimonials, and the Marriage Market in Colonial Calcutta, circa 1875-1940,” The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 63, No. 4, (Nov., 2004: 911-935), p. 920.
» Alchemy, Aquarius, Aries, Cancer, Capricorn, Gemini, Leo, Libra, Pisces, Sagittarius, Scorpio, Taurus, Virgo
Add to this, report errors, suggest edits or voice your opinion by posting a comment