Many people wonder, “Does the orthodox church believe in transubstantation?” There are many aspects to consider, including its origins, traditions, and evidence. This article explores the various aspects of the transubstantiation theory. Once you have answered this question, you will be well-prepared to discuss its use in church. Here are some of the most common arguments that support and refute it.
Table of Contents
orthodox church believes in transubstantiation
There is no single source that describes why the orthodox church believes in transubstantiations, though the term appears in ecclesiastical documents as early as the 12th century. The term appears in Latinophrones’s works, which use the term “transubstantiatio.”
The question of why the orthodox church believes in transubstantiations is an open question, and the answer varies among denominations. Essentially, transubstantiation is the process by which bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ. While both catholicism and orthodoxy hold that this process occurs, there are certain differences between them. For example, the orthodox church believes in transubstantiation because it is “patriotic” and has a long history in Christology.
The orthodox church does not deny that transubstantiation happens, although it does not define exactly what happens. It does, however, acknowledge that the bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ, while keeping the appearances of the bread and wine intact. It is the doctrine of transubstantiation that is accepted by most Orthodox churches, and it is important to note that many orthodox denominations use the term “metabole” to refer to the process.
Origin of transubstantiation theory
While the term “transubstantiation” was used in the sixteenth century by Western Christians, the Orthodox Church rarely responded to the arguments of Luther, Calvin, and others. Indeed, the term never reached dogma status. Rather, Orthodox church officials and writers generally used words of their own day, avoiding the dogmatic corner. However, this doctrine did influence Luther’s Eucharistic proposals.
While some Greek confessions use the word “transsubstantiation” to describe the change from plain bread to ‘the body of Christ,’ most Orthodox traditions play down the term and any notions of substance and accidents. They adhere to the holy mystery of transubstantiation, and use other terms to describe the process. However, there are still differences between the two traditions. Here are some key differences.
In the Catholic Church, transubstantiation has two distinct meanings: it refers to the change from bread and wine to Christ. The bread and wine are converted into the body and blood of Jesus. According to this theory, the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ at the Eucharist. However, the term transubstantiation was introduced in the thirteenth century by Thomas Aquinas, a Catholic theologian.
Tradition of transubstantiation
For centuries, Catholics have disputed the nature of the bread and wine that are served at the Eucharist. In the seventeenth century, the Orthodox Church used the Latin term transubstantiation to define this event, and in 1838, the Russian Church followed suit. The Russian Church retained the word transubstantiation in its translation, but paraphrased the rest, avoiding the terms substance and accident.
The term transubstantiation has a very long history in the Orthodox Church, starting in the mid-fourth century. The term is used by the Roman Catholic Church. This is not entirely wrong, though, since metousiose is the Latin term for change. The Orthodox Church, on the other hand, uses terms such as “metabole” or “epiclesis” to describe the change that occurs during the Eucharist.
In the Roman Catholic Church, the doctrine of transubstantiation has an earlier history. It was in existence even before the Reformation, but it was only declared dogma at the Council of Trent in 1563 CE. It is believed that transubstantiation occurs at the Consecration of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, and that it is the only way to guarantee the truth of the teaching.
Evidence for transubstantiation theory
The term “transubstantiation” dates back to the fourth century or earlier, and was first used in the Eucharistic context by Leontios. In his works, he explains the activity and accidents of such substances. Although his works are considered ancient, they have not influenced the use of the term by Catholic or Orthodox authors. Among other things, it is important to note that the word “transsubstantiation” is still used today.
Although the Greek Church is the first to acknowledge the doctrine of transubstantiation, the Orthodox church is not one of the few to endorse it. Though it is mentioned in Dositheus’ confession, some Orthodox Christians question this theory. They argue that transubstantiation is a valid doctrine, but cannot take place outside the true Church (the Catholic Church).
