- Jun 26, 2008
- Reaction score
- Illinois, US
Great post. It sounds as if the Ethiopian Orthodox Eucharistic theology is essentially the same as ours. A full change has taken place, and the gifts are no longer bread and wine, but fully and entirely the Body and Blood of Christ. I always thought that this was the Eastern Orthodox position as well, but after having participated in this thread I am a bit confused what the Eastern Orthodox believe about the Eucharist. Both consubstantiation and Sacramental Union teach that the bread and wine remain along with the Body and Blood of Christ. I cannot wrap my head around why the Eastern Orthodox Church would consider either teaching anything less than heretical.HabteSelassie said:Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
I am not quite sure that Consubstantiation is Orthodox teaching, because it affirms that there is both the substance of bread and Body, wine and Blood. Christ is not joined by essence or even hypostasis to the Bread and Wine, rather they become His Body and Blood, through metousiosis. Ethiopian Fathers have explained to me that the Holy Communion only appears as bread and wine, but there is no longer bread nor wine, but the Living and Glorious Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Consubstantiation tries to explain why the Holy Communion remains bread and wine, by suggesting that Christ is joined to them, either by essence (doubtful) or hypostasis (illogical) so as to explain how we do not see Human Flesh and Blood on the altar. It is a pseudo-scientific explanation, but such is a Mystery. olice: Metousiosis is a simplistic explanation, there was bread and wine, there becomes the Body and Blood substantively. This is both by essence and hypostasis, as no essence can exist without a manifested form (hypostasis) and no hypostasis can exist without a defining essence/nature. The Holy Communion IS Jesus Christ, so how could He also be by essence or substance bread and water?