Alvin Kimel
12-04-2003, 11:25 PM
I have been reading Constantine Tsirpanlis's Introduction to Eastern Patristic Thought and Orthodox Theology. He offers a very interesting interpretation of St. John Damascene's understanding of the Eucharistic transformation. He describes it as a kind of impanation. He writes:
"Through the epiclesis, and the descent of the Holy Spirit, bread and wine (and water) are changed into the body and blood of Christ, in a supernatural manner, 'hyperfyos metapoiounte.' Not the body of Christ which ascended into heaven descends, but bread and wine itself are changed into the body and blood of Christ. And as the Holy Spirit once had formed Christ's body in the womb of the Virgin, so now, continuously, He forms Him by the changing of the Eucharistic elements....
"Just as God unites His grace to the water and oil of Baptism, so, in the Eucharist, He has joined, "synezfksen," His divinity to the elements, making them His body and blood. Just as charcoal is wood joined to fire, 'in like manner also the bread of the Communion is not bread only, but (bread) united with the divinity, 'Henomenos theoteti.'
"Accordingly, the Orthodox Church maintains the real presence (hypostatic and substantial) of Christ in the Holy Eucharist as consequence of the change of Eucharistic elements, bread and wine, into the body and blood of Christ....
"This Body, created by the Holy Spirit through the change of bread and wine, is assumed hypostically by the Logos, just as He once had assumed hypostatically the body formed in the womb of Mary by the Holy Spirit. But since there is but one hypostasis of the Incarnated Logos, it follows that the Eucharistic body on earth and the glorified body in heaven are one, owing to the one hypostasis to which they belong.
"The Eucharistic body of Christ is identified with the pre-resurrected one. So the question: Why had Christ instituted Holy Eucharist before and not after his resurrection takes its answer. Moreover, the resurrected body is incorruptible and cannot therefore be subject to breaking, eating and drinking." (pp. 134-138)
This is the first time I have encountered this interpretation of St. John. Is this accurate?
Tsirpanlis relies heavily it appears on a work, presumably by John, titled "On the holy body of communion." I have never seen this cited anywhere else. Is this an authentic work of John of Damascus? Is an English translation available anywhere?
Thanks for your help.
Fr Alvin Kimel+
"Through the epiclesis, and the descent of the Holy Spirit, bread and wine (and water) are changed into the body and blood of Christ, in a supernatural manner, 'hyperfyos metapoiounte.' Not the body of Christ which ascended into heaven descends, but bread and wine itself are changed into the body and blood of Christ. And as the Holy Spirit once had formed Christ's body in the womb of the Virgin, so now, continuously, He forms Him by the changing of the Eucharistic elements....
"Just as God unites His grace to the water and oil of Baptism, so, in the Eucharist, He has joined, "synezfksen," His divinity to the elements, making them His body and blood. Just as charcoal is wood joined to fire, 'in like manner also the bread of the Communion is not bread only, but (bread) united with the divinity, 'Henomenos theoteti.'
"Accordingly, the Orthodox Church maintains the real presence (hypostatic and substantial) of Christ in the Holy Eucharist as consequence of the change of Eucharistic elements, bread and wine, into the body and blood of Christ....
"This Body, created by the Holy Spirit through the change of bread and wine, is assumed hypostically by the Logos, just as He once had assumed hypostatically the body formed in the womb of Mary by the Holy Spirit. But since there is but one hypostasis of the Incarnated Logos, it follows that the Eucharistic body on earth and the glorified body in heaven are one, owing to the one hypostasis to which they belong.
"The Eucharistic body of Christ is identified with the pre-resurrected one. So the question: Why had Christ instituted Holy Eucharist before and not after his resurrection takes its answer. Moreover, the resurrected body is incorruptible and cannot therefore be subject to breaking, eating and drinking." (pp. 134-138)
This is the first time I have encountered this interpretation of St. John. Is this accurate?
Tsirpanlis relies heavily it appears on a work, presumably by John, titled "On the holy body of communion." I have never seen this cited anywhere else. Is this an authentic work of John of Damascus? Is an English translation available anywhere?
Thanks for your help.
Fr Alvin Kimel+