Editing Transubstantiation (section)

==History==
=== Summary ===
From the earliest centuries, the Church spoke of the elements used in celebrating the Eucharist as being changed into the body and blood of Christ. Terms used to speak of the alteration included "trans-elementation".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Philip Schaff: NPNF2-05. Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises, Etc. – Christian Classics Ethereal Library |url=https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf205/npnf205.xi.ii.xxxix.html |access-date=2021-11-11 |website=ccel.org}}</ref> The bread and wine were said to be "made",<ref>{{Cite web |title=Church Fathers: Catechetical Lecture 23 (Cyril of Jerusalem) |url=https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310123.htm |access-date=2021-11-11 |website=newadvent.org}}</ref> "changed into",<ref>{{Cite web |title=Philip Schaff: NPNF2-09. Hilary of Poitiers, John of Damascus – Christian Classics Ethereal Library |url=https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf209/npnf209.iii.iv.iv.xiii.html |access-date=2021-11-11 |website=ccel.org}}</ref> the body and blood of Christ. Similarly, [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]] said: "Not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ {{em|becomes}} the body of Christ."<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://archive.org/details/fathersofthechur009512mbp/page/n247/mode/2up?q=becomes |title=Sermon 234|year=1959|publisher=Fathers Of The Church}}</ref>

The term "transubstantiation" was used at least by the 11th century to speak of the change and was in widespread use by the 12th century. The [[Fourth Council of the Lateran]] used it in 1215. When later theologians adopted [[Metaphysics (Aristotle)|Aristotelian metaphysics]] in Western Europe, they explained the change that was already part of Catholic teaching in terms of [[Aristotelian theology|Aristotelian]] substance and accidents. The sixteenth-century [[Reformation]] gave this as a reason for rejecting the Catholic teaching. The [[Council of Trent]] did not impose the Aristotelian [[Substance theory|theory of substance]] and accidents or the term "transubstantiation" in its Aristotelian meaning, but stated that the term is a fitting and proper term for the change that takes place by consecration of the bread and wine. The term, which for that Council had no essential dependence on [[scholasticism|scholastic ideas]], is used in the Catholic Church to affirm the fact of Christ's presence and the mysterious and radical change which takes place, but not to explain {{em|how}} the change takes place,<ref name=ARCIC/> since this occurs "in a way surpassing understanding".<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – The sacrament of the Eucharist, 1333. |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm |access-date=2020-01-05 |website=vatican.va |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200204020023/https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm |archive-date=2020-02-04 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The term is mentioned in both the 1992 and 1997 editions of the ''[[Catechism of the Catholic Church]]'' and is given prominence in the later (2005) ''[[Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church]]''.

===Patristic period===
[[File:Eucharistic bread.jpg|thumb|right|A 3rd-century fresco in the [[Catacomb of Callixtus]], interpreted by the archaeologist [[Joseph Wilpert]] as showing on the left Jesus multiplying bread and fish, a symbol of the Eucharistic consecration, and on the right a representation of the deceased, who through participation in the Eucharist has obtained eternal happiness<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catholic Encyclopedia: Early Symbols of the Eucharist |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05590a.htm |access-date=2017-05-31}}</ref>]]

Early Christian writers referred to the Eucharistic elements as Jesus's body and the blood.<ref name=suffer1/><ref name=suffer2/> The short document known as the ''Teachings of the Apostles'' or ''[[Didache]]'', which may be the earliest Christian document outside of the [[New Testament]] to speak of the Eucharist, says, "Let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, 'Give not that which is holy to the dogs'."<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Didache |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref>

[[Ignatius of Antioch]], writing in about AD&nbsp;106 to the Roman Christians, says: "I desire the bread of God, the heavenly bread, the bread of life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became afterwards of the seed of [[David]] and [[Abraham]]; and I desire the drink of God, namely His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ignatius to the Romans |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-romans-roberts.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref>

Writing to the Christians of [[Smyrna]] in the same year, he warned them to "stand aloof from such heretics", because, among other reasons, "they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again."<ref name="suffer1">{{Cite web |title=Church Fathers: Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-roberts.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref>

In about 150, [[Justin Martyr]], referring to the Eucharist, wrote: "Not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Saint Justin Martyr: First Apology (Roberts-Donaldson) |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref>

In about AD&nbsp;200, [[Tertullian]] wrote: "Having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, This is my body, that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure. If, however, (as [[Marcion of Sinope|Marcion]] might say) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Church Fathers: Against Marcion, Book IV (Tertullian) |url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm |website=newadvent.org}}</ref>

The ''[[Apostolic Constitutions]]'' (compiled {{circa|380}}) says: "Let the bishop give the oblation, saying, The body of Christ; and let him that receiveth say, Amen. And let the deacon take the cup; and when he gives it, say, The blood of Christ, the cup of life; and let him that drinketh say, Amen."<ref>{{Cite web |title=ANF07. Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries: Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily – Christian Classics Ethereal Library |url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.ix.ix.ii.html |website=ccel.org}}</ref>

[[Ambrose]] of Milan (died 397) wrote:
{{Quote|Perhaps you will say, "I see something else, how is it that you assert that I receive the Body of Christ?"&nbsp;...Let us prove that this is not what nature made, but what the blessing consecrated, and the power of blessing is greater than that of nature, because by blessing nature itself is changed.&nbsp;...For that sacrament which you receive is made what it is by the word of Christ. But if the word of Elijah had such power as to bring down fire from heaven, shall not the word of Christ have power to change the nature of the elements?&nbsp;...Why do you seek the order of nature in the Body of Christ, seeing that the Lord Jesus Himself was born of a Virgin, not according to nature? It is the true Flesh of Christ which was crucified and buried, this is then truly the Sacrament of His Body. The Lord Jesus Himself proclaims: "This Is My Body." Before the blessing of the heavenly words another nature is spoken of, after the consecration the Body is signified. He Himself speaks of His Blood. Before the consecration it has another name, after it is called Blood. And you say, Amen, that is, It is true. Let the heart within confess what the mouth utters, let the soul feel what the voice speaks.<ref name="suffer2">{{Cite web |title=Church Fathers: On the Mysteries (St. Ambrose) |url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3405.htm |website=newadvent.org}}</ref>|author=|title=|source=}}

Other fourth-century Christian writers say that in the Eucharist there occurs a "change",<ref>Cyril of Jerusalem, ''Cat. Myst.'', 5, 7 (Patrologia Graeca 33:1113): {{lang|grc|μεταβολή}}</ref> "transelementation",<ref>Gregory of Nyssa, ''Oratio catechetica magna'', 37 (PG 45:93): {{lang|grc|μεταστοιχειώσας}}</ref> "transformation",<ref>John Chrysostom, Homily 1 on the betrayal of Judas, 6 (PG 49:380): {{lang|grc|μεταρρύθμησις}}</ref> "transposing",<ref>Cyril of Alexandria, On Luke, 22, 19 (PG 72:911): {{lang|grc|μετίτησις}}</ref> "alteration"<ref>John Damascene, On the orthodox faith, book 4, chapter 13 (PG 49:380): {{lang|grc|μεταποίησις}}</ref> of the bread into the body of Christ.

[[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]] declares that the bread consecrated in the Eucharist actually "becomes" (in Latin, {{em|fit}}) the Body of Christ: "The faithful know what I'm talking about; they know Christ in the breaking of bread. It isn't every loaf of bread, you see, but the one receiving Christ's blessing, that becomes the body of Christ."<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=A2GyOPOqp-4C ''Sermons (230–272B) on the Liturgical Seasons'' (New City Press 1994), p. 37]; original text in [https://books.google.com/books?id=_P5Win6wF0wC Migne, ''Patrologia latina'', vol. 38, col. 1116]</ref>

[[Clement of Alexandria]], who uses the word "symbol" concerning the Eucharist, is quoted as an exception,<ref>{{Cite book|last=Willis|first=Wendell|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=88zcDQAAQBAJ&dq=symbolic+eucharist+clement+of+alexandria&pg=PA49|title=Eucharist and Ecclesiology: Essays in Honor of Dr. Everett Ferguson|year=2017|publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers|isbn=978-1-4982-8292-5|language=en}}</ref> although this interpretation is disputed on the basis of [[Alexandrian school|Alexandrian]] overlaps of symbology and literalism.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm|website=New Advent|title=The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist|last=Pohle|first=J.|year=1909}}</ref>

===Middle Ages===
[[File:Codex Bruchsal 1 28r.jpg|thumb|upright|The [[Last Supper]] (upper image) and preparatory washing of feet (lower image) in a 1220 manuscript in the [[Baden State Library]], [[Karlsruhe]], Germany]]

[[Paschasius Radbertus]] (785–865) was a Carolingian theologian, and the abbot of [[Corbie Abbey|Corbie]], whose most well-known and influential work is an exposition on the nature of the Eucharist written around 831, entitled ''De Corpore et Sanguine Domini''. In it, Paschasius agrees with [[Ambrose]] in affirming that the Eucharist contains the true, historical body of Jesus Christ. According to Paschasius, God is truth itself, and therefore, his words and actions must be true.  Christ's proclamation at the [[Last Supper]] that the bread and wine were his body and blood must be taken literally, since God is truth.<ref>Chazelle, p. 9</ref>{{Full citation needed|date=March 2024}}  He thus believes that the change of the substances of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ offered in the Eucharist really occurs.  Only if the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ can a Christian know it is salvific.<ref>Chazelle, p. 10</ref>{{Full citation needed|date=March 2024}}

In the 11th century, [[Berengar of Tours]] stirred up opposition when he denied that any material change in the elements was needed to explain the fact of the Real Presence. His position was never diametrically opposed to that of his critics, and he was probably never excommunicated, but the controversies that he aroused (see [[Stercoranism]]) forced people to clarify the doctrine of the Eucharist.<ref>Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005 {{ISBN|978-0-19-280290-3}}), article ''Berengar of Tours''</ref>

The earliest known use of the term ''transubstantiation'' to describe the change from bread and wine to body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist was by [[Hildebert de Lavardin]], Archbishop of Tours, in the 11th century.<ref>[[John Hedley (bishop)|John Cuthbert Hedley]], ''Holy Eucharist'' (1907), p. 37.
[https://archive.org/details/miltonreligiousc0000king/page/134 <!-- quote=transubstantiation Hildebert. --> John N. King, ''Milton and Religious Controversy'' (Cambridge University Press 2000] {{ISBN|978-0-52177198-6}}), p. 134</ref> By the end of the 12th century the term was in widespread use.<ref name=ODCC/>

The [[Fourth Council of the Lateran]] in 1215 spoke of the bread and wine as "transubstantiated" into the body and blood of Christ: "His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been transubstantiated, by God's power, into his body and blood".<ref>{{Catholic|prescript=|wstitle=Fourth Lateran Council (1215)}}.
[http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum12-2.htm#Confession of Faith ''Fourth Lateran Council: 1215''], 1. Confession of Faith, retrieved 2010-03-13.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/lateran4.asp|title=Internet History Sourcebooks Project|website=sourcebooks.fordham.edu}}</ref> Catholic scholars and clergy have noted numerous reports of [[Eucharistic miracle]]s contemporary with the council, and at least one such report was discussed at the council.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Councils of Faith: Lateran IV (1215)| year = 2013| url=https://www.english.op.org/godzdogz/councils-of-faith-lateran-iv-1215/ | last=Javis|first=Matthew|website = Dominican Friars}}</ref><ref>Ryan, S. and Shanahan, A. (2018) How to communicate Lateran IV in 13th century Ireland: lessons from the Liber Examplorum (c. 1275). Religions 9(3): 75; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel9030075</ref> It was not until later in the 13th century that [[Aristotelian metaphysics]] was accepted and a philosophical elaboration in line with that metaphysics was developed, which found classic formulation in the teaching of [[Thomas Aquinas]]<ref name="ODCC">Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005 {{ISBN|978-0-19-280290-3}}), article ''Transubstantiation''</ref> and in the theories of later Catholic theologians in the medieval period ([[Robert Grosseteste]],<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Leonard E.|last1=Boyle|author-link=Leonard Boyle|url=https://academic.oup.com/jts/article-abstract/XXX/2/512/1649099?redirectedFrom=fulltext|title=Robert Grosseteste and the Transubstantiation|journal=[[The Journal of Theological Studies]]|volume=XXX|issue=2|date=October 1, 1979|page=512|doi=10.1093/jts/XXX.2.512|publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|url-access=subscription}}</ref> [[Giles of Rome]], [[Duns Scotus]] and [[William of Ockham]]).<ref>{{Cite book |last=Adams |first=Marylin |title=Some later medieval theories of the Eucharist: Thomas Aquinas, Gilles of Rome, Duns Scotus, and William Ockham |date=2012 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780199658169}}</ref><ref>Stephen E. Lahey, "[http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1126&context=classicsfacpubReview of Adams, ''Some later medieval theories ...'']" in ''The Journal of Ecclesiastical History'', vol. 63, issue 1 (January 2012)]</ref>

===Reformation===
During the [[Protestant Reformation]], the doctrine of transubstantiation was heavily criticised as an Aristotelian "[[pseudophilosophy]]"<ref>Luther, M. ''The Babylonian Captivity of the Christian Church''. 1520. Quoted in, McGrath, A. 1998. ''Historical Theology, An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought''. Blackwell Publishers: Oxford. p. 198.</ref> imported into Christian teaching and jettisoned in favor of [[Martin Luther]]'s doctrine of [[sacramental union]], or in favor, per [[Huldrych Zwingli]], of the Eucharist as memorial.<ref>McGrath, op.cit. pp. 198–99</ref>

[[File:De-captivitate-Babylonica.jpg|thumb|upright|Title page of [[Martin Luther]]'s ''[[On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church|De Captivitate Babylonica Ecclesiae]]'']]
In the Reformation, the doctrine of transubstantiation became a matter of much controversy. Martin Luther held that "It is not the doctrine of transubstantiation which is to be believed, but simply that Christ really is present at the Eucharist".<ref>McGrath, op.cit., p. 197.</ref> In his ''[[On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church]]'' (published on 6 October 1520) Luther wrote:

{{Quote|Therefore, it is an absurd and unheard-of juggling with words, to understand "bread" to mean "the form, or accidents of bread", and "wine" to mean "the form, or accidents of wine". Why do they not also understand all other things to mean their forms, or accidents? Even if this might be done with all other things, it would yet not be right thus to emasculate the words of God and arbitrarily to empty them of their meaning.

Moreover, the Church had the true faith for more than twelve hundred years, during which time the holy Fathers never once mentioned this transubstantiation – certainly, a monstrous word for a monstrous idea – until the pseudo-philosophy of Aristotle became rampant in the Church these last three hundred years. During these centuries many other things have been wrongly defined, for example, that the Divine essence neither is begotten nor begets, that the soul is the substantial form of the human body, and the like assertions, which are made without reason or sense, as the [[Pierre d'Ailly|Cardinal of Cambray]] himself admits.<ref>{{Cite web |title=A Prelude by Martin Luther on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, 2:26 & 2:27 |url=http://www.ctsfw.edu/etext/luther/babylonian/babylonian.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090618075035/http://www.ctsfw.edu/etext/luther/babylonian/babylonian.htm |archive-date=2009-06-18}}</ref>|author=|title=|source=}}

In his 1528 ''[[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]'', he wrote:
{{Quote|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body", even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union", because Christ's body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref>''Weimar Ausgabe'' 26, 442; ''Luther's Works'' 37, 299–300.</ref>}}

What Luther thus called a "sacramental union" is often erroneously called "[[consubstantiation]]" by non-Lutherans. In ''On the Babylonian Captivity'', Luther upheld belief in the Real Presence of Jesus and, in his 1523 treatise ''[[The Adoration of the Sacrament]]'', defended adoration of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist.

In England, the [[Six Articles (1539)|Six Articles of 1539]] prescribed the death penalty for any who denied transubstantiation. This was changed under [[Elizabeth I|Elizabeth&nbsp;I]]. In the [[Thirty-nine Articles]] of 1563, the [[Church of England]] declared: "Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions".<ref>[[Thirty-Nine Articles]], article 28</ref> Laws were enacted against participation in Catholic worship, which [[recusancy|remained illegal]] until 1791.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Penal Laws &#124; British and Irish history |url=https://www.britannica.com/event/Penal-Laws |website=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=September 13, 2010 |title=Factbox: Catholicism in Britain |newspaper=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-britain-catholics-idUSTRE68C1R420100913 |via=reuters.com}}</ref>

For a century and half – 1672 to 1828 – transubstantiation had an important role, in a negative way, in British political and social life. Under the [[Test Act]], the holding of any public office was made conditional upon explicitly denying Transubstantiation. Any aspirant to public office had to repeat the formula set out by the law: "I, ''N'', do declare that I do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or in the elements of the [[Sacrament|bread and wine]], at or after the [[consecration]] thereof by any person whatsoever."

====Council of Trent====
In 1551, the [[Council of Trent]] declared that the doctrine of transubstantiation is a [[dogma#Catholicism and Eastern Christianity|dogma]] of faith<ref>{{cite web| url = https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html| title = The Council of Trent, Thirteenth Session, canon 1: "If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema."}}</ref> and stated that "by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."<ref name=CT13/>
In its 13th session ending 11 October 1551, the Council defined transubstantiation as "that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood – the [[species (Christianity)|species]] only of the bread and wine remaining – which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation".<ref name="CT13">{{Cite web |editor1-first=J. |editor1-last=Waterworth |others=Scanned by Hanover College students in 1995 |title=The Council of Trent – The Thirteenth Session |url=https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html |publisher=Dolman |location=London |edition=1848}}</ref> This council officially approved use of the term "transubstantiation" to express the Catholic Church's teaching on the subject of the conversion of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, with the aim of safeguarding Christ's presence as a literal truth, while emphasizing the fact that there is no change in the empirical appearances of the bread and wine.<ref name="britannica">{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Transubstantiation |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |date=21 September 2023 |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/603196/transubstantiation}}</ref> It did not however impose the Aristotelian theory of substance and accidents: it spoke only of the species (the appearances), not the philosophical term "accidents", and the word "substance" was in ecclesiastical use for many centuries before Aristotelian philosophy was adopted in the West,<ref name="Sophia">{{Cite journal |last=Davis |first=Charles |date=April 1, 1964 |title=The theology of transubstantiation |journal=Sophia |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=12–24 |doi=10.1007/BF02785911 |s2cid=170618935}}</ref> as shown for instance by its use in the [[Nicene Creed]] which speaks of Christ having the same "{{Lang|el|οὐσία}}" (Greek) or "{{Lang|la|substantia}}" (Latin) as the [[God the Father|Father]].

=== Since the Second Vatican Council ===
{{Annotated image
| image = Cathedral Fribourg vitrail Eucharistie 01.jpg
| image-width = 1000
| image-left = -80
| image-top = -660
| width = 220
| height = 250
| caption =Monstrance with transparent host (detail from the Eucharist window by J. Mehoffer in the Cathedral of St Nicholas in [[Fribourg]], Switzerland)
}}
The ''[[Catechism of the Catholic Church]]'' states the Church's teaching on transubstantiation twice.

It repeats what it calls the Council of Trent's summary of the Catholic faith on "the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood [by which] Christ becomes present in this sacrament", faith "in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion": "[B]y the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM |website=vatican.va}}</ref>

As part of its own summary ("In brief") of the ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' on the sacrament of the Eucharist, it states: "By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651)."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P44.HTM|title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText|website=www.vatican.va}}</ref>

The Church's teaching is given in the ''[[Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church]]'' in question and answer form:
{{Quote|283. What is the meaning of ''transubstantiation''?
''Transubstantiation'' means the change of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the Body of Christ and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Blood. This change is brought about in the eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the "eucharistic species", remain unaltered.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html#The+Seven+Sacraments+of+the+Church |website=vatican.va}}</ref>}}

The Anglican–Roman Catholic Joint Preparatory Commission stated in 1971 in their common declaration on Eucharistic doctrine: "The word transubstantiation is commonly used in the Roman Catholic Church to indicate that God acting in the eucharist effects a change in the inner reality of the elements."<ref name="ARCIC">{{Cite web |year=1971 |url=https://www.anglicancommunion.org/media/105215/ARCIC_I_Agreed_Statement_on_Eucharistic_Doctrine.pdf |publisher=Anglican – Roman Catholic Joint Preparatory Commission |title=Agreed Statement on Eucharistic Doctrine 1971}}</ref>

==== Opinions of some individuals (not necessarily typical) ====
In 2017 Irish Augustinian Gabriel Daly said that the Council of Trent approved use of the term "transubstantiation" as suitable and proper, but did not make it obligatory, and he suggested that its continued use is partly to blame for lack of progress towards sharing of the Eucharist between [[Protestantism|Protestants]] and Catholics.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catholics should 'stop talking' of transubstantiation |url=https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/7581/catholics-should-stop-talking-of-transubstantiation |access-date=2019-12-31 |website=The Tablet |language=en |archive-date=2019-12-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191231221606/https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/7581/catholics-should-stop-talking-of-transubstantiation |url-status=dead }}</ref>

[[Traditionalist Catholicism|Traditionalist Catholic]] Paolo Pasqualucci said that the absence of the term in the [[Second Vatican Council]]'s constitution on the liturgy ''[[Sacrosanctum Concilium]]'' means that it presents the [[Catholic Mass]] "in the manner of the Protestants". To this [[Dave Armstrong (Catholic apologist)|Dave Armstrong]] replied that "the {{em|word}} may not be present; but the {{em|concept}} is".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2019-07-22 |title=Vs. Pasqualucci Re Vatican II #11: SC & Sacrifice of the Mass |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2019/07/vs-pasqualucci-re-vatican-ii-11-sc-sacrifice-of-the-mass.html |access-date=2019-12-31 |website=Biblical Evidence for Catholicism |language=en}}</ref> For instance, the document ''[[Gaudium et spes]]'' refers to the "sacrament of faith where natural elements refined by man are gloriously changed into His Body and Blood, providing a meal of brotherly solidarity and a foretaste of the heavenly banquet" (Chapter 3).<ref>{{Cite web |title=Vatican II and the Eucharist |url=http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/vat/a4.html |access-date=2020-01-03 |website=therealpresence.org}}</ref>

[[Thomas J. Reese]] commented that "using Aristotelian concepts to explain Catholic mysteries in the 21st century is a fool's errand", while Timothy O'Malley remarked that "it is possible to teach the doctrine of transubstantiation without using the words 'substance' and 'accidents'. If the word 'substance' scares people off, you can say, 'what it really is', and that is what substance is. What it really is, what it absolutely is at its heart is Christ's body and blood".<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Real Presence: What do Catholics believe and how can the Church respond? {{!}} Southern Cross Online Edition |url=https://www.archbalt.org/the-real-presence-what-do-catholics-believe-and-how-church-can-respond/ |access-date=2020-01-02 |website=southerncross.diosav.org|date=25 August 2019 }}</ref>

==== General belief and doctrine knowledge among Catholics ====
A [[Georgetown University]] CARA poll of United States Catholics<ref>{{cite web| url = https://cara.georgetown.edu/CARAServices/CCPMethods.html| title = CARA Catholic Poll Methods| access-date = 2020-04-13| archive-date = 2022-08-17| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220817055738/https://cara.georgetown.edu/CARAServices/CCPMethods.html| url-status = dead}}</ref> in 2008 showed that 57% said they believed that Jesus Christ is really present in the Eucharist in 2008 and nearly 43% said that they believed the wine and bread are symbols of Jesus. Of those attending Mass weekly or more often, 91% believed in the Real Presence, as did 65% of those who merely attended at least once a month, and 40% of those who attended at most a few times a year.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://cara.georgetown.edu/masseucharist.pdf| title = CARA Catholic Poll: "Sacraments Today: Belief and Practice among U.S. Catholics", p. 54}}{{Dead link|date=May 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

Among Catholics attending Mass at least once a month, the percentage of belief in the Real Presence was 86% for pre–Vatican II Catholics, 74% for Vatican II Catholics, 75% for post-Vatican II Catholics, and 85% for Millennials.<ref>[https://cara.georgetown.edu/masseucharist.pdf CARA Catholic Poll: "Sacraments Today: Belief and Practice among U.S. Catholics", p. 55]{{Dead link|date=May 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}: "Among Catholics attending Mass at least once a month, Millennial Generation Catholics are just as likely as Pre-Vatican II Catholics to agree that Jesus is really present in the Eucharist (85 percent compared to 86 percent). Vatican II and Post-Vatican II Generation Catholics are about 10 percentage points less likely to believe that Christ is really present in the Eucharist (74 and 75 percent, respectively)." Indicated also in the diagram on the same page.</ref>

A 2019 Pew Research Report found that 69% of United States Catholics believed that in the Eucharist the bread and wine "are {{em|symbols}} of the body and blood of Jesus Christ", and only 31% believed that, "during Catholic Mass, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus". Of the latter group, most (28% of all US Catholics) said they knew that this is what the Church teaches, while the remaining 3% said they did not know it. Of the 69% who said the bread and wine are {{em|symbols}}, almost two-thirds (43% of all Catholics) said that what they believed is the Church's teaching, 22% said that they believed it in spite of knowing that the Church teaches that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ. Among United States Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week, the most observant group, 63% accepted that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ; the other 37% saw the bread and wine as {{em|symbols}}, most of them (23%) not knowing that the Church, so the survey stated, teaches that the elements actually become the body and blood of Christ, while the remaining 14% rejected what was given as the Church's teaching.<ref name="Pew Report">{{Cite web |date=August 5, 2019 |title=Just one-third of U.S. Catholics agree with their church that Eucharist is body, blood of Christ. |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/05/transubstantiation-eucharist-u-s-catholics/ |access-date=2020-01-01 |website=Pew Research Center |language=en-US}}</ref> The Pew Report presented "the understanding that the bread and wine used in Communion are {{em|symbols}} of the body and blood of Jesus Christ" as contradicting belief that, "during Catholic Mass, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus".<ref name="Pew Report" /> The Catholic Church itself speaks of the bread and wine used in Communion {{em|both}} as "signs" {{em|and}} as "becoming" Christ's body and blood: "[...] the signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText |url=http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3Z.HTM |access-date=2020-09-18 |website=vatican.va}}</ref>

In a comment on the Pew Research Report, Greg Erlandson drew attention to the difference between the formulation in the CARA survey, in which the choice was between "Jesus Christ is really present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist" and "the bread and wine are symbols of Jesus, but Jesus is not really present", and the Pew Research choice between "during Catholic Mass, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus" and "the bread wine are {{em|symbols}} of the body and blood of Jesus Christ". He quotes an observation by Mark Gray that the word "actually" makes it sound like "something that could be analyzed under a microscope or empirically observed", while what the Church teaches is that the "substance" of the bread and wine are changed at consecration, but the "accidents" or appearances of bread and wine remain. Erlandson commented further: "Catholics may not be able to articulately define the 'Real Presence', and the {{Sic|phrase}} 'transubstantiation' may be obscure to them, but in their reverence and demeanor, they demonstrate their belief that this is not just a symbol".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Do we really believe in the Real Presence? |url=https://www.thebostonpilot.com/Opinion/article.asp?ID=185694 |access-date=2020-01-01 |website=The Boston Pilot}}</ref>