TRANSUBSTANTIATION YANG ASLI VS TRANSUBSTANTIATION YANG ABAL-ABAL (YOHANES 2:9-10)

Pdt. Budi Asali, M,Div.

5) Mengapa Yesus menggunakan air, dan bukannya langsung menciptakan anggur.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION YANG ASLI  VS  TRANSUBSTANTIATION YANG ABAL-ABAL (YOHANES 2:9-10)
gadget, otomotif
Pulpit Commentary: “III. Making use of existing materials. It would, perhaps, have been as easy for Jesus to have filled the empty vessels with wine as to transform the water with which he chose that they should be filled. But this would not have been his way. He did not work marvels for the marvels’ sake. He took the material which was to hand, and wrought upon it. It is a good lesson for us to learn; let us take the circumstances in which Providence has placed us, the characters with whom Providence has associated us, and seek and strive to use them for God’s glory.” [= III. MENGGUNAKAN BAHAN-BAHAN YANG ADA. Mungkin adalah sama mudahnya bagi Yesus untuk memenuhi belanga-belanga / tempayan-tempayan kosong dengan anggur seperti mengubah air dengan mana Ia memilih bahwa belanga-belanga / tempayan-tempayan itu harus dipenuhi. Tetapi ini bukanlah cara-Nya. Ia tidak melakukan mujizat-mujizat demi mujizat-mujizat itu sendiri. Ia mengambil bahan yang ada, dan mengerjakannya. Ini merupakan suatu pelajaran yang bagus bagi kita untuk dipelajari; hendaklah kita menggunakan keadaan-keadaan dalam mana Providensia telah menempatkan kita, orang-orang dengan siapa Providensia telah menghubungkan / menyatukan kita, dan berusaha dan berjuang untuk menggunakan mereka untuk kemuliaan Allah.].

6) Mujizat mengubah air menjadi anggur, khususnya cara-Nya melakukannya, membuktikan keilahianNya.

Bible Knowledge Commentary: “Each year He turns water to wine in the agricultural and fermentation processes. Here He simply did the process immediately.” [= Tiap tahun Ia mengubah air menjadi anggur dalam proses-proses pertanian dan fermentasi. Di sini Ia hanya melakukan proses itu secara langsung.].

Matthew Henry: “By this Christ showed himself to be the God of nature, who maketh the earth to bring forth wine, Ps 104:14,15. The extracting of the blood of the grape every year from the moisture of the earth is no less a work of power, though, being according to the common law of nature, it is not such a work of wonder, as this.” [= Dengan ini Kristus menunjukkan diriNya sendiri sebagai Allah dari alam, yang membuat bumi mengeluarkan / menghasilkan anggur, Maz 104:14,15. Penarikan darah dari buah anggur setiap tahun dari embun / air dari bumi tidak kurang dari suatu pekerjaan kuasa, sekalipun, karena sesuai dengan hukum alam yang biasa, itu bukanlah suatu pekerjaan yang luar biasa seperti ini.].

Mazmur 104:14-15 - “(14) Engkau yang menumbuhkan rumput bagi hewan dan tumbuh-tumbuhan untuk diusahakan manusia, yang mengeluarkan makanan dari dalam tanah (15) dan anggur yang menyukakan hati manusia, yang membuat muka berseri karena minyak, dan makanan yang menyegarkan hati manusia.”.

J. C. Ryle: “The manner in which the miracle was worked deserves especial notice. We are not told of any outward visible action which preceded or accompanied it. It is not said that He touched the waterpots containing the water that was made wine. It is not said that He commanded the water to change its qualities, or that He prayed to His Father in Heaven. He simply willed the change, and it took place. We read of no prophet or apostle in the Bible who ever worked a miracle after this fashion. He who could do such a mighty work, in such a manner, was nothing less than very God.” [= Cara dalam mana mujizat itu dikerjakan layak mendapatkan perhatian khusus. Kita tidak diberitahu tentang tindakan lahiriah yang bisa dilihat yang mendahului atau menyertainya. Tidak dikatakan bahwa Ia menyentuh tempayan-tempayan berisikan air yang dibuat jadi anggur itu. Tidak dikatakan bahwa Ia memerintahkan air itu untuk mengubah kwalitet-kwalitetnya, atau bahwa Ia berdoa kepada BapaNya di surga. Ia hanya menghendaki perubahan itu, dan itu terjadi. Kita tidak membaca tentang nabi atau rasul dalam Alkitab yang pernah mengerjakan suatu mujizat dengan cara ini. Ia yang bisa melakukan suatu pekerjaan yang sangat hebat, dengan cara seperti itu, adalah tidak kurang dari Allah yang sungguh-sungguh.] - ‘Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: John vol I’ (Libronix).

Kalau hanya dengan ‘menghendaki’ air menjadi anggur, dan itu terjadi, maka hal yang sama berlaku untuk keselamatan kita dan kebutuhan rohani kita. Ia hanya perlu ‘menghendaki’nya dan itu pasti terjadi.

J. C. Ryle: “It is a comfortable thought that the same almighty power of will which our Lord here displayed is still exercised on behalf of His believing people. They have no need of His bodily presence to maintain their cause. They have no reason to be cast down because they cannot see Him with their eyes interceding for them, or touch Him with their hands, that they may cling to Him for safety. If He ‘wills’ their salvation and the daily supply of all their spiritual need, they are as safe and well provided for as if they saw Him standing by them. Christ’s will is as mighty and effectual as Christ’s deed. The will of Him who could say to the Father, ‘I will that they whom thou hast given me be with me where I am,’ is a will that has all power in heaven and earth, and must prevail. (John 17:24.)” [= Merupakan suatu pemikiran yang menghibur bahwa kuasa yang maha kuasa yang sama dari kehendak yang Tuhan kita tunjukkan di sini tetap dipraktekkan demi kepentingan umatNya yang percaya. Mereka tidak punya kebutuhan tentang kehadiran-Nya secara jasmani untuk menyokong / mempertahankan kepentingan mereka. Mereka tidak punya alasan untuk kecil hati karena mereka tidak bisa melihatNya dengan mata mereka menengahi / membela mereka, atau menyentuh Dia dengan tangan mereka, supaya mereka bisa berpegang teguh kepada Dia untuk keamanan / keselamatan. Jika Ia ‘menghendaki’ keselamatan mereka dan suplai harian dari semua kebutuhan rohani mereka, mereka sama aman dan diberi persediaan dengan baik seakan-akan mereka melihat Dia berdiri di dekat mereka. Kehendak Kristus sama berkuasa dan efektifnya seperti tindakan Kristus. Kehendak Dia yang bisa berkata kepada Bapa, ‘Aku mau / menghendaki supaya mereka yang telah Engkau berikan kepadaKu ada bersama Aku dimana Aku berada’, adalah suatu kehendak yang mempunyai semua kuasa di surga dan di bumi, dan pasti menang / berhasil. (Yohanes 17:24).] - ‘Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: John vol I’ (Libronix).

7) Kapan persisnya, dan di mana persisnya, mujizat itu terjadi.

Ada 2 pandangan tentang hal ini:

a) Mujizat itu terjadi pada saat air dicedok, dan hanya air yang dicedok yang berubah menjadi anggur.

Adam Clarke: “A question has been asked, ‘Did our Lord turn all the water into wine which the six measures contained?’ To which I answer: There is no proof that he did; and I take it for granted that he did not. It may be asked, ‘How could a part be turned into wine, and not the whole?’ To which I answer: The water, in all likelihood, was changed into wine as it was drawn out, and not otherwise. ... Our Lord does not appear to have furnished any extra quantity, but only what was necessary.” [= Suatu pertanyaan telah ditanyakan, ‘Apakah Tuhan kita mengubah semua air yang ada dalam enam tempayan menjadi anggur?’ Terhadap mana saya menjawab: Di sana tidak ada bukti bahwa Ia melakukannya; dan saya menganggap bahwa Ia tidak melakukannya. Mungkin ditanyakan, ‘Bagaimana bisa sebagian berubah menjadi anggur, dan bukan seluruhnya?’ Terhadap mana saya menjawab: Air itu, sangat mungkin, diubah menjadi anggur pada saat itu dicedok, dan yang lain tidak. ... Tuhan kita tidak kelihatan telah memberi / menyuplai kwantitas yang berlebihan, tetapi hanya apa yang dibutuhkan.].

b) Mujizat itu terjadi di dalam tempayan-tempayan itu, antara ‘saat penuhnya tempayan-tempayan itu dengan air’ dan ‘saat pencedokan air (yang telah berubah menjadi anggur)’. Dan semua air di dalam tempayan-tempayan itu berubah menjadi anggur.

Pulpit Commentary: “The miracle took place between the filling of the jars and their being drawn upon.” [= Mujizat itu terjadi di antara pemenuhan tempayan-tempayan dan dicedoknya mereka.].

J. C. Ryle: “‘And he saith … draw out now.’ It was at this moment, no doubt, that the miracle took place. By an act of will our Lord changed the contents of the water-pots. That which was poured in was water. That which was drawn out was wine.” [= ‘Dan Ia berkata ... cedoklah sekarang’. Pada saat inilah, tak diragukan, bahwa mujizat itu terjadi. Oleh suatu tindakan dari kehendak Tuhan kita mengubah isi dari tempayan-tempayan itu. Yang dicurahkan ke dalam tempayan-tempayan adalah air. Yang dicedok adalah anggur.] - ‘Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: John vol I’ (Libronix).

Pulpit Commentary: “we cannot evade the enormous capacity of the jars, and therefore the abundance of the gift thus provided. Various efforts have been made to reduce the extent of the provision; but the obvious implication of the narrative is that the six jars were the locale of the miracle. Dr. Moulton and Dr. Westcott suggest that these water-pots were filled with pure water, but that the wine was ‘drawn’ from the water-supply to which the servants had access, and that no more wine was provided than that which was borne to the governor of the feast. Others have supposed that simply the water drawn from the jars was transformed in the process. These suppositions make the entire reference to the water-pots extremely obscure and unnecessary.” [= kita tidak bisa menghindari kapasitas yang sangat besar dari tempayan-tempayan itu, dan karena itu kelimpahan dari pemberian yang disediakan dengan cara ini. Bermacam-macam usaha telah dibuat untuk menurunkan volume dari suplai itu; tetapi petunjuk tak langsung yang jelas dari cerita itu adalah bahwa enam tempayan itu adalah tempat terjadinya mujizat itu. Dr. Moulton dan Dr. Westcott mengusulkan bahwa tempayan-tempayan air itu dipenuhi dengan air murni, tetapi bahwa anggur yang ‘dicedok’ dari suplai air pada mana pelayan-pelayan mempunyai jalan masuk, dan bahwa tak ada lebih banyak anggur lagi yang disediakan dari pada yang dibawa kepada pemimpin pesta. Orang-orang lain telah menganggap bahwa hanya air yang dicedok dari tempayan-tempayan itu yang diubahkan dalam proses itu. Anggapan-anggapan ini membuat seluruh referensi dengan tempayan-tempayan air itu menjadi sangat kabur dan tidak perlu.].

Leon Morris (NICNT): “He does not even tell us how much water was changed into wine. It is usually held that it was all the water in the six waterpots, in which case Jesus was making a bountiful wedding gift to the couple, who were evidently poor. ... It is possible that John refers to the water actually drawn out ... On this view, however, it is hard to see a reason for mentioning the size of the pots.” [= Ia bahkan tidak memberi tahu kita berapa banyak air yang berubah menjadi anggur. Biasanya dipercaya / dianggap bahwa itu adalah semua air dalam enam tempayan-tempayan itu, dalam kasus mana Yesus membuat suatu hadiah pernikahan yang berlimpah-limpah kepada pasangan, yang secara jelas adalah miskin. ... Adalah mungkin bahwa Yohanes menunjuk / berbicara tentang air yang sungguh-sungguh dicedok ... Tetapi tentang pandangan ini, adalah sukar untuk melihat alasan untuk menyebutkan ukuran dari tempayan-tempayan itu.].

Saya berpendapat bahwa bantahan yang diberikan oleh Pulpit Commentary dan Leon Morris di atas sangat kuat. Kalau yang berubah menjadi anggur hanya air yang dicedok, maka tidak ada gunanya Yohanes menunjukkan volume yang besar dari 6 tempayan-tempayan itu.

8) Transubstantiation yang asli / sejati vs Transubstantiation yang abal-abal.

Kata ‘transubstantiation’ artinya ‘a change of substance’ [= perubahan zat].

Dalam mujizat yang Yesus lakukan betul-betul terjadi perubahan zat dari air menjadi anggur. Dalam transubstantiation yang asli / sejati ini rasa (dan pasti juga bau, penampilan dsb) dari air itu juga ikut berubah menjadi rasa (dan pasti juga bau, penampilan dsb) dari anggur.

Yohanes 2: 9-10: “(9) Setelah pemimpin pesta itu mengecap air, yang telah menjadi anggur itu - dan ia tidak tahu dari mana datangnya, tetapi pelayan-pelayan, yang mencedok air itu, mengetahuinya - ia memanggil mempelai laki-laki, (10) dan berkata kepadanya: ‘Setiap orang menghidangkan anggur yang baik dahulu dan sesudah orang puas minum, barulah yang kurang baik; akan tetapi engkau menyimpan anggur yang baik sampai sekarang.’”.

Jelas-jelas pemimpin pesta itu mengecap, dan merasakan itu sebagai anggur, bahkan anggur yang sangat baik! Ini transubstantiation yang sungguh-sungguh!

Tetapi dalam komuni / ekaristi yang dilakukan oleh Gereja Roma Katolik (juga Gereja Orthodox, dan Anglikan), dipercayai oleh mereka juga terjadi transubstantiation / perubahan zat dari roti dan anggur menjadi tubuh dan darah Kristus, tetapi accidents-nya (penampilan, bau, rasa dsb) tetap sama (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation).

Gereja Roma Katolik percaya bahwa pada saat pastor mengucapkan kata-kata bahasa Latin: “HOC EST CORPUS MEUM” [= This is my body / Inilah TubuhKu], roti dan anggur betul-betul berubah menjadi tubuh dan darah Kristus. Doktrin ini disebut TRANSUBSTANTIATION [= a change of substance / perubahan zat]. Doktrin ini mulai diajarkan pada abad ke 9 oleh seorang yang bernama Radbertus yang mengatakan bahwa pada saat Eucharist / Ekaristi (Perjamuan Kudus dalam Gereja Roma Katolik), terjadi suatu mujizat dimana roti dan anggur berubah menjadi tubuh dan darah Kristus. Transubstantiation menjadi dogma resmi pada tahun 1059 dan diproklamirkan oleh Paus Innocent III pada tahun 1215.

Teori Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274): “The substance of bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ during communion while the accidents (appear­ence, taste, smell) remain the same.” [= Zat dari roti dan anggur berubah menjadi tubuh dan darah Kristus pada saat komuni, sementara accidentsnya (penampilannya / kelihatannya, rasanya, baunya) tetap sama.].

Ini transubstantiation yang abal-abal.

Barnes’ Notes: “This is declared by the sacred writer to be a ‘miracle’ - that is, an exertion of divine power, producing a change of the substance of water into wine, which no human power could do.” [= Ini dinyatakan oleh penulis kudus sebagai suatu ‘mukjizat’ - yaitu suatu usaha / aktivitas dari kuasa ilahi, menghasilkan suatu perubahan zat dari air menjadi anggur, yang tak ada kuasa manusia bisa lakukan.].

Pulpit Commentary: “The new properties presented themselves to the percipient senses. In this respect the transformation is profoundly different from the supposed change which occurs in the Holy Eucharist. There the accidents and elements all remain; the substantia underlying them is supposed to be replaced by another substantia; but neither the one nor the other substance has ever been present to the senses. Here a new substance, with previously undiscovered attributes, presents itself.” [= Sifat-sifat dasar yang baru menunjukkan / menyatakan diri mereka sendiri kepada indera-indera dari orang yang menerima / merasakan. Dalam hal ini perubahan itu sangat berbeda dari perubahan yang dianggap terjadi dalam Ekaristi Kudus. Di sana ‘accidents’ dan elemen-elemen semua tetap; zat yang ada di bawah mereka dianggap digantikan oleh zat yang lain; tetapi baik zat yang satu ataupun zat yang lain tidak pernah ada bagi indera-indera. Di sini suatu zat yang baru, dengan sifat-sifat dasar yang tadinya tak ada, menyatakan dirinya sendiri.].

Catatan: ‘accidents’ menunjuk pada penampilan / kelihatannya, baunya, dan rasanya.

J. C. Ryle: “Let the word ‘tasted’ be carefully noticed in this place. It supplies a strong incidental argument against the Romish doctrine of transubstantiation. The occasion before us is the only known occasion on which our Lord changed one liquid into another. When He did so change it, the reality of the change was at once proved by the ‘taste.’ Why is it then that in the pretended change of the sacramental wine in the Lord’s Supper into Christ’s blood the change cannot be detected by the senses? Why does the wine after consecration taste like wine, just as it did before? - These are questions which the Roman Catholics cannot satisfactorily answer. The pretended change of the bread and wine in the Lord’s Supper is a complete delusion. It is contradicted by the senses of every communicant. The bread after consecration is still bread, and the wine is still wine. That which contradicts our senses we are nowhere required in God’s Word to believe.” [= Hendaklah kata ‘mengecap’ diperhatikan dengan seksama di tempat ini. Itu menyuplai suatu argumentasi yang menyertai yang kuat terhadap / menentang doktrin transubstantiation dari Gereja Roma Katolik. Kejadian di depan kita ini adalah satu-satunya kejadian yang diketahui dimana Tuhan kita mengubah satu cairan menjadi cairan yang lain. Pada waktu Ia melakukan perubahan itu, realita dari perubahan itu segera terbukti oleh ‘rasa’nya. Lalu mengapa bahwa dalam perubahan yang diakui secara palsu dari anggur sakramen dalam Perjamuan Kudus menjadi darah Kristus, perubahannya tidak bisa dideteksi oleh indera-indera? Mengapa anggur setelah upacara pengudusan terasa seperti anggur, sama seperti rasanya sebelumnya? - Ini adalah pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang orang-orang Roma Katolik tidak bisa menjawab dengan memuaskan. Perubahan yang diakui secara palsu dari roti dan anggur dalam Perjamuan Kudus adalah suatu pandangan / kepercayaan palsu / menyesatkan sepenuhnya. Itu bertentangan dengan indera-indera dari setiap peserta komuni. Roti setelah upacara pengudusan tetap adalah roti, dan anggur tetap adalah anggur. Tak ada dimanapun dalam Firman Allah kita disuruh untuk mempercayai apa yang bertentangan dengan indera-indera kita.] - ‘Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: John vol I’ (Libronix).

Matthew Henry: “The miracle itself was turning water into wine; the substance of water acquiring a new form, and having all the accidents and qualities of wine. Such a transformation is a miracle; but the popish transubstantiation, the substance changed, the accidents remaining the same, is a monster.” [= Mujizat itu sendiri mengubah air menjadi anggur; zat dari air mendapatkan bentuk yang baru, dan mempunyai semua penampilan, bau, rasa dan kwalitet dari anggur. Perubahan seperti itu adalah suatu mujizat; tetapi transubstantiation yang berhubungan dengan Gereja Roma Katolik, zatnya berubah, tetapi penampilan, bau, rasa tetap sama, adalah suatu monster / sesuatu yang menimbulkan kejijikan.].

Di bawah ini saya memberikan kutipan-kutipan dari para ahli theologia / penafsir Reformed, Wikipedia, ahli sejarah, dan dari sumber-sumber Gereja Roma Katolik sendiri, berkenaan dengan doktrin transubstantiation dari Gereja Roma Katolik.

Catatan: saya tidak memberi terjemahan, kecuali bagian yang saya beri garis bawah dan warna biru dan merah.

Loraine Boettner: “According to Roman teaching, in the sacrifice of the mass the bread and wine are changed by the power of the priest at the time of consecration into the actual body and blood of Christ.” [= ] - ‘Roman Catholicism’, hal 169-170.

Loraine Boettner: “The Roman Church acknowledges that in the mass there is no visible change in the bread and wine, that they continue to have the same properties: the same taste, color, smell, weight, and dimensions. It should be sufficient to refute this doctrine to point out that it involves an impossibility. It is impossible that the attributes or sensible properties of bread and wine should remain if the substance has been changed. It is self-evident that if the attributes of flesh and blood are not there, the actual flesh and blood are not there. When Jesus changed the water into wine at Cana of Galilee, there was no question but that it was wine. It had the properties of wine. But since the bread and wine in the eucharist do not have the attributes of flesh and blood, it is absurd to say that any such change has taken place. That which contradicts our reason must be pronounced irrational. Yet the adherents of Rome, under threat of eternal condemnation, are forced to believe what their church tells them, even though it contradicts their senses. The effect cannot be other than detrimental when men are forced to accept as true that which they know to be false.” [= Pada waktu Yesus mengubah air menjadi anggur di Kana dari Galilea, disana tidak ada pertanyaan / keraguan bahwa itu adalah anggur. Itu mempunyai sifat dasar / kwalitet / ciri-ciri dari anggur. Tetapi karena roti dan anggur dalam ekaristi tidak mempunyai sifat dasar / kwalitet / ciri-ciri dari daging dan darah, adalah konyol / menggelikan untuk mengatakan bahwa ada perubahan apapun seperti itu yang telah terjadi.] - ‘Roman Catholicism’, hal 178-179.

Louis Berkhof: “1. The view of Rome. The Church of Rome conceives of the sacramental union in a physical sense. ... When the priest utters the formula, ‘HOC EST CORPUS MEUM’, bread and wine change into the body and blood of Christ. It is admitted that even after the change the elements look and taste like bread and wine. While the substance of both is changed, their properties remain the same. In the form of bread and wine the physical body and blood of Christ are present.” [= ] - ‘Systematic Theology’, hal 652.

Charles Hodge: “Christ is present in this ordinance, not spiritually as taught by the Reformed, nor by the real presence of his body and blood in, with, and under the bread and wine, but by the bread and wine being by the almighty power of God changed into his body and blood. As at the feast in Cana of Galilee, the water was changed into wine, so in the eucharist, the bread and wine are changed into, and remain the body and blood of Christ.” [= ] - ‘Systematic Theology’, Vol III, hal 678-679.

Lalu ia beri 11 point keputusan Sidang Gereja Trent tentang hal ini (dalam bahasa Latin!!).

Charles Hodge: “From this statement it appears, first, as concerns the elements of bread and wine, that in and by the act of consecration, their whole substance is changed. Nothing of the substance or essence of either remains. The accidents, or sensible properties, however, continue as they were. The form, colour, taste, odour, the specific gravity, their chemical affinities, and their nutritive qualities remain the same. So far as the senses, chemical analysis, and physics are concerned or are to be trusted, no change has taken place. As the sensible properties of the bread and wine do not and cannot inhere in the substance of Christ’s body and blood, and as their own substance no longer exists, those properties do not inhere in any substance.” [= ] - ‘Systematic Theology’, Vol III, hal 680.

A. H. Strong: “Mat. 26:28 - ‘This is my blood.…which is poured out,’ cannot be meant to be taken literally, since Christ’s blood was not yet shed. Hence the Douay version (Roman Catholic), without warrant, changes the tense and reads, ‘which shall be shed.’.” [= Matius 26:28 - Ini adalah darahKu ... yang dicurahkan’, tidak bisa dimaksudkan untuk diartikan secara hurufiah, karena darah Kristus belum dicurahkan. Karena itu Versi Douay (Roma Katolik), tanpa otoritas / dasar, mengubah tensa dan berbunyi / menuliskan, ‘yang akan dicurahkan.’.] - ‘Systematic Theology’, hal 965.

Wikipedia: “Transubstantiation (Latin: TRANSUBSTANTIATIO; Greek: μετουσίωσις METOUSIOSIS) is, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, "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 the Blood of Christ. ... However, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the ‘eucharistic species’, remain unaltered."” [= ] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Wikipedia: “The Roman Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharistic offering bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ. The affirmation of this doctrine was expressed, using the word ‘transubstantiate’, by the Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215.” [= ] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Wikipedia: “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.” [= ] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Wikipedia: “In 1551, the Council of Trent declared that the doctrine of transubstantiation is a dogma of faith 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.’ 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 only of the bread and wine remaining – which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation’.” [= ] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Wikipedia: “The Church’s teaching is given in the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church in question and answer form: 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.” [= ] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Wikipedia: “In the arguments which characterised the relationship between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism in the 16th century, the Council of Trent declared subject to the ecclesiastical penalty of anathema anyone who 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 (... and anyone who) saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth 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 only of the bread and wine remaining - which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation, let him be anathema.” [= Sidang Gereja Trent menyatakan ada di bawah hukuman kutukan gerejani siapapun yang menyangkal, bahwa, dalam sakramen Ekaristi yang paling kudus, tercakup dengan benar, sungguh-sungguh dan secara hakiki, tubuh dan darah bersama-sama dengan jiwa dan keilahian dari Tuhan kita Yesus Kristus, dan karena itu seluruh Kristus; ... dan menyangkal bahwa perubahan yang ajaib / mengherankan dan unik / luar biasa dari seluruh zat dari roti menjadi Tubuh, dan dari seluruh zat dari anggur menjadi Darah - hanya ‘accidents’ {= penampilan, bau, rasa} dari roti dan anggur tetap tinggal - perubahan mana memang Gereja Katolik secara paling tepat menyebut Transubstantiation, hendaklah ia dikutuk / terkutuk.] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Catatan: perhatikan kata yang saya beri warna biru dalam kutipan di atas. Kata ‘species’ saya terjemahkan ‘accidents’, karena alasan di bawah ini.

Wikipedia: “The philosophical term ‘accidents’ does not appear in the teaching of the Council of Trent on transubstantiation, which is repeated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. For what the Council distinguishes from the ‘substance’ of the bread and wine it uses the term ‘species’:” [= Istilah yang bersifat filsafat ‘accidents’ tidak muncul dalam pengajaran dari Sidang Gereja Trent tentang transubstantiation, yang diulangi dalam Katekisasi Gereja Katolik. Karena apa yang Sidang Gereja itu bedakan dari ‘zat’ dari roti dan anggur ia menggunakan istilah ‘species’:] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Wikipedia: “The Catholic Church asserts that the consecrated bread and wine are not merely ‘symbols’ of the body and blood of Christ: they are the body and blood of Christ. It also declares that, although the bread and wine completely cease to be bread and wine (having become the body and blood of Christ), the appearances (the ‘species’ or look) remain unchanged, and the properties of the appearances also remain (one can be drunk with the appearance of wine despite it only being an appearance). They are still the appearances of bread and wine, not of Christ, and do not inhere in the substance of Christ. They can be felt and tasted as before, and are subject to change and can be destroyed. If the appearance of bread is lost by turning to dust or the appearance of wine is lost by turning to vinegar, Christ is no longer present.” [= (seseorang bisa jadi mabuk dengan penampilan dari anggur, sekalipun itu hanya suatu penampilan) ... Jika penampilan dari roti hilang karena berubah menjadi debu atau penampilan dari anggur hilang karena berubah menjadi cuka, Kristus tidak lagi hadir.] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

David Schaff: “The fullest and clearest presentation of the eucharist was made by Thomas Aquinas. He discussed it in every possible aspect. Where Scripture is silent and Augustine uncertain, the Schoolman’s speculative ability, though often put to a severe test, is never at a loss.” [= ] - ‘History of the Christian Church’, vol V, pasal 115, hal 713 (Libronix).

David Schaff: “The culminating point in the history of the mediaeval doctrine of the eucharist was the dogmatic definition of transubstantiation by the Fourth Lateran Council, 1215. Thenceforth it was heresy to believe anything else.” [= Sejak saat itu dan seterusnya adalah kesesatan / bidat untuk mempercayai apapun yang lain.] - ‘History of the Christian Church’, vol V, pasal 115, hal 714 (Libronix).

Catatan: tentang ‘the Fourth Lateran Council’ ini lihat dalam link ini: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Council_of_the_Lateran

David Schaff: “At the moment of priestly consecration, the elements of bread and wine are converted into the very body and blood of Christ. The substance of the bread and wine disappears. The ‘accidents’ - species sensibiles - remain, such as taste, color, dimensions, and weight. What becomes of the substance of the two elements? asks Peter the Lombard. ... The Lombard, Bonaventura, and Thomas Aquinas adopted the view that the substance is converted into the body and blood of Christ.” [= ] - ‘History of the Christian Church’, vol V, pasal 115, hal 715 (Libronix).

‘Catechism of the Catholic Church’ (1992):

“1376 The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: ‘Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, 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.’” [= bahwa oleh pengudusan dari roti dan anggur disana terjadi suatu perubahan dari seluruh zat dari roti menjadi zat dari tubuh Kristus Tuhan kita dan dari seluruh zat dari anggur menjadi zat dari darahNya. Perubahan ini Gereja Katolik yang kudus secara cocok dan tepat telah menyebut transubstantiation’.].

“1377 The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.” [= Kristus hadir secara utuh dan sepenuhnya dalam setiap dari elemen ekaristi itu (roti dan anggur) dan utuh dan sepenuhnya dalam setiap bagian-bagian mereka, dengan cara sedemikian rupa sehingga pemecahan roti tidak memecah Kristus.].

“1378 Worship of the Eucharist. In the liturgy of the Mass we express our faith in the real presence of Christ under the species of bread and wine by, among other ways, genuflecting or bowing deeply as a sign of adoration of the Lord. ‘The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers to the sacrament of the Eucharist the cult of adoration, not only during Mass, but also outside of it, reserving the consecrated hosts with the utmost care, exposing them to the solemn veneration of the faithful, and carrying them in procession.’” [= Penyembahan dalam Ekaristi. Dalam liturgi dari Misa kami menyatakan iman kami pada kehadiran yang sungguh-sungguh dari Kristus di bawah elemen-elemen Ekaristi dari roti dan anggur, di antara cara-cara yang lain, penekukan satu atau kedua lutut atau membungkuk secara dalam sebagai suatu tanda pemujaan Tuhan.].

Baca Juga: Yesus Mengubah Air Menjadi Anggur (Yohanes 2:7-8)

“1379 The tabernacle was first intended for the reservation of the Eucharist in a worthy place so that it could be brought to the sick and those absent outside of Mass. As faith in the real presence of Christ in his Eucharist deepened, the Church became conscious of the meaning of silent adoration of the Lord present under the Eucharistic species. It is for this reason that the tabernacle should be located in an especially worthy place in the church and should be constructed in such a way that it emphasizes and manifests the truth of the real presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.” [= ].

“1380 It is highly fitting that Christ should have wanted to remain present to his Church in this unique way. Since Christ was about to take his departure from his own in his visible form, he wanted to give us his sacramental presence; since he was about to offer himself on the cross to save us, he wanted us to have the memorial of the love with which he loved us ‘to the end,’even to the giving of his life. In his Eucharistic presence he remains mysteriously in our midst as the one who loved us and gave himself up for us, and he remains under signs that express and communicate this love: The Church and the world have a great need for Eucharistic worship. Jesus awaits us in this sacrament of love. Let us not refuse the time to go to meet him in adoration, in contemplation full of faith, and open to making amends for the serious offenses and crimes of the world. Let our adoration never cease.” [= ].

“1381 "That in this sacrament are the true Body of Christ and his true Blood is something that ‘cannot be apprehended by the senses,’ says St. Thomas, ‘but only by faith, which relies on divine authority.’ For this reason, in a commentary on Luke 22:19 (‘This is my body which is given for you.’), St. Cyril says: ‘Do not doubt whether this is true, but rather receive the words of the Savior in faith, for since he is the truth, he cannot lie.’" Godhead here in hiding, whom I do adore Masked by these bare shadows, shape and nothing more, See, Lord, at thy service low lies here a heart Lost, all lost in wonder at the God thou art. Seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived; How says trusty hearing? that shall be believed; What God’s Son has told me, take for truth I do; Truth himself speaks truly or there’s nothing true.” [= "Bahwa dalam sakramen ini ada tubuh Kristus yang sungguh-sungguh dan darahNya yang sungguh-sungguh merupakan sesuatu yang ‘tidak bisa dimengerti oleh pengertian / pikiran’, kata Santo Thomas, ‘tetapi hanya oleh iman, yang bersandar / berdasarkan pada otoritas Ilahi’.].

Catatan: yang dimaksudkan dengan Santo Thomas adalah Thomas Aquinas. Ini bisa terlihat dari catatan kaki yang ada dalam ‘Catechism of the Catholic Church’ ini.
Next Post Previous Post