Christianity – Religious practices

Here is an evaluation of the Eucharistic practice of the Middle Ages. Précis the gist of the argument in one sentence.

<p>The classic tradition of the eucharist suffered from two unintended consequences. The first was the substitution of adoration of the bread and wine for the reception. To a very large extent congregations were spectators at the Eucharist, going about their own devotions, ignorant of the meaning of the Latin words being said by the priest. But once the miraculous transubstantiation had taken place, the congregation understood itself to be in the very presence of Christ himself, to whom devotion and adoration must be paid. Second, frequency of participation in communion declined to the point where the majority of Christians came no more than once a year at the prescribed time of Easter. Thus the Eucharist lost a considerable measure of its effectiveness as a sign of social solidarity in the body of Christ. Indeed, its social significance could plausibly be construed in quite another manner, as a means whereby a clerical caste exercised power in the context of chronic controversies with secular authority.</p>

<p>Source: Christian Theology, ed Peter Hodgson and Robert King (SPCK, 2008:281)</p>

The Eucharist suffered two problems due to the emphasis on transubstantiation: people came to look rather than join in, and they came to communion less and less often, until it became a once yearly event.