Eucharist and Alchemy

[Gillian]

After the recent thread regarding secret teachings and apparent unavailability to mankind, I decided to revisit "The Alchemist." I have read this book at least three times and have listened to the audio book more often than I can count.

In the book, there is quite a bit of discussion about the Philosopher's Stone and The Elixir of Life. Is the Eucharist, in truth, about, or metaphorical for, these two items?

Thanks, sorry, I am not Catholic and do not want to offend anybody here by asking this.

If the person who asked about secret teachings reads this, I highly recommend reading (Coelho) "The Alchemist," if you have not already done this. It might help you along your path ...

[shaberon]

The Eucharist is not exclusive to Catholicism and not particularly original with any church (Dionysus had a similar rite).

What *is* original to the churches is transubstantiation, i. e. becoming the body/blood of someone, and consuming it is therefor beneficial on its own right.

See John XV: I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardner.

So, "my blood" is this wine, the wine being from the fruit of the true vine, and has more to do with the spread of truth from person to person. By comparison, alchemists worked mostly alone or with one apprentice to discover nature's truths, the limitless operations of the One Element. Abstractly, I suppose they are similar, although Jesus was more of a healer and these guys were more like scientists.

[DeDukshyn]

 
I don't know enough about Catholicism to answer your question well ...

I haven't read the Alchemist myself (but I do have it), but word came to me as highly regarded for those who need a clearer picture of their path.

[Kryztian]

I am a Roman Catholic and absolutely no offense taken, but as Shaberon points out, this is not merely a Catholic rite, but one for most Christians, especially Catholics, Orthodox, and Anglicans. It becomes a little less central in Protestant churches. While Catholics talk about "transubstantiation", other denominations do believe in the"Divine Presence": Eastern Orthodoxy thinks in terms of "Epiclesis" performed by the Holy Spirit, and Anglicans in "the real objective presence" or "consubstantiation" and Lutherans in "the sacramental union". Protestants who perform the Eucharist merely as a re-enactment of the Last Supper, but don't believe there is a qualitative change in the bread or wine are called "memorialists."

Another important "alchemical" event in Christianity is the Wedding at Cana, where Christ turned water into wine.

When Christ performed these transformations, he merely spoke a few words and the transformation occurred. But when a priest performs the Eucharist, there is the reading of mantras from a book, the use and manipulation of sacred objects (e.g. raising the cup, storing the bread in the Tabernacle, etc.), which is more like an alchemical event.

We usually think of alchemy as a medieval phenomena. Meanwhile, the Church had been practicing this rite of transformation for a millenium.

The dime store explanation for alchemy is that it is about the search for material, chemical transformation, especially about the transformation of base metals into gold.

In the Eucharist, even though physical objects are utilitized (bread and wine), it is about spiritual transformation:


Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty."
- - John 6:35

and we are talking about spiritual hunger and thirst. But many alchemists would also claim this is the true higher objective of alchemy as well.

[Gillian]

I did a stint in the Anglican Church when I was young -- want to say too young to know better, but think it was good for me to do -- so I realize that the Eucharist is celebrated in other denominations. I mentioned the Catholic Church because as a Christian ritual, it was part of the Catholic Church for centuries until the breakaway religions came along.

I understand the idea of the Eucharist and the story of the last supper is well known (I am not going to get into the did Jesus / Yeshua exist argument) and it seems to me that transubstantiation is alchemy at the human level or at least, an introduction to the common man of the idea of alchemy. I was wondering though, and this is because I understand that there are three layers of information in the New Testament including the storyline for the common man, a level that is aimed at say a novice Biblical / Christian student/scholar, and a level for the inner circle/initiates, if the Eucharist when looked at by somebody in the inner circle, is really about the Philosopher's Stone, the Elixir of Life, and immortality?

[Post-Structuralist Comet]

In the book, there is quite a bit of discussion about the Philosopher's Stone and The Elixir of Life. Is the Eucharist, in truth, about, or metaphorical for, these two items?
Thanks for this Gillian! Very interesting. Any chance of a brief description of what Coelho has to say about the connection? :)

Sort of related and I think interesting, I've seen (Medieval) alchemists draw a connection between alchemy and Christ's resurrection, but not with the Eucharist per se (though I haven't read much and my memory is terrible). These also seem to have a quite different purpose; they take alchemy to be reflective of Christ, rather than Christian theology as a metaphor for alchemy. As an example the anonymous alchemist pseudo-Arnald wrote that:


This art [alchemy] may be comprehended through His coming...for He is the example of all things. And our elixir may be understood according to the conception and generation and nativity and passion of Christ, and be compared to the predictions of the prophets...And on earth he suffered passion and underwent resurrection, and he visibly ascended from earth to heaven where he rested...Do understand how to deal with mercury following the example of Christ.
(quoted from Visualization in Medieval Alchemy by Barbara Obrist (http://www.hyle.org/journal/issues/9-2/obrist.htm), who goes on to explain that "Christ had suffered four passions, and so does mercury. Among others, mercury had to be put into to a coffin and it had to stay there just as Christ did, and so on.").

Similarly, Petrus Bonus thought that the parallels between alchemical procedures and the resurrection of Christ were so strong that anybody sufficiently familiar with alchemy would would come to believe in Christ:


Because of the insight which their Art gave to them, the Ancient Sages knew all about the resurrection of the body and the redeeming work of Jesus Christ, as also about the Trinity in Unity, and all the other verities of our faith. I am firmly persuaded that any unbeliever who got truly to know this Art, would straightway confess the truth of our Blessed Religion, and believe in the Trinity and in our Lord Jesus Christ. Such was the experience of Hermes, Plato, and other ancient Sages.
(quoted from The New Pearl of Great Price (https://archive.org/stream/newpearlofgreatp00laciiala/newpearlofgreatp00laciiala_djvu.txt)).

Like I said though, these have a very different direction to what you mentioned, so I'd love to hear more!

(I've just realised I know hardly anything about different views of the metaphysics of the Eucharist - need to get on that!).

[Gillian]

 

I haven't read the Alchemist myself (but I do have it), but word came to me as highly regarded for those who need a clearer picture of their path.

My son read The Alchemist for English 12 (U.S.) and he was struggling with it so I read it so that I could help him. It's a sweet book with lots of depth. I keep re-reading it to remind myself of some of the things I should be doing like enjoying life while dealing with two drops of olive oil on the spoon, and even the first story about Narcissus reminds me that I should be trying to see my own beauty. As for the information about alchemy; fascinating. I love the idea of trying to understand Planet Earth's soul.

[Gillian]

 
I don't know enough about Catholicism to answer your question well ...

I haven't read the Alchemist myself (but I do have it), but word came to me as highly regarded for those who need a clearer picture of their path.



In the book, there is quite a bit of discussion about the Philosopher's Stone and The Elixir of Life. Is the Eucharist, in truth, about, or metaphorical for, these two items?
Thanks for this Gillian! Very interesting. Any chance of a brief description of what Coelho has to say about the connection? :)

Sort of related and I think interesting, I've seen (Medieval) alchemists draw a connection between alchemy and Christ's resurrection, but not with the Eucharist per se (though I haven't read much and my memory is terrible). These also seem to have a quite different purpose; they take alchemy to be reflective of Christ, rather than Christian theology as a metaphor for alchemy. As an example the anonymous alchemist pseudo-Arnald wrote that:


This art [alchemy] may be comprehended through His coming...for He is the example of all things. And our elixir may be understood according to the conception and generation and nativity and passion of Christ, and be compared to the predictions of the prophets...And on earth he suffered passion and underwent resurrection, and he visibly ascended from earth to heaven where he rested...Do understand how to deal with mercury following the example of Christ.
(quoted from Visualization in Medieval Alchemy by Barbara Obrist (http://www.hyle.org/journal/issues/9-2/obrist.htm), who goes on to explain that "Christ had suffered four passions, and so does mercury. Among others, mercury had to be put into to a coffin and it had to stay there just as Christ did, and so on.").

Similarly, Petrus Bonus thought that the parallels between alchemical procedures and the resurrection of Christ were so strong that anybody sufficiently familiar with alchemy would would come to believe in Christ:


Because of the insight which their Art gave to them, the Ancient Sages knew all about the resurrection of the body and the redeeming work of Jesus Christ, as also about the Trinity in Unity, and all the other verities of our faith. I am firmly persuaded that any unbeliever who got truly to know this Art, would straightway confess the truth of our Blessed Religion, and believe in the Trinity and in our Lord Jesus Christ. Such was the experience of Hermes, Plato, and other ancient Sages.
(quoted from The New Pearl of Great Price (https://archive.org/stream/newpearlofgreatp00laciiala/newpearlofgreatp00laciiala_djvu.txt)).

Like I said though, these have a very different direction to what you mentioned, so I'd love to hear more!

(I've just realised I know hardly anything about different views of the metaphysics of the Eucharist - need to get on that!).

I have been going through The Alchemist -- something of a Diamond in Your Pocket Tale -- and will answer below.

[Gillian]

As I have rejected bifocals, I am using reading glasses to copy these quotes. Hence, I cannot see the computer screen very well.
I am using the HarperOne edition.

The first quote is on page 80: "The book that most interested the boy told the stories of the famous alchemists. They were men who had dedicated their entire lives to the purification of metals in their laboratories; they believed that, if a metal were heated for many years, it would free itself of all its individual properties, and what was left would be the Soul of the World. This Soul of the World allowed them to understand anything on the face of the earth, because it was the language with which all things communicated. They called that discovery the Master Work -- it was part liquid and part solid."

The second quote is on page 81: "The boy learned that the liquid part of the Master Work was called the Elixir of Life, and that it cured all illnesses; it also kept the alchemist from growing old. And the solid part was called the Philosopher's Stone.
'It's not easy to find the Philosopher's Stone,' said the Englishman. 'The alchemists spent years in their laboratories observing the fire that purified the metals. They spent so much time close to the fire that gradually they gave up the vanities of the world. They discovered that the purification of the metals had led to a purification of themselves.'"

The third quote from page 81: "'Also,' said the Englishman, 'the Philosopher's Stone has a fascinating property. A small sliver of the stone can transform large quantities of metal into gold.'"

I think this sounds very like what is really going on in the Eucharist. There is solid and liquid; bread and wine. We could argue that the point of the Eucharist is to transform the common man into something more Christlike: base metal into gold. What if the Master Work should read the Master's Work? A small sliver of bread or wafer supposedly upgrades the human receiving it.


I am wondering if the Eucharist is one of those secret things that the common man doesn't need to know about. I certainly can see an allegory.

[shaberon]

Allegory is the most basic level of symbolism: one thing stands for or represents another.

Bread, biblically, is knowledge...so "don't eat the bread of the Pharisees" (or whomever), don't swallow the knowledge they're feeding you. With Buddha, who was killed by pork, it wasn't the flesh of the pig but the "bread" of those Indian priests.

If bread & wine receives a blessing and is beneficial, it is the same process as any talismanic magic.

Immortality can only be the result of an "Alchemical Wedding", mind/soul to spirit. These types of allegories should be common knowledge. Medieval Alchemists or Natural Scientists had to veil it in different language, as did the Troubadors, etc., due to the church persecuting anyone who didn't follow it.

The church itself establishes false doctrines or poisoned bread. Itself having no scriptural basis. It takes the same things as the mysteries, alchemy, etc., and "rebrands" them into its own institution, which is why "secrets" are so obfuscated. Transubstantiation, virgin birth, vicarious atonement, indulgences, confession, sempiternity are some of the "rebrandings" that come to mind, whereas, to the extent they may be true, any claims by Jesus or the alchemists would have to amount to the same thing, same as the Dionysians of which the Eucharist is a pretty close plagiarism.

Once you weed out the superstitions and misunderstandings, it is all the same.