Another Question About Transubstantiation

[Hope1960]

When we eat Jesus’ body are we actually eating his hair, toes, hands etc? Please include a source for your reply.

 

[LateranBasilica]

Is there a source for your question? Do you have a quote besides the Eucharist is Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

 

[Rob2]

@Hope1960 , how do you understand the term you use in the title , namely “Transubstantiation” ?

I know it involves using terms like “substance” and “accidents” borrowed from Aristotle . But I know little of Aristotelian philosophy , and the language used doesn’t help me .

I am left wondering what Jesus means when he says “This bread is my body and this wine is my blood .”

Jesus can be a liar , deluded or truthful .

When he says "I am the Truth " I believe him . So I also believe his words , but I don’t understand them . I take them as truthful .

What he says is beyond my understanding , and as the Catechism says , “The signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ.”

I prefer to leave it at that .

I will say though , in relation to your question , that it appears to presume a physical rather than a sacramental presence of Jesus .

Anyway , back to what I was saying . I like this translation of the hymn Adoro te devote by the Jesuit Gerard Manley Hopkins . His words best express how I believe :

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.

On the cross thy godhead made no sign to men,
Here thy very manhood steals from human ken:
Both are my confession, both are my belief,
And I pray the prayer of the dying thief.

I am not like Thomas, wounds I cannot see,
But can plainly call thee Lord and God as he;
Let me to a deeper faith daily nearer move,
Daily make me harder hope and dearer love.

 

[Gorgias]

When we eat Jesus’ body are we actually eating his hair, toes, hands etc?

No.

Please include a source for your reply.

From Mysterium Fidei, by Pope Paul VI:

what now lies beneath the aforementioned species is not what was there before, but something completely different; and not just in the estimation of Church belief but in reality, since once the substance or nature of the bread and wine has been changed into the body and blood of Christ, nothing remains of the bread and the wine except for the species—beneath which Christ is present whole and entire in His physical “reality,” corporeally present, although not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.

Although Christ is present, it is “not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.” So… no hair, toes, hands.

 

[fide]

Hi Gorgias - can you explain how you get from
“not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.”
to conclude,
“So… no hair, toes, hands.”?

 

[Hope1960]

Although Christ is present, it is “not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.” So… no hair, toes, hands.

Thanks! I read something on CA that said the opposite, but I can’t find it now. I trust your source over the other, anyway,

 

[Rob2]

Thanks @Gorgias for reminding me of Pope Paul VI’s Mysterium Fidei .

The language of some of which you quote puzzles me .

" nothing remains of the bread and the wine except for the species—beneath which Christ is present whole and entire in His physical “reality,” corporeally present, although not in the manner in which bodies are in a place. "

I don’t understand the part I have put in bold type .

What is meant when it says that Christ is not present in the manner in which bodies are in a place ?

Saying that Christ is not present in the manner in which bodies are in a place appears to contradict that Christ is present whole and entire in His physical “reality,” corporeally present .

What am I missing ?

 

[Gorgias]

Hi Gorgias - can you explain how you get from
“not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.”
to conclude,
“So… no hair, toes, hands.”?

See Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae, Third Part, Question 76, Article 5.

 

[Wesrock]

Thanks @Gorgias for reminding me of Pope Paul VI’s Mysterium Fidei .

The language of some of which you quote puzzles me .

" nothing remains of the bread and the wine except for the species—beneath which Christ is present whole and entire in His physical “reality,” corporeally present, although not in the manner in which bodies are in a place. "

I don’t understand the part I have put in bold type .

What is meant when it says that Christ is not present in the manner in which bodies are in a place ?

Saying that Christ is not present in the manner in which bodies are in a place appears to contradict that Christ is present whole and entire in His physical “reality,” corporeally present .

What am I missing ?

The manner in which bodies are normally present is that they can be divided. I can separate arm from torso, foot from leg, etc… The Eucharist is not that way. Every particle under the appearance of bread and wine in the Eucharist is Christ’s person totally. You can break the bread and it doesn’t change that. Bodies are also normally localized, but Christ is wholly present in heaven, is fully present at your parish, is fully present at a parish on the other side of the world, etc… again, neither divided nor localized in the same manner under the miracle of the Eucharist. The amount of Christ we receive is not restricted to the size of the host, either. And when we consume the Eucharist, we consume the accidents of bread and wine, not the accidents typically associated with the body.

@Gorgias, since we receive Christ fully, I don’t think we can say we don’t consume specifics, unless you have another source. But we can day what I wrote above.

 

[Wesrock]

fide:

Hi Gorgias - can you explain how you get from
“not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.”
to conclude,
“So… no hair, toes, hands.”?

See Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae, Third Part, Question 76, Article 5.

Will do. 10 char.

 

[Gorgias]

What is meant when it says that Christ is not present in the manner in which bodies are in a place ?

Saying that Christ is not present in the manner in which bodies are in a place appears to contradict that Christ is present whole and entire in His physical “reality,” corporeally present .

What am I missing ?

The question boils down to what “the manner in which bodies are in a place” means. There are many aspects to this assertion (and St Thomas deals with them in the Summa), but one of these aspects is that bodies are composite (i.e., made up of parts).

Christ is present in the Eucharist sacramentally. This means that there aren’t “parts” of Christ present in the Eucharist (if so, then you’d be able to break off a piece of host and say ‘look! a finger!’). Rather, each particle of the Eucharist is the entire Christ – body, blood, soul and divinity, present in sacramental mode.

Therefore, ‘present’, but not ‘as bodies are in a place.’

 

[JimG]

From the writings of Fr. John Hardon:

“Jesus is therefore in the Blessed Sacrament "whole and entire: the Soul, the Body and Blood of Christ, with all their component parts.”

Fr. Hardon’s discussion of the Eucharist can be found here:

http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Eucharist/Eucharist_005.htm

There is also this from Fr. Hardon:

“Christ is present in the Eucharist not only with everything that makes Him man, but with all that makes Him this human being. He is therefore present with all His physical properties, hands and feet and head and human heart. He is present with His human soul, with His thoughts, desires and human affections. He becomes present in the Eucharist by means of transubstantiation.”

 

[Gorgias]

@JimG: Yes, but in His substance, not in the members themselves, physically present in the way we are. And so, sacramentally, not in the physical mode.

We wouldn’t want to suggest that Christ is somehow incomplete in the Eucharist, but we also wouldn’t want to give the impression that there are physical parts floating around in the chalice, which is what the worry is, here.

 

[JimG]

Yes, Christ is fully present whole and entire, including his corporeal human presence. We do not perceive his accidents, we only perceive the accidents of bread and wine. Accidents are those things which are perceptible to the senses. Location is also an accident. So we do not perceive him as located in a location.

I had a man once tell me that he had trouble believing that the Eucharistic host was a little piece of Jesus. I told him, “It’s not. It’s all of Jesus.”

 

[JimG]

Yes, Jesus’ presence is not like ours. We are present as in a location, with our various parts distributed over a space. Jesus’ presence in the Eucharist is not the same. We do not perceive the accident of location. His presence is unitary. When we break the host in two, or four or more pieces, he is wholly present in each part of the host, whose accidents we can perceive.

 

[Gorgias]

We are present as in a location

You’re talking about the ‘dimensive quality’. Aquinas does, too. He asserts that the Eucharist really does have dimensive quality. Yet, it’s not the dimensive quality of parts (such as fingers, toes, eyeballs). It takes on the dimensive quality of the species of bread and wine, whose accidents remain.

 

[JimG]

Exactly so. We perceive the dimensive quality of bread and wine since it is only those accidents of bread and wine that we can perceive in the Eucharist.

 

[Gorgias]

Exactly so. We perceive the dimensive quality of bread and wine since it is only those accidents of bread and wine that we can perceive in the Eucharist.

No, it’s more than that. It’s not just “limited perception”. It’s that this is the dimensive quality present in the Eucharist – no more, no less.

 

[Richca]

JimG:

We are present as in a location

You’re talking about the ‘dimensive quality’. Aquinas does, too. He asserts that the Eucharist really does have dimensive quality. Yet, it’s not the dimensive quality of parts (such as fingers, toes, eyeballs). It takes on the dimensive quality of the species of bread and wine, whose accidents remain.

It’s not dimensive quality but dimensive quantity. Dimensions belong to the accident of quantity not to the accident of quality. As you can see, Aquinas speaks of dimensive quantity, not dimensive quality.

The whole body of Christ including all its parts are substantially present in the eucharist. In the first article of question 76, Aquinas addresses the question ‘Whether the Whole Christ is Contained Under the Sacrament?’
Aquinas answers in the affirmative. See the reply to objection 2 where Aquinas says that by the power of the sacrament the entire body of Christ with all its parts is present or contained under the sacrament which is apparent from the very form or words of the sacrament, namely, ‘This is my body’, i.e., not this or that part of Christ’s body but the entire body of Christ.

The substance of Christ’s body is his entire body with all its parts and it is to this that the substance of the bread changes into in transubstantiation at the consecration at Mass. Dimensive quantity is an accident of substance which extends the material parts of a substance from one another locally in space. The power of the sacrament as Aquinas says terminates at the substance of Christ’s body and so the substance of the bread is changed into the substance of Christ’s body but the dimensive quantity of the bread does not change into the dimensive quantity of Christ’s body or any of the other accidents of the bread which is evident after the consecration of the bread. Nevertheless, as Aquinas says in article 4 of question 76, the whole dimensive quantity and all of the other accidents of Christ’s body are substantially present in the eucharist, i.e., not in the proper manner of an accident (visibly) but after the manner of substance (invisibly).

 

[fide]

Thank you.
We know the substance of Christ is present in the Holy Eucharist:
Catechism 1374 The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique. It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as “the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend.”<St. Thomas Aquinas, STh III, 73, 3c> In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist “the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained.”<Council of Trent (1551): DS 1651>

Referring to St. Thomas (in : Summa Theologiae > Third Part > Question 76):
St. Thomas affirms that “the entire dimensive quantity of Christ’s body is in this sacrament.”
and also, " the accidents of Christ’s body are in this sacrament by real concomitance. And therefore those accidents of Christ’s body which are intrinsic to it are in this sacrament."

Does this not include all natural, normal parts and members of the human body?

Those from St. Thomas (in : Summa Theologiae > Third Part > Question 76):

Art. 4 - The existence of the dimensive quantity of any body cannot be separated from the existence of its substance. But in this sacrament the entire substance of Christ’s body is present, as stated above (Article 1, Article 3). Therefore the entire dimensive quantity of Christ’s body is in this sacrament.
and
Art 5 - As stated above (Article 4), the accidents of Christ’s body are in this sacrament by real concomitance. And therefore those accidents of Christ’s body which are intrinsic to it are in this sacrament.