Clarifying the mode of Christ in the Eucharist

[bcirka]

Morning! I was listening to Catholic Answers today, and someone called in to ask how every recipient of the Eucharist on a Sunday takes a “little piece” of Christ. It got me to pondering the mode of his presence. Can someone help me work though something I’m stuck on? I’ll lay out key thoughts below.

1. The person of Christ contains both Divine and human natures.
2. Because of his human nature, Christ has a body and a soul.
3. The union of body and soul in Christ are in the hypostasis.
4. If Christ is fully present in the Eucharist, it seems to imply that he would be there substantially–in body and soul.

Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

Thanks for helping me clear my foggy Monday morning thoughts!

 

[Rob_Arnzen]

Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

The word “material” isn’t part of the Catholic belief in the Eucharist.

The word “substance” is.

Substance is that which a thing is. What we call material is that which a thing appears to be.

If you can see it, smell it, taste it, measure it - it’s material, and therefore appearance.

From the Council of Trent:

“For the apostles had not as yet received the Eucharist from the hand of the Lord, when nevertheless Himself affirmed with truth that to be His own body which He presented (to them). And this faith has ever been in the Church of God, that, immediately after the consecration, the veritable Body of our Lord, and His veritable Blood, together with His soul and divinity, are under the species of bread and wine; but the Body indeed under the species of bread, and the Blood under the species of wine, by the force of the words; but the body itself under the species of wine, and the blood under the species of bread, and the soul under both, by the force of that natural connexion and concomitancy whereby the parts of Christ our Lord, who hath now risen from the dead, to die no more, are united together; and the divinity, furthermore, on account of the admirable hypostatical union thereof with His body and soul. Wherefore it is most true, that as much is contained under either species as under both; for Christ whole and entire is under the species of bread, and under any part whatsoever of that species; likewise the whole (Christ) is under the species of wine, and under the parts thereof.”

So, the smallest particle contains the substance of Christ whole and entire.

.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Morning! I was listening to Catholic Answers today, and someone called in to ask how every recipient of the Eucharist on a Sunday takes a “little piece” of Christ. It got me to pondering the mode of his presence. Can someone help me work though something I’m stuck on? I’ll lay out key thoughts below.

1. The person of Christ contains both Divine and human natures.
2. Because of his human nature, Christ has a body and a soul.
3. The union of body and soul in Christ are in the hypostasis.
4. If Christ is fully present in the Eucharist, it seems to imply that he would be there substantially–in body and soul.

Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

Thanks for helping me clear my foggy Monday morning thoughts!

The answer is that this is a part of the Miracle of Transubstantiation. By His Divine Power Christ makes Himself Wholely Present in every crumb of the bread, every drop of the wine and in every consecrated host and cup throughout the whole world, at the same moment. He is God who created the universe, He has the power to perform this Miracle as well.

Linus2nd

 

[Richca]

Morning! I was listening to Catholic Answers today, and someone called in to ask how every recipient of the Eucharist on a Sunday takes a “little piece” of Christ. It got me to pondering the mode of his presence. Can someone help me work though something I’m stuck on? I’ll lay out key thoughts below.

1. The person of Christ contains both Divine and human natures.
2. Because of his human nature, Christ has a body and a soul.
3. The union of body and soul in Christ are in the hypostasis.
4. If Christ is fully present in the Eucharist, it seems to imply that he would be there substantially–in body and soul.

Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

Thanks for helping me clear my foggy Monday morning thoughts!

As Linusthe2nd says, it is simply a matter of our catholic faith in the miracle of transubstantiation and the power of God that Christ’s entire physical, material body is in every host and under every part of the host and that his material blood is in every chalice. Jesus’ body is not divided amongst multiple hosts so that each recipient of the Eucharist takes a little piece of Christ. The priest says to the communicant “The body of Christ,” and this means the entire material body of Christ, his flesh, bones, nerves, heart, etc. There is but one body of Christ and that one body of Christ is whole and entire in every host and under every part of the host along with his soul and divinity. How this is so is incomprehensible to us but we believe that it is not impossible to God. For Jesus said
“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink." (John 6: 53-55). And at the Last Supper, Jesus said “This is my body” and “This is my blood.”

 

[Richca]

Originally Posted by bcirka
Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

The word “material” isn’t part of the Catholic belief in the Eucharist.

The word “substance” is.

Substance is that which a thing is. What we call material is that which a thing appears to be.

If you can see it, smell it, taste it, measure it - it’s material, and therefore appearance.

From the Council of Trent:

“For the apostles had not as yet received the Eucharist from the hand of the Lord, when nevertheless Himself affirmed with truth that to be His own body which He presented (to them). And this faith has ever been in the Church of God, that, immediately after the consecration, the veritable Body of our Lord, and His veritable Blood, together with His soul and divinity, are under the species of bread and wine; but the Body indeed under the species of bread, and the Blood under the species of wine, by the force of the words; but the body itself under the species of wine, and the blood under the species of bread, and the soul under both, by the force of that natural connexion and concomitancy whereby the parts of Christ our Lord, who hath now risen from the dead, to die no more, are united together; and the divinity, furthermore, on account of the admirable hypostatical union thereof with His body and soul. Wherefore it is most true, that as much is contained under either species as under both; for Christ whole and entire is under the species of bread, and under any part whatsoever of that species; likewise the whole (Christ) is under the species of wine, and under the parts thereof.”

So, the smallest particle contains the substance of Christ whole and entire.
.

There are material substances such as bread, wine, the body and blood of Christ; and there are immaterial substances such as God, the angels, and human souls. Matter, together with the substantial form, belongs to the very substance of material substances. Consequently, the OP is correct in stating that the entire material body of Christ is substantially present in the consecrated host. The whole substance of the bread, i.e., the substantial form and matter, is converted into the whole substance of the body of Christ, i.e., the form and matter of the body of Christ and likewise the whole substance of the wine into the blood of Christ.

The accidents or appearances of the bread and wine which remain after the consecration of the bread and wine at Mass cannot properly be called material appearances as if these accidents or appearances are supported by the substances and matter of the bread and wine because the whole substances of the bread and wine which includes their matter no longer exists after the consecration. They have been converted into the body and blood of Christ. The accidents or appearances of the bread and wine remain by divine power without a subject, i.e., without a substance and without matter.

 

[thinkandmull]

“So, the smallest particle contains the substance of Christ whole and entire.” Aquinas believes that matter is infinitely divisible, therefore must there be an infinite number of Jesus’s by bilocation? Aquinas also says “substantial forms are not of themselves objects of the senses, for the object of the intellect is what a thing is, as is said De Anima iii, text 26”. I guess this is in accord with the Church’s understanding. So mustn’t we say that matter is nothing other than accidents attached to it’s substance, an immaterial thing?

 

[thinkandmull]

And I don’t think you can say that the bread and win exist without a subject. The subject is Jesus, otherwise we couldn’t look at the bread with true adoration

 

[Richca]

“So, the smallest particle contains the substance of Christ whole and entire.” Aquinas believes that matter is infinitely divisible, therefore must there be an infinite number of Jesus’s by bilocation?

Since the resurrection and ascension of Jesus into heaven, the body of Christ is not susceptible to division; it has been glorified and taken on incorruption and immortality. The one body of Christ in heaven is substantially present in every host and under every part of the host just as the whole substance or nature of bread before the consecration and the transubstantiation was in the whole host and under every part of it. You cannot infinitely divide bread or wine without it ceasing to be bread or wine at some point. The body and blood of Christ are substantially present only in so far as the accidents or appearances of bread and wine remain. Furthermore, matter or a body is divisible only in so far as it is subject to quantity or extension, the first accident of a material substance, which extends matter part from part and into three dimensional space and by which it becomes localized. Now, the entire body of Christ which includes all the parts of Christ’s body, his flesh, bones, nerves, heart, etc. is contained under the dimensions of the bread substantially, i.e., without the effect of quantity or extension being actualized or realized as is the body of Christ in heaven. Substance as such is indivisible and not simply as a point but as devoid of dimensions.

Aquinas also says “substantial forms are not of themselves objects of the senses, for the object of the intellect is what a thing is, as is said De Anima iii, text 26”. I guess this is in accord with the Church’s understanding. So mustn’t we say that matter is nothing other than accidents attached to it’s substance, an immaterial thing?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

And I don’t think you can say that the bread and win exist without a subject. The subject is Jesus, otherwise we couldn’t look at the bread with true adoration

No, there is no subject. By an accompanying miracle, the accidents exist without a subject. They inhere in nothing. That is the teaching of the Church. See the Real Presence in the Catechism linked below.

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Since the resurrection and ascension of Jesus into heaven, the body of Christ is not susceptible to division; it has been glorified and taken on incorruption and immortality. The one body of Christ in heaven is substantially present in every host and under every part of the host just as the whole substance or nature of bread before the consecration and the transubstantiation was in the whole host and under every part of it. You cannot infinitely divide bread or wine without it ceasing to be bread or wine at some point. The body and blood of Christ are substantially present only in so far as the accidents or appearances of bread and wine remain. Furthermore, matter or a body is divisible only in so far as it is subject to quantity or extension, the first accident of a material substance, which extends matter part from part and into three dimensional space and by which it becomes localized. Now, the entire body of Christ which includes all the parts of Christ’s body, his flesh, bones, nerves, heart, etc. is contained under the dimensions of the bread substantially, i.e., without the effect of quantity or extension being actualized or realized as is the body of Christ in heaven. Substance as such is indivisible and not simply as a point but as devoid of dimensions.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

quantity or extension, the first accident of a material substance, which extends matter part from part and into three dimensional space and by which it becomes localized.

Just a pedantic fine tune … I have seen scholarly debate on this point. “Localisation” as you put it may require some qualitas as well otherwise how would we identify/delineate that which has been allegedly divided?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

Thanks for helping me clear my foggy Monday morning thoughts!

The short answer is sacrament followed by ex opera operato = the work done.

Jesus Presence is key here, not material body.

Just as the Holy Spirit overshadowed the Virgin Mary, so to at the invocation prays for the Holy Spirit to come upon these gifts to make them holy so that they may become for us the body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ.

Faith is the other element required here as Hebrews describes faith; " By faith we understand that the world was created by the WORD OF GOD , so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear"

“It is the Spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail”.

When man speaks his word and sends it to a hearer, that word that man sends from his voice and breath does nothing in and of itself. Although that word can carry with it instructions, directions, motivation, including negative revelations that reflect the sender. Man’s word of itself does nothing to produce a visible from the invisible. It takes another hearer to produce the result, man’s word can do nothing of itself.

God’s Word on the other hand. When God sends His Word that Word sent from the Father produces an action and a result into the visible from the invisible.

It is by God’s Word alone that His presence is made known in His Eucharist at all times in every place, God sends the Holy Spirit to declare to our spirit “Ex Opera Operato”, the Work done, or as Jesus states upon the cross, “it is finished”, what Jesus sends the Spirit to reveal and declare to us who believe the Word of God from God that; “this is my body, this is my blood”.

The substance of Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity in all valid Eucharist, is present at all times, made visible in the accidents of bread and wine, from the invisible. The presence of God is never divided, separated or confused.

Every small crumb and drop of Eucharist contain real and substantial real PRESENCE of the full, whole Christ body, blood, soul an divinity, from the rising of the Sun to it’s setting, God’s name is glorified from every nation being fulfilled today in the Mass everyday and everywhere.

How is God’s presence made known in all the hosts distributed? That Host every day and everywhere is not divided remains Only One.

The substance of Jesus body and blood present in the confected hosts is not divided or separated in space and time, although it may appear that way to our flesh which is of no avail here, It is the Spirit never divided that gives life.

It is here in the real substantial presence of God that we no longer worship God in this mountain or that mountain, but we enter God’s presence to worship God is Spirit and Truth. That Spirit and Truth is revealed in Eucharist = Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity.

Peace be with you

 

[thinkandmull]

No, there is no subject. By an accompanying miracle, the accidents exist without a subject. They inhere in nothing. That is the teaching of the Church. See the Real Presence in the Catechism linked below.

Linus2nd

It seems that the only logical conclusion is that we worship the Christ that is present in the space of the host, but not the host itself. See my point? Otherwise it is idolatry of accidents without a substance. Also, I don’t know how you can reconcile this with what Ricca said: “Matter is not an accident” So the host is merely an sensory illusion after consecration? How is an illusion a retaining of the accidents?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

It seems that the only logical conclusion is that we worship the Christ that is present in the space of the host, but not the host itself. See my point? Otherwise it is idolatry of accidents without a substance. Also, I don’t know how you can reconcile this with what Ricca said: “Matter is not an accident” So the host is merely an sensory illusion after consecration? How is an illusion a retaining of the accidents?

You are getting into the weeds now. Matter is a part of the underlying or second substance. This entire substance has been changed into the body and blood of Christ and only the accidents remain. Do not confuse philosophical matter with what science calls matter. What science calls matter are actually the accidents you see, measure and taste. This would include extension. Extension, weitght, etc are accidents as well. Christ is present wherever the accidents are present but he is not a part of the accidents, nor are they a part of Christ. When we see and taste and handle the accidents, we are " touching " Christ for he accompanies the accidents. When we adore the Blessed Sacrament, we are adoring Christ who is " veiled " by the accidents which we see, we are not adoring the accidents, the bread or wine. So you can indeed say that we are adoring Christ who is present within the " space " of the accidents.

When I look at the host or think about it I picture in my mind a host with the Resurrected Christ standing just above or behind it or even envision him in one of the scenes in which we see him during the forty days after his Resurrection.

Does that help?

Linus2nd

 

[thinkandmull]

That helps,

although I don’t know if we actually touch Christ. Where do we touch Him, on His face? It would be inappropriate to say we touch His whole body, after all, its still a human body with personal parts

 

[Linusthe2nd]

That helps,

although I don’t know if we actually touch Christ. Where do we touch Him, on His face? It would be inappropriate to say we touch His whole body, after all, its still a human body with personal parts

Didn’t Thomas touch the wounds of Christ? Remember, this is the exact same glorified body that walked the earth after his Resurrection. And as he could be touched then, so we can touch him now. The only difference is that now we cannot see him. Remember also, that when we receive Christ, he comes into our bodies, is that not touching?

God Bless

Linus2nd

 

[Richca]

It seems that the only logical conclusion is that we worship the Christ that is present in the space of the host, but not the host itself. See my point? Otherwise it is idolatry of accidents without a substance. Also, I don’t know how you can reconcile this with what Ricca said: “Matter is not an accident” So the host is merely an sensory illusion after consecration? How is an illusion a retaining of the accidents?

The host after the consecration is not a sensory illusion. The appearances or accidents which remain after the consecration have real being just as they did before the consecration except that after the consecration they exist miraculously by divine power without the substance and matter of bread in which they formally inhered. In the natural order of things, accidents only have being through the substance by inhering in the substance; they are supported by the substance.

In the Aristotlian/Thomistic philosophical tradition, matter is of course the material out of which a material thing is made. However, in and by itself matter is characterless, formless, shapeless, colorless, indeterminate, invisible, non-existent, pure potentiality. The scholastics called this formless matter prime matter. It may be helpful to think of prime matter as something pliable as for example, a lump of clay; though strictly speaking it cannot even be imagined since being formless it has no determining characteristics and is non-existent, it is a mere abstraction. In the real world, matter is never without form.
Prime matter must be informed to have actual existence and be made sensible and visible. Matter receives existence from the substantial form which is the organizing principle of matter and which determines the matter to be the matter of some particular thing such as gold or a dog. The substance thus constituted by the substantial form and matter is further modified by accidental forms by which the substance and the matter is made sensible and visible. For example, the first accident, quantity, extends the substance into the three dimensions of length, breadth, and depth. Color and figure or shape are in the category of accidents called qualities. Taste and weight are other qualities.

The accidents of the bread and wine which remain after the consecration are sensible forms held in existence miraculously by God since what formally supported them prior to the consecration, namely, the substances of the bread and wine, no longer remain; they have been converted into the substances of the body and blood of Christ.

The Aristotlian/Thomistic concept of matter can be difficult to understand probably because of the language and concepts of modern science that we may be accustomed too. We probably tend to think of matter as having existence in its own right and we may imagine matter as being the elements or the protons, nuetrons, and electrons that make up the individual atoms of these elements.
For Aristotle and St Thomas, matter in itself cannot be imagined, it is indeterminate and characterless, and indeed, cannot exist without form. Matter is pure potentiality while the substantial and accidental forms are actual. The forms give existence, character, shape, extension, color, organization, and whatever other qualities or properties matter may come to possess.

 

[JimG]

Morning! I was listening to Catholic Answers today, and someone called in to ask how every recipient of the Eucharist on a Sunday takes a “little piece” of Christ. It got me to pondering the mode of his presence. Can someone help me work though something I’m stuck on? I’ll lay out key thoughts below.

1. The person of Christ contains both Divine and human natures.
2. Because of his human nature, Christ has a body and a soul.
3. The union of body and soul in Christ are in the hypostasis.
4. If Christ is fully present in the Eucharist, it seems to imply that he would be there substantially–in body and soul.

Question: How is Christ’s material body fully present in the Eucharist if it’s divided amongst multiple hosts?

Thanks for helping me clear my foggy Monday morning thoughts!

The answer is: the body of Christ is NOT divided among multiple hosts!

Neither does every communicant receive a little piece of Jesus. Each communicant receives all of him–Jesus in his totality.

He is not divided in the Eucharist. Neither is He multiplied. Each communicant receives the same body of Christ. He has only one body. (In this way we are united not only with Him but with one another.)

 

[thinkandmull]

Didn’t Thomas touch the wounds of Christ? Remember, this is the exact same glorified body that walked the earth after his Resurrection. And as he could be touched then, so we can touch him now. The only difference is that now we cannot see him. Remember also, that when we receive Christ, he comes into our bodies, is that not touching?

God Bless

Linus2nd

If you argue that we touch Christ in the Eucharest because he comes into our body, then our tongue, mouth, ect touch His genitals, which is blasphemy. Perhaps we touch everything except the private parts, but still, where is the evidence that we actually touch Him at all?

Also, what is the philosophical reason for believe there even is such a thing as substance? Is not the substance, in common understanding, merely the matter which your senses feel?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

If you argue that we touch Christ in the Eucharest because he comes into our body, then our tongue, mouth, ect touch His genitals, which is blasphemy. Perhaps we touch everything except the private parts, but still, where is the evidence that we actually touch Him at all?

The Catechism says we receive the whole Christ. that is his glorified body just as he walked the earth after his Resurrection. I visualize him as robed and administering the sacrament. And if we receive his body and blood, how is it possible that we do not touch him? If we do not touch him we do not receive him.

Also, what is the philosophical reason for believe there even is such a thing as substance? Is not the substance, in common understanding, merely the matter which your senses feel?

Here is a good explanation of substance: iep.utm.edu/aq-meta/ . Click on " substance and accidents. " Aristotle and Thomas, elsewhere distinguisn between first and second substance. First substance would be what common understanding, since it contains what we see, which includes all the accidents - arms, legs, hair, color, size, etc. First substance contains or exist in the second substance which we cannot see.

It is the second substance of the bread and wine which is changed into the whole substance of Christ - the second substance and the first substance ( all the accidents )

You can also read about substance in Aquinas by Edward Feser.

Linus2nd