Concerning the Real Presence

[langlob]

I have a number of concerns about the Real Presence in the Eucharist that my sense of logic just finds difficult to accept. I’ll start with the first one. During my search to find out which (if any) was the true faith, I came aross a Protestant (ex-Catholic) website called something like the Roman Catholic Observer. In those days I had a farily strong antagonism towards the Catholic Church, and I used to frequent this website in search of reasons to justify my decision to leave the Church I had been baptized and raised in. I have since found God leading me back to the Catholic Church, and I have thankfully abandoned a lot of the prejudices and mistruths I formerly held against her.

However, this website raised at least one interesting point which I still consider to this day, concerning the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Basically, in an attempt to disprove transubstantiation, the author recommended taking the Eucharist at Communion and instead of immediately consuming it, putting it in a plastic bag for observation. Over the next few days, he claimed one could observe the specimen turning mouldy and going bad just like normal bread, thus “proving” that it is not really Christ, since anything divine is incorruptible. He further claimed that priests always consume the leftover Eucharistic Adoration hosts before the required time elapses for them to go mouldy for the sole purpose of ‘eliminating the evidence’.

I realize that desecrating the host in this way would be the utmost in blashpemy, and thus I would never attempt it, but is there any soundness to this guys argument? Would a Eucharistic host, if not consumed in time, go mouldy? Since the Church teaches that the Real Presence does not leave the host until it changes form, are we to believe that a host left unconsumed would remain incorrupted forever? Or is it justifiable to believe that it would, indeed, go bad just like normal bread?

 

[Ace86]

Good question. The bread and the wine are changed in essence, that is - they change into the Body and Blood of Christ, but they still have the physical properties of bread and wine. They look and taste like bread and wine obviously, but there is a substantial change from bread and wine, to the Body and Blood of Christ.

If I recall correctly, there was a miracle in France I think, where this priest began to have doubts about the Eucharist. One day at Mass as he lifted up the Host, it physically changed into Flesh and the wine into Blood. The Flesh and Blood have never decayed.

 

[MarySon]

Maybe this link to Eucharistic Miracles will make you pause and rethink your convictions
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/a3.html

 

[mlchance]

langlob:

Basically, in an attempt to disprove transubstantiation, the author recommended taking the Eucharist at Communion and instead of immediately consuming it, putting it in a plastic bag for observation. Over the next few days, he claimed one could observe the specimen turning mouldy and going bad just like normal bread, thus “proving” that it is not really Christ, since anything divine is incorruptible.

…is there any soundness to this guys argument?

Not a bit. The only thing the guy’s “argument” demonstrates is a profound ignorance of the Church’s doctrines regarding the Real Presence.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[langlob]

Ace86:

Good question. The bread and the wine are changed in essence, that is - they change into the Body and Blood of Christ, but they still have the physical properties of bread and wine. They look and taste like bread and wine obviously, but there is a substantial change from bread and wine, to the Body and Blood of Christ.

If I recall correctly, there was a miracle in France I think, where this priest began to have doubts about the Eucharist. One day at Mass as he lifted up the Host, it physically changed into Flesh and the wine into Blood. The Flesh and Blood have never decayed.

Thanks for your response. Since the transformed host still has the physical properties of bread and wine, are you saying then that they would still be subject to decay? To me that just seems odd . . . the complete body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ decaying before our eyes. But, isolated Eucharistic miracles aside, in normal circumstances, do you think this would occur? What do you think the Chuch’s position would be (or is)?

By the way, thanks for the link, MarySon.

 

[JCPhoenix]

I realize your question has to do with the physical properties of the Eucharist, and I think the information on Eucharistic miracles will be very helpful to you.

I would also encourage you to read Scott Hahn’s “The Lamb’s Supper”. This is a theological discussion regarding the Eucharist and why it HAS to be the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ.

If you are going to approach this topic, it’s best to be able to see it from more than just the physical angle. There is a lot of theology and history to back up the Church’s teaching on this.

 

[palmas85]

langlob:

Thanks for your response. Since the transformed host still has the physical properties of bread and wine, are you saying then that they would still be subject to decay? To me that just seems odd . . . the complete body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ decaying before our eyes. But, isolated Eucharistic miracles aside, in normal circumstances, do you think this would occur? What do you think the Chuch’s position would be (or is)?

By the way, thanks for the link, MarySon.

One of the common things about religions is that they all to some degree or another require you take a leap of faith. Accept something that you cannot prove, see or even touch. It requires you to accept that which is patently impossible. And to not only accept it, but worship and adore aspects of it.

Does a consecrated host decay if unconsumed? Yes and no. Some have, some have not. There are literally hundreds if not thousands of examples of a consecrated host surviving for years sometimes hundreds of years without decay.

I can only go by what I was taught, and that is that the bread and wine becomes the actual body and blood of Christ, but it remains with the appearance of bread and wine. It looks like bread and wine, tastes like bread and wine and will react like bread and wine to an outside stimulus. So yes under normal circumstances they would probably decay.

Now having said that, as I said above there have numerous Eucharistic miracles recoded throughout history. I would have to say that should God decide to preserve the consecrated host it would be preserved, otherwise it would react exactly as bread and wine would.

 

[friarpark]

I’ve always been taught that the changing into the Flesh and Blood of Christ is a miracle. And that’s what I tell my kids, I nudge them and tell them that this is when the miracle happens. In the Bible, Christ heals people because of their faith. He tells them it’s because of your faith that you are healed. My thoughts on the baggie expereiment is that the people who do things like that have no faith in the miracle of the Flesh and Blood. Maybe that’s why the host goes moldy. This may not be the most theological aurgument, just call it a gut feeling. Faith can move mountains, if only we had such faith!!

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Faith brought about by knowledge is good.

Faith in the absence of knowledge is pure, and the most desired.

 

[puzzleannie]

langlob:

Thanks for your response. Since the transformed host still has the physical properties of bread and wine, are you saying then that they would still be subject to decay? To me that just seems odd . . . the complete body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ decaying before our eyes. But, isolated Eucharistic miracles aside, in normal circumstances, do you think this would occur? What do you think the Chuch’s position would be (or is)?

By the way, thanks for the link, MarySon.

Yes, the sacred species retain the physcial accidents, appearance, molecular structure etc. of bread and wine, and the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity is present after the Consecration so long as those accidents remain. Once the species are consumed and digested (usually about 15 minutes) the fullness of His presence in that sense is gone, or once the sacred species is no longer recognizable under its appreance of bread and wine–disintegrated, decayed, diluted etc.

That is way care must be taken that the bread and wine are fresh to begin with, and once consecrated the wine is consumed at once and care taken to dilute the Precious Blood which may remain on the cleaning cloths before washing them in the normal way. That is also why care must be taken in storing the reserved consecrated hosts which will be taken to the sick so they do not decay or crumble, so we have special containers for that purpose, the pyx or carrying case, the ciborium or covered bowl, the lunette or glass case for exposition, the tabernacle as the receptacle.

The reserved hosts must be consumed within a reasonable time so that they do not decay, which is why those left from the previous day will usually be consumed first the next day during Mass. The priest also is careful to make sure the host reserved for exposition and adoration is fresh, he usually changes it at least every couple of days and consumes the first one.

this is not odd when you think of the doctrine this represents, based in the reality of the Incarnation: the Second Person of the Trinity, the Godhead assuming the human nature of Jesus from Mary. If God himself can assume human form, and if Jesus used created materials for his healings, miracles, and ultimately his sacrifice, and since he chose the created materials as matter for the sacraments, then it follows naturally that the created matter will retain its natural properties. If not, then where is the miracle of the resurrection? Since we know our created bodies will be resurrected on the last day, in defiance of earthly death and decay which has its roots in the evil of original sin, we know that the Eucharistic sacrifice and its sacred species are also temporal. When we are reunited finally with Christ, who is in heaven Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, the need for the earthly sacrifice is no longer, because we will be at the heavenly wedding banquet.

 

[Alfie]

Ace86:

If I recall correctly, there was a miracle in France I think, where this priest began to have doubts about the Eucharist. One day at Mass as he lifted up the Host, it physically changed into Flesh and the wine into Blood. The Flesh and Blood have never decayed.

Since I am a Protestant can you give me definite proof concerning your comment about the priest and how the host turned into the flesh and blood? If you can…please give me the name and place where this priest lives and I will go to his church to see it for myself.

 

[Alfie]

friarpark:

I’ve always been taught that the changing into the Flesh and Blood of Christ is a miracle. And that’s what I tell my kids, I nudge them and tell them that this is when the miracle happens. In the Bible, Christ heals people because of their faith. He tells them it’s because of your faith that you are healed. My thoughts on the baggie expereiment is that the people who do things like that have no faith in the miracle of the Flesh and Blood. Maybe that’s why the host goes moldy. This may not be the most theological aurgument, just call it a gut feeling. Faith can move mountains, if only we had such faith!!

This is the only miracle in the Bible where you do not actually see a miracle. Why is this? I have heard of priests getting drunk because they have to drink the rest of the wine that is left over. How do you explain that?

 

[arieh0310]

Alfie:

Since I am a Protestant can you give me definite proof concerning your comment about the priest and how the host turned into the flesh and blood? If you can…please give me the name and place where this priest lives and I will go to his church to see it for myself.

Here are several…

 

[montanaman]

Alfie:

This is the only miracle in the Bible where you do not actually see a miracle. Why is this? I have heard of priests getting drunk because they have to drink the rest of the wine that is left over. How do you explain that?

Yeah, that’s a standard old anti-Catholic legend that never seems to get old. How do I explain it? Like this: Yawn.

Are you one of those guys that just keeps throwing stuff at the Church and hoping something sticks? Good luck with that.

I’ve heard of Protestant pastors driving their wives to abortion clinics in shiny SUVs because they just don’t want another mouth to feed. I’ve known Protestants who use the Bible to justify just about anything–such as spousal abuse. Do a google search on PROTESTANT corruption, and you’ll find plenty of instances of rank hypocrisy. Does this prove anything about the rightness or wrongness of Protestantism? Not really, but it does show that far from arriving in some sanctified place by “escaping” from the clutches of Rome, they’re still human and sinners.

Personally, I think the drunken priest story is a myth and a lie. But even if it was true, while regrettable, so what? It proves nothing.

 

[Church_Militant]

Alfie:

This is the only miracle in the Bible where you do not actually see a miracle. Why is this? I have heard of priests getting drunk because they have to drink the rest of the wine that is left over. How do you explain that?

Whoa whoa whoa!

I have NEVER heard of a priest getting drunk from “having to” drink the rest of the communion wine. That is anti-Catholic BUNK because there is never that much left and even in the pre-Vatican 2 days the priest never consecrated more than the small amount needed for his own communion since he was the only one to receive under both species most of the time.

So THAT’S how I explain THAT! (Alfie, you should be ashamed for even asserting that kind of thing. What’s wrong with you?!!)

You need to check that effort right there sister of mine! Let’s see…New Testament miracles that don’t appear different…
John 2:1-10, The water into wine, looked no different until it was tasted. Further more if you don’t believe in miracles that you can’t detect with your own senses then you can’t believe in may miracles of Christianity. Angels, the forgiveness of our sins, rebirth, or even just the divine moment by moment maintenance of all creation.

Have a nice trip to Lanciano, Italy, maybe you can swing by the olympics while you’re in country.
As always, good sharing with you, but let’s keep it to the facts, not the a-C bunk that you’ve been told, okay?
Pax tecum,

 

[Ace86]

Alfie:

Since I am a Protestant can you give me definite proof concerning your comment about the priest and how the host turned into the flesh and blood? If you can…please give me the name and place where this priest lives and I will go to his church to see it for myself.

This specific miracle that I am refering to happened in the 8th or 9th centuries. The blood type of all the Eucharistic miracles is the same type on the Shroud of Turin. (AB if you want to know!). I personally do not know any priests who experienced a Eucharistic miracle.

therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

 

[VociMike]

langlob:

Thanks for your response. Since the transformed host still has the physical properties of bread and wine, are you saying then that they would still be subject to decay? To me that just seems odd . . . the complete body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ decaying before our eyes. But, isolated Eucharistic miracles aside, in normal circumstances, do you think this would occur? What do you think the Chuch’s position would be (or is)?

This is really no different than the process of digesting the host. At some point, when the ‘bread’ and ‘wine’ are no longer recognized as such, the Real Presence ceases. God can enter and leave His creation at will, and certainly without injury.

Consider this. If the host did not decay, would it also be impossible to damage it in any other way? Could it not be burned in the hottest oven, for example? Would it survive a nuclear explosion? Such miraculous attributes would go against God’s desire that we have faith, for such daily miracles would negate the need for faith. That is why, IMHO, the elements behave normally.

 

[VociMike]

Alfie:

This is the only miracle in the Bible where you do not actually see a miracle. Why is this?

So you need to put your hand into Christ’s side too? It’s not enough that Jesus said it and the early Church taught it? You will not believe unless you see? Faith that demands proof is no faith at all.

 

[mosher]

Alfie:

This is the only miracle in the Bible where you do not actually see a miracle. Why is this? I have heard of priests getting drunk because they have to drink the rest of the wine that is left over. How do you explain that?

This was explained above. The dogma of transubstantiation is simply understood as “the substance changes while the accidents remain.” What is meant exactly by substance and accidents would take a while to explain fully but to simplify it the accidents are those things accessable to the senses. Thus, in transubstantiation the Blessed Sacraments retains all the physical propterties of bread and wine. However, it is the substance that changes from the species of bread or wine to the species of Christ. One cannot put a thing under a microscope and see the substance because the substance is an invisible reality to all things unique to each individual thing.

 

[mosher]

langlob:

Thanks for your response. Since the transformed host still has the physical properties of bread and wine, are you saying then that they would still be subject to decay? To me that just seems odd . . . the complete body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ decaying before our eyes. But, isolated Eucharistic miracles aside, in normal circumstances, do you think this would occur? What do you think the Chuch’s position would be (or is)?

By the way, thanks for the link, MarySon.

As the accidents that are proper to bread decay the substance of Christ is no longer there. The Substance of Christ does not decay but ceases to be with the accidents that we recognize with our senses as bread. This is the same for the evaporation of the Precious Blood. St. Thomas does a through job explaining all these questions.

newadvent.org/summa/4.htm

Go to this site and scroll down to the section dealing with the Holy Eucharist.