Do the atoms/molecules of the Host change/get replaced?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sixpence
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sixpence said:
I have a very specific question, and I want to ask it as precisely as possible. But this is my first thread, so please bear with me.
Bread and wine are made up of various molecules, and at a more basic level, atoms and sub-atomic particles. I am wondering if Catholics believe that such particles are changed or replaced once consecrated.
So I’m clear (hopefully), I’m not asking what these particles appear to be upon closer inspection. That’s super obvious. I am asking, point blank, whether the molecules/atoms of the bread and wine change or get replaced.
Also, I am not asking about substance. If you believe molecular and atomic particles are synonymous with substance, that’s the only way substance would be relevant here.
Once again, I’m not asking about substance and I’m not asking about appearance. I’m asking whether particles (ie., atoms and molecules) are changed or replaced by different particles under the guise of the originals.
Thanks very much!
Click to expand...
No.
The Catholic faith is that it is the substancethat changes not the qualities.
 
I think of it as being similar to water and salt. As I understand it, if you add sugar to water, the molecules of neither change, but you now have sugar water, a combination of the two. The water is still present, as is the sugar.

After the consecration, the bread and wine are still bread and wine, yet they are also the Body and Blood. Molecules have been combined with something that is not (as far as we can tell) molecular to give us something unique and precious.
 
mackbrislawn said:
I have a question too.

We say that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. But why don’t we say that the body and blood of Christ become bread and wine? That is simpler. After all, Christ became incarnate in flesh and blood, so why can’t He become incarnate in bread and wine?
Click to expand...
I like this.🙂
 
GEddie said:
Why do the particles need to change?

After all, the particles now constituting the tissues of your body were originally in various foodstuffs consumed by your body. The molecules rearranged, the particles stay the same.

Couldn’t our LORD do the same?

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
I like this too.🙂
 
Aelred_Minor said:
I’m not sure what the relevance of Celiac Disease would be, since in any case a the person will end up with gluten in their blood stream just as someone receiving from the chalice will end up with alcohol in their bloodstream, even if there is no alcohol or gluten in the Eucharist itself. The Real Presence is no longer there when the accidents of bread and wine are gone. What you have instead is whatever you would have had if there had been no consecration.

Again, I’m not necessarily saying that there are no gluten or ethanol molecules in the Eucharist. I’m staying neutral on that question. But whether there is or not, if you received both species you will end up with both in your bloodstream, unless a gluten-free host or mustum is used.
Click to expand...
The significance is that your body would have reacted to the matter it consumed as if it was bread.

I think we do not need to overthink this. The fact is, the details is we do not know and everything we put forth here is a guess. All Sacraments are mysteries, because it is a synthesis of the physical and spiritual, it is beyond any of our current understanding.
 
CopticChristian said:
Maybe this is why the Orthodox just refer to it as “Mystery”.🙂
Click to expand...
As a Lutheran, I share this. The “how” of the Real Presence is a mystery. Any explanation we humans try to wrap around it can never fully explain it.
 
gcnuss said:
As a Lutheran, I share this. The “how” of the Real Presence is a mystery. Any explanation we humans try to wrap around it can never fully explain it.
Click to expand...
As do Catholics. The transubstantiation expresses the “what” of the mystery (Christ, not bread and wine), never the “how”. 🙂
 
The host and wine maintain their outward form, but in fact through the Holy Spirit at the Epiclesis at Mass become the Glorified Lamb Who stands wounded yet triumphant at the High Altar of the God Most High.

The Lord Himself transcends all matter and molecule…the Lord has broken the power of linear time, the boundaries and finite properties of the bread and wine to become transcendent and divine…bringing us into the eternal being where there is no time, but union with God, “I Am Who Am”.

You are looking at the host and wine before Divinization.

We are not receiving the Lord prior to His Passion.

We are receiving the Resurrected and Glorified Lord.

The Transfiguration of Christ was preparing us for His Divine ministry when He would return to Heaven, and thus for this great event, we celebrate this feast day in the Church, August 6.
 
mackbrislawn said:
I have a question too.

We say that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. But why don’t we say that the body and blood of Christ become bread and wine? That is simpler. After all, Christ became incarnate in flesh and blood, so why can’t He become incarnate in bread and wine?
Click to expand...
I do not like this at all. It would mean we have millions of incarnations of the Son of God, only one of which was as a man. Jesus would not be the God-Man but the God-Man-Loaf-Merlot-Wafer-White Zinfandel-Bread Square-Cabernet Sauvignon-Wafer-Mustum-Wafer-Riesling-Wafer…

We would not be receiving the Body and Blood of the risen Christ, but something Fully God and Fully Wheat.

No, we believe the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine and instead become the Body and Blood of Christ.
 
sallybutler said:
I think of it as being similar to water and salt. As I understand it, if you add sugar to water, the molecules of neither change, but you now have sugar water, a combination of the two. The water is still present, as is the sugar.

After the consecration, the bread and wine are still bread and wine, yet they are also the Body and Blood. Molecules have been combined with something that is not (as far as we can tell) molecular to give us something unique and precious.
Click to expand...
The position you are proposing here is an old heresy called Consubstantiation. I’m not by any means saying you are personally guilty of heresy, just letting you know that this idea has come up several times before in the history of the Church and has been firmly rejected.

Here’s the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the subject:

oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Consubstantiation
 
No. The host is changed, every part, to the body and blood of our Lord under the appearance of bread. So, the host physically retains the appearance of bread (down to the last starch molecule) but it is really the body and blood of Christ. Difficult to answer, but based on my understanding of your question, the answer is no.
 
I heard you on Catholic Answers Live, Sixpence! “Mike in Chicago, IL” at about 7:03.

Fun to put a voice to a screenname. 🙂

Tim Staples addressed your question quite eloquently and incisively.

Loved the analogy with Tiger Woods. 👍

Trying to talk about the Eucharist without mentioning accidents or substance is like talking about Tiger Woods without mentioning golf.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
I do not like this at all. It would mean we have millions of incarnations of the Son of God, only one of which was as a man. Jesus would not be the God-Man but the God-Man-Loaf-Merlot-Wafer-White Zinfandel-Bread Square-Cabernet Sauvignon-Wafer-Mustum-Wafer-Riesling-Wafer…

We would not be receiving the Body and Blood of the risen Christ, but something Fully God and Fully Wheat.

No, we believe the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine and instead become the Body and Blood of Christ.
Click to expand...
No, this is the thinking–if the Son of God became flesh and blood, why can He also not become bread and wine? After all, wasn’t Jesus fully God and fully flesh? So why can He not also be fully God and fully wheat?

As far as millions of incarnations of the Son of God, isn’t that what we have in the Mass? Millions of incarnations?

The heretical Docetists had a hard time believing that the Son of God was flesh, so why should we of faith have a hard time believing that the Son of God is bread?

Of course I am arguing here as a kind of Devil’s advocate…I like what you say about not receiving the body and blood of the risen Christ. This might be a good way to explain why the Catholic view is a higher view than that of the reformers, and a more logical view after all.

The reformers all seem to take the low road if there is a choice. Of course the low road is a more fleshly road, and takes less faith. By always taking the low road, eventually one ends up with no road at all. You’ve reached the bottom. And that is the position of modern liberal protestantism.
 
mackbrislawn said:
No, this is the thinking–if the Son of God became flesh and blood, why can He also not become bread and wine? After all, wasn’t Jesus fully God and fully flesh? So why can He not also be fully God and fully wheat?

As far as millions of incarnations of the Son of God, isn’t that what we have in the Mass? Millions of incarnations?

The heretical Docetists had a hard time believing that the Son of God was flesh, so why should we of faith have a hard time believing that the Son of God is bread?

Of course I am arguing here as a kind of Devil’s advocate…I like what you say about not receiving the body and blood of the risen Christ. This might be a good way to explain why the Catholic view is a higher view than that of the reformers, and a more logical view after all.

The reformers all seem to take the low road if there is a choice. Of course the low road is a more fleshly road, and takes less faith. By always taking the low road, eventually one ends up with no road at all. You’ve reached the bottom. And that is the position of modern liberal protestantism.
Click to expand...
The Son of God is not wheat or bread. The host ceases to be bread and becomes the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. The host continues to have the accidents of bread and wheat, it appears to be bread, but is actually no longer bread.
 
Elizium23 said:
The Son of God is not wheat or bread. The host ceases to be bread and becomes the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. The host continues to have the accidents of bread and wheat, it appears to be bread, but is actually no longer bread.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is the orthodox teacing.
 
Sixpence said:
I have a very specific question, and I want to ask it as precisely as possible. But this is my first thread, so please bear with me.
Bread and wine are made up of various molecules, and at a more basic level, atoms and sub-atomic particles. I am wondering if Catholics believe that such particles are changed or replaced once consecrated.
So I’m clear (hopefully), I’m not asking what these particles appear to be upon closer inspection. That’s super obvious. I am asking, point blank, whether the molecules/atoms of the bread and wine change or get replaced.
Also, I am not asking about substance. If you believe molecular and atomic particles are synonymous with substance, that’s the only way substance would be relevant here.
Once again, I’m not asking about substance and I’m not asking about appearance. I’m asking whether particles (ie., atoms and molecules) are changed or replaced by different particles under the guise of the originals.
Thanks very much!
Click to expand...
It seems that I read that no measurable changes occur but then I saw an advertisement on a book that states that there are measurable proof of molecular changes that can be scientifically studied. I am hoping someone else will comment on that and I will see if I can find that reference. I will be eager to see what others say.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top