If Christ is Present at the Mass, then who is Returning at the Second Coming?

[Returnee]

This is a question I’ve seen recently posed by a non-Catholic Christian on another site.

Hello CA forum regulars! I enjoy reading this forum on occasion, and find it useful for strengthening my Catholic faith. I was wondering what you all thought about this question. I haven’t seen it directly posed, and it’s difficult to search for this exact topic as it contains many prepositions that make an exact search impossible. Thus, I thought I’d start a thread about it.

To restate, for clarity, the person in question asked:

“Catholics believe Jesus is physically present at Mass after the communion wafer is blessed. But Jesus told us in Scripture that He would not return until He came again in glory to judge us (the Second Coming). So clearly, Catholics have it wrong when they believe in transubstantiation, as it clearly violates Scripture”.

What do you all say about this?

Thanks,

 

[adrift]

He isn’t returning again since the sacrifice of the Mass is the same sacrifice of the cross. When we participate in Mass, we are at Calvary.

 

[Della]

Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is not a “physical one” in the sense this person means (we aren’t eating physical flesh and blood), rather it is sacramental–a mystery of the faith. Besides, it is the Risen Christ that we celebrate on our altars. The same Jesus who walked through closed doors and yet ate fish. This person, and all who think like him, have a very limited understanding of the nature of both the Eucharist as well as of the life of the Risen Christ. From the 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.” 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.” “This presence is called ‘real’ - by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be ‘real’ too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present.”

 

[Returnee]

Ah yes, thank you adrift and Della. I keep forgetting about those distinctions.

 

[mike182d]

Christ was present before His birth, but it wasn’t *technically *the first coming. He was physically present in His mother’s womb for 9 months before He was born as the first coming.

The Eucharist is similar. Its almost Christ’s time in the “womb” before being “born” and coming into the world in the second coming.

 

[Returnee]

mike182d:

Christ was present before His birth, but it wasn’t *technically *the first coming. He was physically present in His mother’s womb for 9 months before He was born as the first coming.

The Eucharist is similar. Its almost Christ’s time in the “womb” before being “born” and coming into the world in the second coming.

Interesting. I’ve never thought of it that way.

 

[Jordan_1]

Della:

Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is not a “physical one” in the sense this person means (we aren’t eating physical flesh and blood), rather it is sacramental–a mystery of the faith. Besides, it is the Risen Christ that we celebrate on our altars. The same Jesus who walked through closed doors and yet ate fish. This person, and all who think like him, have a very limited understanding of the nature of both the Eucharist as well as of the life of the Risen Christ. From the Catechism:

Christ is physically present in the host and chalice. He is there body, blood, soul and divinity.

We are eating physical flesh and blood, just under the appearances of bread and wine.

This question is one often used by our fundamentalist brothers. if we take it to it’s logical conclsuion, then because Christ is present in scripture, then he cant come back at the last coming.

Christ said that he will be with us for all time, and he will be. Most especially in the eucharist, but in the scriptures, aswell as his people. Christ is eveywhere. He is in all things created.

What we need to distinguish is that Christ said he will come back to us in a visible, human form, and He will judge the nations. That does not mean that he cant be with us in other “forms” so to speak.

 

[mike182d]

Returnee:

Interesting. I’ve never thought of it that way.

Kinda’ weird, isn’t it?

I can’t take the credit though. I heard that from someone else but can’t remember who. It was a while ago.

 

[rwoehmke]

-Jordan:

Christ is physically present in the host and chalice. He is there body, blood, soul and divinity.

We are eating physical flesh and blood, just under the appearances of bread and wine.

This question is one often used by our fundamentalist brothers. if we take it to it’s logical conclsuion, then because Christ is present in scripture, then he cant come back at the last coming.

Christ said that he will be with us for all time, and he will be. Most especially in the eucharist, but in the scriptures, aswell as his people. Christ is eveywhere. He is in all things created.

What we need to distinguish is that Christ said he will come back to us in a visible, human form, and He will judge the nations. That does not mean that he cant be with us in other “forms” so to speak.

I believe that we speak in the CCC as quoted above of a SUBSTANTIAL presence rather than physical. There is a change in substance. If it were physical there would no longer be the appearances of bread and wine. That is not to say that Jesus is not present body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist. When he comes again at the end it will be a physical presence.

 

[Jordan_1]

rwoehmke:

I believe that we speak in the CCC as quoted above of a SUBSTANTIAL presence rather than physical. There is a change in substance. If it were physical there would no longer be the appearances of bread and wine. That is not to say that Jesus is not present body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist. When he comes again at the end it will be a physical presence.

Granted, the CCC uses the word substantial, but that isn’t to say that it isn’t a physical presence, of course it is.

If he weren’t physically there, then we’d be Lutherans and worship bread. He is truly there, physically.

And the appearnces of bread and wine still would remain, why would they not? When I see the host, I see bread, but I’m looking at Jesus Chirst: REALLY present, physically.

How can it be his REAL Body and Blood if it isn’t physically present?

 

[LatinCat]

Returnee:

This is a question I’ve seen recently posed by a non-Catholic Christian on another site.

Hello CA forum regulars! I enjoy reading this forum on occasion, and find it useful for strengthening my Catholic faith. I was wondering what you all thought about this question. I haven’t seen it directly posed, and it’s difficult to search for this exact topic as it contains many prepositions that make an exact search impossible. Thus, I thought I’d start a thread about it.

To restate, for clarity, the person in question asked:

“Catholics believe Jesus is physically present at Mass after the communion wafer is blessed. But Jesus told us in Scripture that He would not return until He came again in glory to judge us (the Second Coming). So clearly, Catholics have it wrong when they believe in transubstantiation, as it clearly violates Scripture”.

What do you all say about this?

Thanks,

All though Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is most definitely physical, it is super natural and hidden. When Christ returns in Glory it will be in his normal mode of physical presence and will be fully exposed, not hidden. Rember, that whe we celebrate the mass, we are partaking in the parousia, or return of Christ, for we feast at the heavenly banquet made present on earth. Think of Christ’s hidden presence in the Eucharist at mass as the the precusor to his visible presence that will occur at the parousia. Also conisder the way the people at mass recieve Christ. Those who recieve him in a state of mortal sin, without dicerning the body of Lord will eat and drink judgement on themselves as St. Paul states. Those who recieve him in a state of grace (i.e. God’s friendship) recieve him to the salvation and sanctification of their souls. It will be the same at the parousia. Those who recieve Christ at the end time in mortal sin will be cast into the eternal hell fire. Those who receive Christ’s coming in His friendship, will recieve him to the salvation of their souls. You might ask how Catholics, Eastern Othodox, and Oriental Orthodox, take part in these mysteries now at mass? Well, Since Christ is God as well as man, everything he does, did, and will do become present in both time and eternity.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Returnee:

"Catholics believe Jesus is physically present at Mass after the communion wafer is blessed.

More accurately, he is meta-physically present.

But Jesus told us in Scripture that He would not return until He came again in glory to judge us (the Second Coming).

Can you cite the passage of Scripture?

 

[LatinCat]

As for Christ not returning until the second coming, I think I remember Christ saying something at the assension to the tune of “And Lo, I am with you, even until the end of time.”

 

[Returnee]

There have been some interesting replies to this thread and I hope to see more. I would like to “make the circle complete” though by linking back to another interesting thread where I linked to this one. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1374516

It seems that the issues of “physical” presence vs. “real” presence gives some interesting food for thought.

I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts given these two threads and the issues raised on both.

 

[Returnee]

LatinCat:

As for Christ not returning until the second coming, I think I remember Christ saying something at the assension to the tune of “And Lo, I am with you, even until the end of time.”

That’s an excellent point. I forgot about that entirely.

 

[LatinCat]

Returnee:

There have been some interesting replies to this thread and I hope to see more. I would like to “make the circle complete” though by linking back to another interesting thread where I linked to this one. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1374516

It seems that the issues of “physical” presence vs. “real” presence gives some interesting food for thought.

I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts given these two threads and the issues raised on both.

Those who state that Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is not physical are in grave error. The Church teaches that the whole substance to the Eucharist becomes the body blood soul and divinty of Christ. For flesh to be present it MUST be physical. That is the only mode of presence that flesh and blood have. Thus Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is physical. The distinction between this and his normal presence is that in the Eucharist his presence is hidden, supernatural, and sacramental. This does not diminish the physical nature of that presence.

 

[LatinCat]

Returnee:

That’s an excellent point. I forgot about that entirely.

You are asking some great questions. Keep it up!

 

[Returnee]

itsjustdave1988:

More accurately, he is meta-physically present.

I would love to hear more about “meta-physical” prescence. If/when you have the time/inclination.

Can you cite the passage of Scripture?

Yes, it would appear I had forgotten the basic fact that Jesus promised, as He was ascending, that He would “be with us for all time”. I’m not sure why I forgot that when this person suggested otherwise.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

LatinCat:

Those who state that Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is not physical are in grave error. The Church teaches that the whole substance to the Eucharist becomes the body blood soul and divinty of Christ. For flesh to be present it MUST be physical. That is the only mode of presence that flesh and blood have. Thus Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is physical. The distinction between this and his normal presence is that in the Eucharist his presence is hidden, supernatural, and sacramental. This does not diminish the physical nature of that presence.

Can you help us out then. Please cite the magisterial texts that specifically calls it a “physical presence.” Perhaps you are correct, but unless you have a magisterial texts (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, excerpt from an ecumenical council), then I don’t see any basis for your claim.

As I understand it the real presence is meta-physical in that the reality is present but under the species of bread and wine. That’s metaphysics, not physics. Sadly, the modern world does not seem to understand the distinction anymore. Then again, perhaps it is a matter of differing semantics.

 

[Returnee]

LatinCat:

You are asking some great questions. Keep it up!

Thank you! I visit these forums often, as well as the CA main website. I don’t post usually as my knowledge of Catholicism is much more limited than many others around here. But if it’s questions you like, trust me, I have a boatload! LOL

One question I no longer have though is whether or not the Church is the one True Church. That much is no longer in question for me. It’s just the whole issue of Apologetics that gets me sometimes! It’s almost like one could study for a lifetime, and still not know everything.