Is the Eucharist and Transubstantiation considered a miracle?

[mercygate]

Yes, there have been Eucharistic miracles.

But as to AKLion’s point, I would say the following: The Eucharist is a sacrament, and every sacrament works ex opere operato, that is, by the nature of the sacrament itself. It works through the power of Christ mediated through physical things (bread & wine; water, oil, words, etc). It works because of the promise and power of Christ, not through any merits of the human being who performs the action.

Now, it is true that only a priest can confect the Eucharist, but the priestly power comes from Christ; it is not an effect of the merits or the goodness of the priest.

When he acts “in the person of Christ,” the priest is in effect making his own (human) person available to be used by Christ as His own person. Christ is perfect, whether or not the priest is worthy.
And who could actually be worthy enough to confect the Eucharist, or to forgive sins?

Good post!

Your observation that there are “Eucharistic miracles” makes the point that under the oridinary definition of the word “miracle”, the confection of the Eucharist at Mass is not a miracle. Precisely, it is a sacred mystery.

When verifying miracles for the canonization of saints, the Church requires that something be observable and quantifiable. You cannot observe or quantify the presence of Christ in the Eucharist!

 

[AHapka]

If this is the case, could anyone perform the consecration? Perhaps they are not supposed to, according to canon law, but if say someone impersonates a priest…(Ok, I know this is starting to sound odd, but strange things happen)? The celebrants of the sacrement may not know any different.

Someone might impersonate a priest. They might fool everyone in the congregation. But they are not fooling God. Christ will not work through someone who is not properly ordained to transubstantiate the bread and wine.

Those partaking of the Sacrament (not knowing that it was not confected) would not be guilty of idolitry (becuase they don’t know that it’s not the Blood and Body of our Lord). But anyone who did know, and then adored the bread/wine would be.

I also agree with those who say it is a mystery. Much better wording in my mind.

 

[CradleCath]

Though every once in a while we get lucky enough to actually see it

therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

I have known for some time about the Eucharistic miracle that occured in Lanciano…BUT, I didn’t know about the scientific investigations & evidence that you linked to. I’m going to do some studying on this & I want to THANK YOU so much for the link!!!

 

[Traditional_Ang]

So there is then the possibility of having your sacraments invalidated. I can see this being of even greater concern in regards to last rites. If it is a Priest you know well, there is likely not as much concern. However, if you are away from home…It is not like one would have the presence of mind to ask the Priest’s ID for Last Rites

Since I have not found much information on this, it must not be much of a concern. Still it is something that has been nagging at me.

I appreciate you all indulging me here.

God bless

AKLion:

ALL priests who are ordained within the 22 (?) Churches that are in union with the See of Peter HAVE VALID ORDERS.

So long as the priest you are receiving the Sacraments from has been ordained by a Bishop of one of those Churches (or of the Autocephalic Eastern Orthodox Churches) you are receiving VALID SACRAMENTS.

The principle of ex opere operato operates on the level of Ordination of priests and Consecration of bishops just as it does on the Eucharist. So long as a VALID Bishop is doing what the Church does (ordaining a Catholic priest and not a protestant minister or a “priestess”) and using a Valid Ordinal and the “Ordinand” desires to become a Catholic Priest (expressed by cooperation with the ceremony and his answers during his ordination), it’s a Valid Ordination, and the priest is a Valid priest.

The other issue - That of Licensure or “Incardination” - is another issue, and has NOTHING to do with the validity of the priest’s orders or any Sacraments he may confer. This only has to do with the exercise of a Bishop’s authority over his own diocese…

FYI, in case of imminent death, any validly ordained priest, even one who has been laicized, is required by Canon Law to confer whatever Sacraments may be necessary for the dying person’s salvation (Baptism, Penance - Including Absolution, Unction and Viaticum - Including a post-haste consecration of our Lord’s Body and Blood (Canon Law provides a greatly abreviated form for a valid consecration in such circumstances) if Reserve Sacrament isn’t available).

I hope this resolves the issue.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Brian_Reeves]

I believe that the miracle of the bread and wine being changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ is the greatest miracle that Jesus ever performed and one that He “created” for us so that, as long as we receive it in absolute faith, we may grow in His grace. Also I am coming to believe that the “state” of the priest, influences the validity of the extent of the miracle. So if the priest was steeped in sin would anything have happened to the bread and wine? A miracle requires faith, as a minimum on the part of the “performer”. How many of our priests have that faith ? For instance could one say that a church without miracles has no faith ? Genuine questions !!!

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I believe that the miracle of the bread and wine being changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ is the greatest miracle that Jesus ever performed and one that He “created” for us so that, as long as we receive it in absolute faith, we may grow in His grace. Also I am coming to believe that the “state” of the priest, influences the validity of the extent of the miracle. So if the priest was steeped in sin would anything have happened to the bread and wine? A miracle requires faith, as a minimum on the part of the “performer”. How many of our priests have that faith ? For instance could one say that a church without miracles has no faith ? Genuine questions !!!

Brian:

Several miracles have where the Lord has change the Bread and Wine into his Physical Body and Blood - See this Website:

Real Presence Eucharistic Education and Adoration Association
The Eucharistic Miracles of the World

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm

The one I’m most familiar with is the miracle at Lanciano, Italy:

*“A monastic priest doubted whether the Body of our Lord was truly present in the consecrated Host. He said the Mass, and when he said the words of Consecration, he saw the host turn into Flesh and the Wine turn into Blood. everything was visible to those present. The Flesh is still intact, and the Blood is divided into five unequal parts which together have the same exact weight as each one does separately…”

1. The “miraculous Flesh” is authentic flesh consisting of muscular striated tissue myocardium.
2. The “**miraculous Blood” is truly blood. The chromatrographic analysis indicated this with indisputable certainty.
3. The immunological study shows with certitude that the flesh and blood are human, and the immuno - hematological test allows us to affirm with complete objectivity and certitude that both belong to the same blood type AB - the same blood type as that of the man on the Shroud of Turin and the type most characteristic of Middle Eastern populations.

Lanciano, 750 A.D. (part 1) – (PDF: 186k)
Lanciano, 750 A.D. (part 2) – (PDF: 194k)
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm

From the PDF - Report about 2/3 of the way down. Please copy the PDF.

Faith isn’t required - Obedience is. The priest here doubted but was doing the Mass because he knew that he had an obligation to do it.

The Lord performed the miracle so he could have the faith because he obeyed.

I have a similar experience where someone else was pulled back from death’s doorstep so I could believe.

Remember, Faith isn’t something we “manufacture” - It’s a gift of God and a fruit of the Spirit.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Brian_Reeves]

Dear Michael thank you for your response and, ABOVE ALL, obviously not looking for a fight, if you understand what I mean !!!
As you read so many of these postings they have become entelectual battle grounds. I will say no more.
I was thinking of what I would call a “deeper sin”. We have a young priest who, to me, sees himself as having no value.
I was accused of this in my first confession so, after a number of bitter years discovering how true this was/is, I have a little idea of
what I am talking about. Anyway the young priest now has to give himself value in no uncertain terms. So the Mass has become a drama, but not of the right sort. We go over all sorts of “obstacle courses” to show that he “represents Jesus” to the point where we now have a beretta, so the server has to go to the other side of the sanctuary so that the beretta can be placed on his or her seat and worn for the few seconds during the appropriate point in the mass. And so it goes on. You may see me as being very critical of a priest. No, I am not ! I pray hard for him, yet, it is so difficult to manouver through this “self drama”, and it is this sort of thing that I was talking about and to me is more serious than perhaps a brief laps in being able to believe in the real presense. I heard it said that eighty percent of American do not believe in this, although I cannot substantiate this. Howver, I do believe that as I pray more earnestly for him then God may well allow something to befall him that is very painful. As I see it it is this “valuelessness” ( that should make the spellcheck blow a fuse !) is where Satan has entrapped mankind. “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”. “Deny your self, pick up your cross and follow me” Jesus replies. If we do not know ourselves than how can we deny them?
I believe, supported by “The Poem of the Man-God”, if you believe that, although the Bible shows just the same thing, that the apostles/disciples spent three years with Jesus, apart from other things, discovering themselves. But I’ll rest there, that should be enough for you to get your LOVING critical teeth into.
God bless you, my dear friend.
Brian.

 

[AHapka]

We go over all sorts of “obstacle courses” to show that he “represents Jesus” to the point where we now have a beretta, so the server has to go to the other side of the sanctuary so that the beretta can be placed on his or her seat and worn for the few seconds during the appropriate point in the mass.

A Beretta???

Is it loaded do you know? I can’t even begin to imagine at what point in Mass one needs to wear a gun???

What are the other parishoners doing? I imagine the Bishop should be dealing with this IMMEDIATELY.

I don’t think you are wrong at all by being critical, a priest using a gun in such a manner during Mass is a serious matter indeed.

I can only hope the Bishop is dealing with this matter. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[masterjedi747]

If on the other hand the Priest comes out with a female deacon and they concelebrate, using a plate of onion bagels and a pitcher of Bud Light .saying take and eat and drink these holy offerings that God has given us so that we may have eternal life, then no, it was not valid and doesn’t count.

Don’t laugh, I saw that one personally in 1999:thumbsup:

:bigyikes: Oh my goodness… was this a “CATHOLIC” Church? Really!?

Your observation that there are “Eucharistic miracles” makes the point that under the oridinary definition of the word “miracle”, the confection of the Eucharist at Mass is not a miracle. Precisely, it is a sacred mystery.

No, no, no… IT IS A MIRACLE.

Bread and wine undergoing substantial change into the glorified flesh of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, NOT TO MENTION while still retaining all the accidents of bread and wine, is ABSOLUTELY a miracle, probably even the greatest miracle could ever be done… in fact, it’s so spectacular that it’s hardly even comprehensible, and hence a “sacred mystery” of the faith. But it’s still a miracle.

“Eucharistic miracles” following upon Transubstantiation are merely confirmation that “the” Eucharistic miracle, so to speak, has indeed taken place. When, in rare cases, the bread and wise ACTUALLY appear to us under the forms of human flesh and blood, we are merely being shown the underlying reality of what is ALREADY THERE under normal conditions. If anything, such a spectacular occurrence is probably even LESS of a miracle (technically), since God is no longer concealing the body and blood of his Son under the appearances of bread and wine.

But it’s TOTALLY a miracle. Absolutely. Always.

 

[Holly3278]

Well, my priest considers it to be a miracle. I asked him once “Have you ever witnessed a Eucharistic miracle?” and he said to paraphrase “I witness a Eucharistic miracle every time I do Mass.”

 

[germangreek]

We have a young priest who, to me, sees himself as having no value.
.
.
.
Anyway the young priest now has to give himself value in no uncertain terms. So the Mass has become a drama, but not of the right sort. We go over all sorts of “obstacle courses” to show that he “represents Jesus” to the point where we now have a beretta, so the server has to go to the other side of the sanctuary so that the beretta can be placed on his or her seat and worn for the few seconds during the appropriate point in the mass. And so it goes on.

Do you KNOW this?

I’m truly serious, do you and this priest have discussions in which he bares his heart to you about his unworthiness when offering the sacrifice of the Mass, or has he been for a long time a close personal friend so you have, so to speak, a window into his soul? Because I can think of any number of reasons why a young priest might start adopting the accoutrements of the more traditional-minded among us, and that wouldn’t be very high up my list. Years ago at my parish, we actually had an associate assigned to our parish who undertook to train the altar servers - that had been left to a teacher at the school or a lay assistant - and who even corrected them, during Mass, if they didn’t perform their minimal functions correctly. This aroused the ire of the parents of the poor dears, ever mindful of the delicate self-esteem of their precious offspring, who met with him and got him to back off. Why all the drama? Because this priest wanted the sacrament of our salvation to be DONE RIGHT! He probably still thinks the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is more important than the self-esteem of a ten-year-old. Anyway, your cursory description of the circumstances suggests to me a fellow who actually wants the Mass to be done right, dealing with a sanctuary full of folks who have been trained to think it’s no big deal, in fact he should be grateful for their service. That would be a more charitable judgement on your priest, a little harsher judgement on your fellow-parishioners, and would require you to become more learned in the ritual of the Mass so you could form an accurate judgement of the rights and wrongs you observe.
Or, you could scrupulously avoid forming any judgements at all, and rejoice in the mystery of your salvation, made present in your time and place so that you can offer the Father true worship, in Spirit and in truth.

It’s a ‘biretta’, by the way. James Bond prefers a Beretta.

Just a suggestion.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please stay on topic, everyone. Take side discussions to new or existing threads. Thank you all.

 

[JimG]

Eucharist miracles, such as Lanciano, are miracles because there is a change in the accidents, or appearances, which we can see.

When a scientist analyzes the heart tissue which is evident at Lanciano, he is examining the change in accidents which occurred.

In a normal Mass, the substance is changed, but the accidents of bread and wine remain.

 

[mercygate]

Eucharist miracles, such as Lanciano, are miracles because there is a change in the accidents, or appearances, which we can see.

When a scientist analyzes the heart tissue which is evident at Lanciano, he is examining the change in accidents which occurred.

In a normal Mass, the substance is changed, but the accidents of bread and wine remain.

Exactly. In a normal Mass, we participate in a “mystery” (which has its miraculous side, to be sure) but to spare confusion, when the Church refers to “miracles” (e.g. those documented for the canonization of a saint) it requires documentable evidence.

 

[FromTheAshes777]

Only a priest (or bishop) can confect the Eucharist because of the indelible character they received at their ordination. The priest only has the power to do so because he invokes the Holy Spirit to work through him (in the epiclesis of the Eucharistic Prayer) in persona Christi (“in the person of Christ”): apart from God, he can do nothing but talk over bread and wine; with God, he can make sacramentally, substantially, and really present our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

This is getting a little bit off of the subject of the Eucharist, but say a person was on their death bed and needed to recieve Extreme Unction. Say this person’s Priest had a grudge or even hatred twoards this person (since we all know there are and have been bad priests) and refused to give them the sacrament when this person requested it. Would this be a situation similar to baptism of desire? The person desires this sacrament but can’t recieve it because of the sin of the priest and dies before another priest can be found.

I know that God is not bound to the sacraments and the He is a just God, would God consider this person’s desire and contrition to be equal to the sacrament of Extreme Unction in regards to their salvation? Thanks.

 

[japhy]

…say a person was on their death bed and needed to recieve Extreme Unction. Say this person’s Priest had a grudge or even hatred twoards this person (since we all know there are and have been bad priests) and refused to give them the sacrament when this person requested it. Would this be a situation similar to baptism of desire? … I know that God is not bound to the sacraments and the He is a just God, would God consider this person’s desire and contrition to be equal to the sacrament of Extreme Unction in regards to their salvation?

I can’t provide an authoritative answer to that question, but I would expect that if a priest unjustly refused a sacrament to one who asked for it with the proper intentions, that God would have mercy on that one. Nor can I (nor would I want to!) say what God would do about the unjust priest!

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please stay on topic, everyone. Take side issues to new or existing threads. Thank you all.

 

[masterjedi747]

Exactly. In a normal Mass, we participate in a “mystery” (which has its miraculous side, to be sure) but to spare confusion, when the Church refers to “miracles” (e.g. those documented for the canonization of a saint) it requires documentable evidence.

I completely agree with the “but to spare confusion…etc.” part.

But that doesn’t mean that Transubstantiation isn’t a miracle, in and of itself. It is. The miracle is the mystery. But it’s a much more frequent and not-as-obviously-spectacular miracle, and hence we set aside another category for (the more spectacular) “Eucharistic miracles”.

Eucharist miracles, such as Lanciano, are miracles because there is a change in the accidents, or appearances, which we can see.

In a normal Mass, the substance is changed, but the accidents of bread and wine remain.

Right. However, the very fact that the substance changes at the words of consecration is most certainly a miracle. And it’s an even further miracle that the accidents of bread and wine actually remain throughout the substantial change… because they really shouldn’t be there.

 

[JimG]

Right. However, the very fact that the substance changes at the words of consecration is most certainly a miracle. And it’s an even further miracle that the accidents of bread and wine actually remain throughout the substantial change… because they really shouldn’t be there.

Exactly right. The accidents remain without inhering in any substance.

The Eucharist is more than a miracle. If anyone wants to call it miracle, I won’t argue. But, if so, it’s a miracle we can’t observe or measure. We can never see the change which takes place.
(I exclude 'Eucharistic miracles here, because in those we do perceive a change in the accidents.)

Healings can be seen and medically certified.
Bilocation can be verified by observers in two places.
The transformation which occurs in the Eucharist is not observable or measurable. It’s a sacrament, a mystery, which is even better than a miracle.

So while the change in substance may be “miraculous,” it does not meet the technical definition of a miracle because it is not apparent to observers.

 

[tessi]

Faith isn’t required - Obedience is. The priest here doubted but was doing the Mass because he knew that he had an obligation to do it.

The Lord performed the miracle so he could have the faith because he obeyed

I don’t agree. God needs faith to perform a miracle. Jesus healed those who believed He could do it. The great things that God did in the Old Testament were because someone had faith.
I think that in Lanciano there must have been someone (an unknown saint maybe) with a deep faith so God could do that miracle for the doubtful priest.