Luther's Consubstantiation .... or Catholicism's Transubstantiation

[brb3]

1. ) The first part of brb3’s statement, “our Chruch teaches we receive the Crucified and Resurrected Christ in the Eucharist” is absolutely correct and incontrovertible. This is because we receive Christ as He really is.

2.) The second part brb3’s statement “we receive both his sacrificed ‘natural’ body/blood & his ‘supernatural’ ‘glorified’ body/blood.” is the portion that is incorrect if it posits that we receive Christ both glorified and unglorified, i.e. in the resurrected and non-resurrected state.

1. … Yes, we receive Christ … as He really is.
2. … Yes, we receive the B/B/S/D Real Presence ----- of Christ who suffered & died for us on Cross as the sacrificial ‘God-man’ Lamb ] and retains the scars thereof for all eternity … and of Christ, Resurrected & Glorified by the Father, who lives forever to make intercession for us before the Father. The Christ who TODAY commands we ‘take up our Cross’ and follow him in a life of sacrifice and devotion. We love the Christ of Calvary & the Christ at right hand of the Father. The suffering, rejected Savior & the glorious, truimphant, reigning Son of God.

So, YES … we know the Father thru the unglorified, humiliated Servant / Lamb & the GLORIFIED Eternal King. The SAME Christ … undivided, who overcame death, and rules His Church, being Sacramentally available to us as a REAL PRESENCE, in the Eucharist.

Am I wrong ? Did I receive errant Catholic formation on the Eucharist ?

 

[Verbum_Caro]

So, YES … we know the Father thru the unglorified, humiliated Servant / Lamb & the GLORIFIED Eternal King. The SAME Christ … undivided, who overcame death, and rules His Church, being Sacramentally available to us as a REAL PRESENCE, in the Eucharist.

Am I wrong ? Did I receive errant Catholic formation on the Eucharist ?

All is fine, unless you mean when you say “we know the Father thru the unglorified” that Christ who is now present in the Eucharist is unglorified.

Christ WAS unglorified but is now glorified. We therefore now receive Christ who IS glorified.

You have to be clear. For instance if you marry a 33 year old woman who won the spelling bee in 5th grade you have married the SAME woman who ONCE who won the spelling bee in 5th grade, but you are not marrying a 5th grader.

When you receive communion now you receive Christ in His glorified state, the same Christ who ONCE was unglorified, but you are not now receiving a unglorified Christ.

Any help?
VC

 

[brb3]

All is fine, unless you mean when you say “we know the Father thru the unglorified” that Christ who is now present in the Eucharist is unglorified.

Christ WAS unglorified but is now glorified. We therefore now receive Christ who IS glorified.

When you receive communion now you receive Christ in His glorified state, the same Christ who ONCE was unglorified, but you are not now receiving a unglorified Christ.

:nope:

That’s not the way the Gospel or Paul in Epistles teach Communion. Christ has always been Glorified, He is the Alpha & Omega. Glorified from before the beginning of time, eons BEFORE he consented, in obedience to the Father, to become man, suffer and die in the most ‘unglorified’ way a Jew could imagine.

So in the Eucharist we receive the Glorified I AM, the Beginning & End, and the unglorifed servant Lord that suffered / died IN THE FLESH … so that man/woman might be justified by his bruised flesh & spilled blood, and receive forgiveness of post-baptismal sins. “But, he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and WITH HIS STRIPES WE ARE HEALED” … Isaiah 53:5

then, Isaiah continues in 53:10-12 “Yet it was the will of the Lord to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when HE MAKES HIMSELF AN OFFERING FOR SIN, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand; HE SHALL SEE THE FRUIT OF THE TRAVAIL of his soul and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, MAKE MANY TO BE ACCOUNTED RIGHTEOUS; and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and HE SHALL DIVIDE THE SPOIL WITH THE STRONG; BECAUSE HE POURED OUT HIS SOUL TO DEATH, and was numbered with the transgressors; YET HE BORE THE SIN OF MANY, AND MADE INTERCESSION FOR THE TRANSGRESSORS, …”

 

[brb3]

When you receive communion now you receive Christ in His glorified state, the same Christ who ONCE was unglorified, but you are not now receiving a unglorified Christ.

Let me quote another, an ECF source on the subject of how the EARLY CHURCH perceived the Eucharist … to dispute your above statement.

“For not as common bread or common drink do we receive these [hosts] … but, as both the FLESH AND BLOOD of that INCARNATED JESUS.”
Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66

Now, did Justin say ‘resurrected’ or ‘heavenly’ Jesus ? Nope … he said INCARNATED JESUS.

Are you gonna have me believe Isaiah and Justin got it wrong ? … or that our Church today disputes/teaches ‘otherwise’, than what they taught in the beginning ?

 

[Verbum_Caro]

brb3,

We’re talking about a different and specific “glorified”.

This one, from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

659 Christ’s body was glorified at the moment of his Resurrection, as proved by the new and supernatural properties it subsequently and permanently enjoys.

If you do a search for “glorified” in the Catechism (or the Catholic Encyclopedia, or a Catholic dictionary) you’ll see the several ways the word is used. When speaking of Christ in Eucharist and referring to a “glorified state” (as I did) or a “glorified body” (as you did) we are using “glorified” in this sense – the sense of post-Resurrection, Catechism 659, etc.

Any help?
VC

 

[brb3]

When you receive communion now you receive Christ in His glorified state, the same Christ who ONCE was unglorified, but you are not now receiving a unglorified Christ.

"Reverence, therefore, reverence this table, of which we are all communicants ! CHRIST SLAIN FOR US, THE SACRIFICIAL VICTIM WHO IS PLACED THEREON ! "
John Chrysostom, Homilies on Romans 8:8

“Christ is the Priest, OFFERING HIMSELF, AND HIMSELF THE VICTIM. He will that the sacramental sign of this would be the DAILY SACRIFICE OF THE CHURCH…”
ST. Augustine, City of God 10:20

There you are VC … look at what our greatest ECF, Doctor of the Church, has said in the City of God ---------- the Glorified, Resurrected Christ [as High Priest] offers up his unglorified, sacrified body/blood of Calvary to us in the Daily Mass / Eucharist … in an ‘unbloody’ way. As, BOTH High Priest & Victim … we receive the REAL PRESENCE of CHRIST … B/B/S/D !

Remember its generally not an Either/Or truth that Catholicism teaches. Usually its BOTH / AND !!!

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Let’s put it simply and clearly, for you and any other following this thread:

If you hold that at Holy Communion you receive THE NON-GLORIFIED BODY OF CHRIST then you hold error and state something that is certainly not Catholic.

Any help?
VC

(P.S. As Catholics, we really shouldn’t cherry pick and quote mine Church Fathers to support our own ideas. . . we shouldn’t read them and interpret them to bolster our own opinions. We are Catholics after all.)

 

[brb3]

If you hold that at Holy Communion you receive THE NON-GLORIFIED BODY OF CHRIST then you hold error and state something that is certainly not Catholic.

I’ve quoted Justin Martyr, John Chrysostom, ST. Augustine, & Isaiah [who speaks words of Christ] to you …all stating that we do indeed receive the LITERAL Christ of Calvary, that self-same Body/Blood that redeemed us from sins, the FINAL ‘bloody’ sacrifice’ that put to end forever the old Jewish Temple sacrifices. The SUBSTANCE of Christ is contained in the Consecrated Hosts, yet the Species we see is ‘unbloody’ Bread/Wine. It’s a mystery, but possible because it is Christ himself who performs the Mass, as High Priest. His words are spoken, he offers his Real Presence to us, to take away our sins. This is the final offerring, the Todah of Thanksgiving, the only sacrafice pleasing to God the Father [since Calvary event], the only sacrifice that takes away sins in our Post-Calvary World.

We receive BOTH the Glorified, Heavenly High Priest/King AND the Injured Servant/Prophet God-man of the Cross. The undivided Alpha - Omega God-man … whose shed blood forgives our sins. “Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins”. Hebrews 9:22

Show me where the Catholic Church teaches otherwise … and I’ll recant my formation on the Eucharist.

 

[Philthy]

:nope:

That’s not the way the Gospel or Paul in Epistles teach Communion. Christ has always been Glorified,…

You have to be a little careful. The second person of the Trinity has “always been Glorified” just as the Father has, but not in quite the same sense as the glorification that we speak of in a discussion of the Eucharist. Again, hear me out:
The Son did not always have a human nature. This great mystery, the Incarnation, that “By the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary and became man” is a profound thing and so great a mystery that we bow each time we recite it in Mass. Anyhow, the point is that the second Person of the Godhead “became man” and did so in the ordinary, unglorified sense. It was not until his Resurrection that he was glorified. At that time all of his human nature ( his body, his blood and his soul) including the wrinkles, lashings, nail scars and pierced side became glorified for all eternity. That is how He is now, and that is how we receive Him in the Eucharist…glorified and under the cloak (to sense and science) of bread and wine.

BTW, I’m grateful that we’re having this discussion because I wasn’t sure whether Christ was, in fact, in his glorified state during the post-resurrection/pre-ascension period but VC has provided the catechism to confirm, unequivocally that he was. And that citation would not have occurred without your persistence, so I thank you!

Blessings!

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Show me where the Catholic Church teaches otherwise … and I’ll recant my formation on the Eucharist.

I have my doubts that you will change your mind when shown you are wrong. But, I hope you prove me wrong to have doubts.

You want me to show you where the Church teaches otherwise regarding the jumble you just stated? No, because you are just using words however you like, equivocating, and picking out phrases from the Church Fathers and interpreting however you wish. . . so, no.

But, if you want me to show you that the Church teaches what I said above, namely, that when you now receive Christ in Holy Communion you receive only the glorified body and not an unglorified, unresurrected body, then yes.

Let’s start here:

A document from the USCCB entitled “The Real Presence Of Jesus Christ In The Sacrament Of The Eucharist: Basic Questions And Answers”

This seems like a good place to start!

The whole Christ is truly present, body, blood, soul, and divinity, under the appearances of bread and wine—the glorified Christ who rose from the dead after dying for our sins.

In the celebration of the Eucharist, the glorified Christ becomes present under the appearances of bread and wine

In order for the whole Christ to be present—body, blood, soul, and divinity—the bread and wine cannot remain, but must give way so that his glorified Body and Blood may be present.

During the Eucharist, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ. As human, Jesus Christ has a human body, a resurrected and glorified body that in the Eucharist is offered to us in the form of bread and wine.

But, all of this is simply to say the Christ has a glorified body, right now.

Do you believe Christ has ONLY a glorified body or does he have two bodies? (Please use glorified to mean a resurrected body, as used in Catechism 659.

VC

 

[Philthy]

I’ve quoted Justin Martyr, John Chrysostom, ST. Augustine, & Isaiah [who speaks words of Christ] to you …all stating that we do indeed receive the LITERAL Christ of Calvary, that self-same Body/Blood that redeemed us from sins, the FINAL ‘bloody’ sacrifice’ that put to end forever the old Jewish Temple sacrifices.

Correct - and we receive all of it in it’s glorified state. Being glorified does not make it any less “literal”, as you seem to imply. In addition, don’t forget the importance of context in reading the ECFs. You have to remember that many of these ECF comments are directed toward refutation of those who held that Christ did not actually assume humanity (Monophytisism, Gnosticism, et al)

We receive BOTH the Glorified, Heavenly High Priest/King AND the Injured Servant/Prophet God-man of the Cross. The undivided Alpha - Omega God-man … whose shed blood forgives our sins. “Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins”. Hebrews 9:22

I would say we receive his glorified divinity and his glorified humanity. His glorified humanity was not always so and we can speak of it’s preglorified state as being one with his glorified state - it is simply different now.

Show me where the Catholic Church teaches otherwise … and I’ll recant my formation on the Eucharist

I would go right to this:

659 Christ’s body was glorified at the moment of his Resurrection, as proved by the new and supernatural properties it subsequently and permanently enjoys.

To sum up, following the Resurrection (ie subsequently) Christ’s body - the same body we receive in the Eucharist - is glorified and remains in this state permanently. What you need to do is prove that the Eucharist is an exception to the clear teaching that his humanity is “permanently” glorified to maintain your position.

blessings

 

[brb3]

But, if you want me to show you that the Church teaches what I said above, namely, that when you now receive Christ in Holy Communion you receive only the glorified body and not an unglorified, unresurrected body, then yes.

Let’s start here:

A document from the USCCB entitled [“The Real Presence Of Jesus Christ In The Sacrament Of The Eucharist: Basic Questions And Answers”](http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and worship/resources-for-the-eucharist/the-real-presence-of-jesus-christ-in-the-sacrament-of-the-eucharist-basic-questions-and-answers.cfm)

This seems like a good place to start!

OK … I read you above link. Sorry, but I don’t see where this document answers your ‘glorified’ vs ‘unglorified’ premise. It indeed promotes Christ’s literal ‘real presence’ in the Eucharist, and the presence of Christ’s crucified body @ Calvary, being RE-PRESENTED to us in the Eucharist meal. Exactly the point I’ve been making.

By the way, its well written … and generally supports what I’ve said here in this thread. What you need to do is quote specific passages from this document, and others, to address your claims of errors, in my posts. But, this you can be sure … no official Church document is ever gonna speak opposed to what Isaiah, Augustine, J. Martyr, or Chrysostom collectively taught on the Eucharist. The Church is protected from speaking errantly on matters of faith/morals. You & I are not … Many times I’ve been wrong in past … that’s why I always vet my ideas publicly, to be corrected/instructed in the fuller truths. 4 years ago I put the question of Christ in the Eucharist to my spiritual adviser(s). After some discussion and research on their part … I was informed the Church teaches we receive BOTH the crucified AND resurrected/glorified Body & Blood of the Lord.

 

[brb3]

To sum up, following the Resurrection (ie subsequently) Christ’s body - the same body we receive in the Eucharist - is glorified and remains in this state permanently. What you need to do is prove that the Eucharist is an exception to the clear teaching that his humanity is “permanently” glorified to maintain your position.

Sorry, but I don’t recall saying Christ has not been ‘permanently’ glorified … since the Resurrection? Point me to where I did so.

I did suggest Christ was in Glory, with the Father & H.S. … from BEFORE the creation of the World/Universe. Before all ages, eternal in being from before the Alpha point … probably the Big Bang, which is as far back as scientists/mankind can see.

Rather, I suggested Christ forfeitted that glory for a brief time in history. Willing giving up his Godhead position, to become man, and a servant & prophet to his people. Scripture absolutely supports this FACT ! John 12: 23-28 an example:

And Jesus answered them, "The hour has come for the Son of man TO BE GLORIFIED. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a GRAIN OF WHEAT falls into the earth and DIES, it remains alone; but if it dies, IT BEARS MUCH FRUIT. He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. If any one serves me, he must follow me; and where I AM, there shall my servant be also; if any one serves me, the Father will honor him. “Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? NO, FOR THIS PURPOSE I HAVE COME TO THIS HOUR. Father, GLORIFY THY NAME.” Then a voice came from heaven, “I HAVE GLORIFIED IT, and I WILL GLORIFY IT AGAIN.”

 

[Verbum_Caro]

OK … I read you above link. Sorry, but I don’t see where this document answers your ‘glorified’ vs ‘unglorified’ premise.

The document says (along with Aquinas, and other) we receive the glorified body of Christ. That’s because the Real Presence is Christ as He really is, right now. And right now, really, He has a glorified body. Period.

4 years ago I put the question of Christ in the Eucharist to my spiritual adviser(s). After some discussion and research on their part … I was informed the Church teaches we receive BOTH the crucified AND resurrected/glorified Body & Blood of the Lord.

The glorified body of Christ is the crucified body. It is the same body that was crucified and then glorified. There isn’t any problem (indeed, it is essential) to say that we received the glorified body of the crucified Christ.

But this is why I’ve pointed out that you’ve written erroneous or at least inaccurately when you say

“we receive both his sacrificed ‘natural’ body/blood & his ‘supernatural’ ‘glorified’ body/blood.”

if you mean by this we receive two different bodies, a glorified and an unglorified one.

So I say again, if you hold that at Holy Communion you receive THE NON-GLORIFIED BODY OF CHRIST then you hold error and state something that is certainly not Catholic. If you hold, however that we receive the glorified Body which once was crucified, then that is fine. Just as if you say you married a woman who once was a 5th grader, that’s fine. But saying that you married both a 5th grader and a woman isn’t.

VC

 

[brb3]

The glorified body of Christ is the crucified body. It is the same body that was crucified and then glorified. There isn’t any problem (indeed, it is essential) to say that we received the glorified body of the crucified Christ.

But this is why I’ve pointed out that you’ve written erroneous or at least inaccurately when you say if you mean by this we receive two different bodies, a glorified and an unglorified one.

Where did I ever say Christ has two bodies… or that we receive two bodies ? That’s just you taking license to liberalize what I said.

I simply said we receive ALL of Christ. The Glorified Son of God from before all creation, the servant/prophet Jesus, Son of man [God-man] for a brief moment in history, and the Resurrected, Glorified Christ the King … in the Eucharist. To my knowledge, Christ only had ONE body … a human body, via lineage of David ---- that was retained in Glorified state, upon the Resurrection.

 

[Philthy]

Sorry, but I don’t recall saying Christ has not been ‘permanently’ glorified … since the Resurrection? Point me to where I did so.

I did suggest Christ was in Glory, with the Father & H.S. … from BEFORE the creation of the World/Universe.
Before all ages, eternal in being from before the Alpha point … probably the Big Bang, which is as far back as scientists/mankind can see.

This is a technical inaccuracy on your part. Jesus did not exist prior to creation - the second person of the Trinity did. It was not until the second person of the Trinity possessed a human nature, “born of the virgin Mary” and was called Jesus of Nazareth and lived and died in a non-glorified state. His divine nature is somewhat different - it has not changed.

Rather, I suggested Christ forfeitted that glory for a brief time in history. Willing giving up his Godhead position, to become man, and a servant & prophet to his people. Scripture absolutely supports this FACT ! John 12: 23-28 an example:

His divine nature - which existed from all eternity - cloaked/forfeited it’s glorified state within his humanity. This has little to do with his human nature and has little to do with a discussion of the “body and blood” we receive in the Eucharist. The quote from John changes nothing with respect to this.

 

[Philthy]

Where did I ever say Christ has two bodies… or that we receive two bodies ? That’s just you taking license to liberalize what I said.

Here’s where it can be said you imply we receive two bodies, a glorified one and an unglorified one:

“we receive both his sacrificed ‘natural’ body… & his ‘supernatural’ ‘glorified’ body…”

I simply said we receive ALL of Christ.

And that, depending upon how you mean it, is where the error lies. We do not receive Christ in an unglorified state in the Eucharist - we do not receive the Christ of the past, but only the Christ of the present, which means both the glorified human nature and the divine nature.

The Glorified Son of God from before all creation, the servant/prophet Jesus, Son of man [God-man] for a brief moment in history, and the Resurrected, Glorified Christ the King … in the Eucharist.

Here again you imply that we receive Christ in an unglorified state. Why do I say that? Because you qualify the “resurrected” Jesus as being “Glorified” while you do not attach that quality to him as “servant/prophet…Son of man”. What we receive is the servant, prophet, Son of man in his now glorified state.

To my knowledge, Christ only had ONE body … a human body, via lineage of David ---- that was retained in Glorified state, upon the Resurrection.

To remain on point, Christ only HAS one body - a glorified one, and we receive it along with his divinity, in the Eucharist.

 

[perro_sarnoso]

Which is best supported by 21st Century Physics/Chemistry ? Both require a miracle, both require faith to believe. But, which seems to fit the science of molecules and matter ?

Physics…Chemistry…Science…Molecules…it might as well all be jibberish.!!!

Jesus Christ is truly present in body, blood, soul and divinity.

There is no " fit" for supernaturality. It is above nature.! AND…it is not a parallel occurence…it is truly happening as it is done…Transubstantiation. Not consubstantiation…

The action of the priest of consecration is the point of origin. The substance is Transformed completely at that moment…completely so that it is truly Jesus Himself at that moment.

His flesh…his heart…cardium…Keep It Simple…simply.

Comprende?!

 

[brb3]

Physics…Chemistry…Science…Molecules…it might as well all be jibberish.!!!

Keep It Simple…simply.

Sorry, but reality is not so simple. Christ designed physics/chemistry/atoms/molecules … and all science. No jibberish at all. All of nature and humanity are wonderfully created. You are not just a ‘metaphysical’ imagination of the mind … neither in this world, or the next.

 

[brb3]

Here again you imply that we receive Christ in an unglorified state. Why do I say that? Because you qualify the “resurrected” Jesus as being “Glorified” while you do not attach that quality to him as “servant/prophet…Son of man”. .

:nope: I said we receive all of Christ in the Eucharist. So did the ECF’s I quoted. BOTH the suffering, abused servant/prophet, son of man … AND, the Glorified, resurrected Lord. To leave out the first aspect of Christ’s humanity … removes the sacrifice of Jesus for our sins.

Yes, the Resurrected, Glorified Christ, Son of God, makes salvation possible, but w/o the sacrifice of Jesus … the Father would not receive us into his Kingdom.