So, back to my question: why do you beleive so? What lead you to think so? You arent simply extrapolating from Eucharistic miracles that have done testing to argue that such testing on more usual hosts would show molecular change?
Do an internet search on the previous Eucharistic miracles, and lab testing performed … and get back to us.
No personal lab testing be myself. But, I’ve received both Protestant Lord’s Supper and Catholic Eucharist … and the Eucharist is the one with efficacious properties.
No, i mean why do you think that a microscope trained on a consecrated host from aan ordinary mass would show there has been a molecular change?
Because Christ taught this to his 12, and to the others … who left him. He taught them to touch Him and feel his flesh … so they would not doubt. Paul clearly believed/taught the body/blood transformation of bread/wine. The Church always has believed and maintained this Tradition. Several Eucharistic miracles offer chemical lab & physical microscopic evidence of human blood/flesh. And, the Catholic Eucharist has the spiritual / physical healing power … which non-transubstantiated hosts lack.
So you are extrapolating from the idea that because a microscope used on a eucharistic miracle showed a microscopic change that a microscope used on a normal consecrated host woul also show a microscopic change?
The tradition you meantion may not be the true one. It is somewhat of a mystery to understand what a glorified life is after death. On the mountain Christ’s body was transformed and it glowed brightly. When he came to the apostles after resurrecting, he was a human with the wounds of the cross. He even ate fish with the apostles but didn’t need to because you don’t need human food to exist in heaven. He used methods beyond star trek to go from heaven and down to earth to visit and teach until the Spirit was to come. We cannot say for sure what the transubstantiated - glorified body of Christ is like because it can change to whatever it needs to be, even aligning atoms to go through walls.
Because the Church teaches we receive the BODY/BLOOD/SOUL/DIVINITY in the Eucharist. That Christ is not divided … and only giving us his Spirit. We receive the TOTAL, indivisible, resurrected Christ.
Not sure this is true because many times I have heard of people making communion breads with butter, cinnamon, sugar, etc because they don’t know what is really required. These are “illicit” materials, but do not make the Eucharist invalid, just illicit. I think it would be the same with poison. It is illicit, but does not invalidate IMHO.
Not a functioning link !
Here it is again, but better:Not a functioning link !
what source Chuck ? Scripture, ECF’s, CCC, Catholic Encyclo ?
I propose you misunderstand the Latin Church’s teaching on “accidents.” Accidents are REAL things. They are not phantoms. Are you aware of the Latin Catholic anthropology that states that the spirit is the form of the human being, while the body is the ACCIDENT? Do you suppose our bodies have no reality?
I see your ‘gnostic’ viewpoint, … Christ didn’t bleed or suffer physical pain on the Cross, it was only metaphysical suffering. And, Christ only spoke metaphorically, when he told the 12 to receive him bodily in the bread and wine :ballspin:
Better stated as: the* essence* of bread and wine no longer remain.
I’ll say this as gently as I can, and not nearly as pithy as clchowry: I don’t think so brb.
Yes.
Verbum …
Every Eucharist in every Catholic Church every day of the year.