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

  • Thread starter Thread starter brb3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Verbum_Caro said:
Marcopolo,

Can you explain a bit about what you mean by “ontological change”?

Thanks
VC
Click to expand...
It is a change in the reality of what the thing is (in this case bread is no longer bread, but His body), although imperceptible to empirical human measurements, whether it be our eyes or a scientific instrument. As I understand the term ontological, it refers to the very being or nature of a thing.
 
MarcoPolo said:
It is a change in the reality of what the thing is (in this case bread is no longer bread, but His body), although imperceptible to empirical human measurements, whether it be our eyes or a scientific instrument. As I understand the term ontological, it refers to the very being or nature of a thing.
Click to expand...
Thanks MP.

The reason i ask is because you stated it in general terms, and it makes wonder if that is the best way to state it.

The question that occured to me was: dont things change from one thing to another? And if so, how do we know they do?

VC
 
Verbum_Caro said:
Thanks MP.

The reason i ask is because you stated it in general terms, and it makes wonder if that is the best way to state it.

The question that occured to me was: dont things change from one thing to another? And if so, how do we know they do?

VC
Click to expand...
I’m sure there are other far better ways to state it than my awkward wording. :o Maybe just stick with “the change is imperceptible” and leave out the big words. :o

As to “how do we know,” on this issue of Transubstantiation, we can only perceive with the eyes of faith based on what we understand to have been revealed in divine revelation.
 
MP,

Yes, that avoids any confusion.

In factt, the change is impreceptible because the accidents of bread and wine remain the same as before the change. Normally accidents changing are what clues us in when things change.

VC
 
Verbum_Caro said:
Are you under the impression that the color of Neptune or the width of an atom aren’t accidents because we don’t sense them without scientific instuments?
Click to expand...
One is too far away to appreciate, with our 5 senses … the other too tiny to appreciate, at the macro human level. Keep in mind that the ‘appearances’ were defined before our modern day scientific aids were available to the Church.
 
exnihilo said:
The Church is not saying that there is no longer bread and wine. They remain as the accident so to all appearances nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
Nope ! The Church is saying precisely the opposite. Consubstantiation, on the otherhand, would propose that bread and wine remain.

Transubstantiation, proposes that there is NO LONGER bread & wine present. The appearance of bread & wine remains … but, their molecular / atomic constitution has been transformed into Christ’s Body/Blood/Soul/Divinity [true presence].
 
brb3 said:
Nice effort JonNC … but, ML is not saying what 10th Article says. Read his words carefully … they clearly teach Consubstantiation.

When was 10th Article composed by Lutherans ? That Article appears to have corrected ML’s error … and is more in line with the Catholic understanding/teachings.

Anything else on the subject written by ML … or by the Lutheran Church ?
Click to expand...
The Apology of the Augsburg Confession was written by Melanchthon, and approved by Luther.

Jon
 
brb3 said:
Also, on my second reading of the 10th Article from the LUTHERAN BOOK OF CONCORD … I’ve spotted the error of Luther — still present today !

“We confess that we believe, that IN the Lord’s Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and TRULY TENDERED WITH THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE SEEN, BREAD AND WINE] to those who receive the Sacrament.”

I capitalized the words that point up the continued ‘co-existance’ of bread/wine along with Christ. Thus, the bread & wine remain the visible substance of the supper … and IN this, Christ is also TENDERED. This is Consubstantiation, by definition.
Click to expand...
So, I take it you can’t see bread and wine at mass? I’ve been to Catholic Mass on numerous occasions, and while I, out of respect of your communion and mine, did not go forward to receive, I certainly saw what my senses perceived as bread and wine. On the other hand, I knew for a fact that it was the body and blood of Christ.

Consubstantiation talks of a mixing of bread and body. We reject this totally. The Lutheran position is simple and clear; Christ said the bread is His body, and so it is.

Jon
 
MarcoPolo said:
physical or chemical science is ineffective at measuring what is an ontological change. For Catholics, and Lutherans as far as I know, the change is imperceptible.

The answer to the OP’s question is “neither.”
Click to expand...
Don’t be so sure ! Our science might well be able to address if Trans or Consubstantiation has occurred. Lanciano, Corpus Christi miracle, and the recent appearance of blood in the host in South America [see video link in this thread] suggest it is possible to differentiate a CON from TRANSubstantiation event.
 
brb3 said:
One is too far away to appreciate, with our 5 senses … the other too tiny to appreciate, at the macro human level. Keep in mind that the ‘appearances’ were defined before our modern day scientific aids were available to the Church.
Click to expand...
That doesnt work brb. Does something that is too far away see, say the Acropolis, have height?

Let Aristotle posit a celestial body beyond the view of the naked eye, would such a body have a mass, a shape, a color?

VC
 
brb3 said:
Don’t be so sure ! Our science might well be able to address if Trans or Consubstantiation has occurred. Lanciano, Corpus Christi miracle, and the recent appearance of blood in the host in South America [see video link in this thread] suggest it is possible to differentiate a CON from TRANSubstantiation event.
Click to expand...
This maybe a little off topic but… The blood from the Eucharistic miracles, the blood from the stigmata of the saints (different blood type than the natural blood of the saint), and the blood found on the Shroud of Turin… All the same blood type!
 
JonNC said:
So, I take it you can’t see bread and wine at mass? I’ve been to Catholic Mass on numerous occasions, and while I, out of respect of your communion and mine, did not go forward to receive, I certainly saw what my senses perceived as bread and wine. On the other hand, I knew for a fact that it was the body and blood of Christ.

Consubstantiation talks of a mixing of bread and body. We reject this totally. The Lutheran position is simple and clear; Christ said the bread is His body, and so it is.
Click to expand...
Yes, we all SEE, SMELL, TASTE … wine and bread !! But, what do our cells receive ? Some limited, scientific testing suggests the substance of wine & bread is IN FACT become human heart protein & human blood. Human molecular substances, which linger for extended time periods … which is c/w the teaching of Transubstantiation, not Consubstantiation.
 
brb3;:
their molecular / atomic constitution has been transformed into Christ’s Body/Blood/Soul/Divinity [true presence].
Click to expand...
brb,

Do you propose that a microscope would show a molecular change? If so, and if I understand you properly, I’d say that isnt what the Church teaches. Can you explain why you think so? What have you read or been taught that indicates that to you?

Thanks,
VC
 
SMA_12 said:
This maybe a little off topic but… The blood from the Eucharistic miracles, the blood from the stigmata of the saints (different blood type than the natural blood of the saint), and the blood found on the Shroud of Turin… All the same blood type!
Click to expand...
Yes … Type AB blood. And the body tissue is human myocardial heart tissue …
 
brb3 said:
Yes, we all SEE, SMELL, TASTE … wine and bread !! But, what do our cells receive ? Some limited, scientific testing suggests the substance of wine & bread is IN FACT become human heart protein & human blood. Human molecular substances, which linger for extended time periods … which is c/w the teaching of Transubstantiation, not Consubstantiation.
Click to expand...
My understanding is this is not what your Church teaches, but unlike you, I do not propose to say what your church teaches. It would seem to me that if science were to test the sacrament and find human tissue, the even the accidents would be gone. But even when/if this is the case in Eucharistic miracles, it would not be contrary to the Lutheran belief that the bread is His body.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
I’ve been to Catholic Mass on numerous occasions, and while I, out of respect of your communion and mine, did not go forward to receive, I certainly saw what my senses perceived as bread and wine.
Click to expand...
Yes, but hopefully, soon you will be a Confirmed Catholic … and able to receive the Transubstantiated Eucharist with Christ’s ‘true presence’. I am confident you will receive / perceive the Catholic Eucharist to be more efficacious to you … than the Lutheran Lord’s Supper.
 
brb3 said:
In the limited cases where the Eucharistic host have been studied, … YES !

See post # 38 … and review the Lanciano miracle lab results.
Click to expand...
No, not in eucharistic miracles. Do you propose that a microscope would show a molecular change in the multitude of hosts used at mass?

Thanks,VC
 
Verbum_Caro said:
Do you propose that a microscope would show a molecular change in the multitude of hosts used at mass?
Click to expand...
Indeed I do !! I have not personally ‘palmed’ the bread and tested it in the Lab, and wouldn’t do so. This would be highly offensive to God.

But, God has already allowed some chemical testing to be done … and it supports Transubstantiation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top