Nature of the Catholic Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Le_Cracquere
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Le_Cracquere

Guest
Folks, I hereby apologise in advance, because I truly don’t know how to put these questions without risking giving grave offence that, with all my heart, I don’t mean. So, forgive me. And here goes:
  1. If the Host, or wafer, is literally transformed into the body of Christ, then why is our Lord’s Body crispy, starchy, and otherwise breadlike? Shouldn’t Its physical properties undergo some fairly obvious sort of change?
  2. I’m sure it would be a grave impiety to put a consecrated Host under the microscope, and I neither recommend nor propose it. However, if someone with more curiosity than righteousness were to do so, what do Catholics suppose the observer would see through his lens?
Of course, maybe the best question of all is, “does the Church really want the sort of catechumen to whom questions like these occur?” :rolleyes:
 
Le Cracquere:
Folks, I hereby apologise in advance, because I truly don’t know how to put these questions without risking giving grave offence that, with all my heart, I don’t mean. So, forgive me. And here goes:
  1. If the Host, or wafer, is literally transformed into the body of Christ, then why is our Lord’s Body crispy, starchy, and otherwise breadlike? Shouldn’t Its physical properties undergo some fairly obvious sort of change?
  2. I’m sure it would be a grave impiety to put a consecrated Host under the microscope, and I neither recommend nor propose it. However, if someone with more curiosity than righteousness were to do so, what do Catholics suppose the observer would see through his lens?
Of course, maybe the best question of all is, “does the Church really want the sort of catechumen to whom questions like these occur?” :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Your not the first one to get stuck on this. The bread is transformed in substance but the outward appearance and form remains looking like it did before. Christ said “This is My body” therefore it is! It may not look, taste, smell, feel, like it but it is because Christ said it is. Looking under a microscope would only provide a veiw of the outward physical appearances not the actual substance.
 
Br. Rich SFO:
Your not the first one to get stuck on this. The bread is transformed in substance but the outward appearance and form remains looking like it did before. Christ said “This is My body” therefore it is! It may not look, taste, smell, feel, like it but it is because Christ said it is. Looking under a microscope would only provide a veiw of the outward physical appearances not the actual substance.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response–I think, to some extent, I see what you mean. However (oh, dear, I’m digging my hole deep), what does “substance” entail here? Does the atomic structure change? Are we saying that an analysis of the Host would turn up the same carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, etc., atoms, in the same number & proportions, as are found in ordinary bread? If so, then I take it that “substance” in the philosophical/theological sense means something different from our garden-variety use of the word. It seems, at least, that “substance” is a spiritual rather than a physical concept. Am I on the right track?
 
Le Cracquere:
Thanks for the response–I think, to some extent, I see what you mean. However (oh, dear, I’m digging my hole deep), what does “substance” entail here? Does the atomic structure change? Are we saying that an analysis of the Host would turn up the same carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, etc., atoms, in the same number & proportions, as are found in ordinary bread? If so, then I take it that “substance” in the philosophical/theological sense means something different from our garden-variety use of the word. It seems, at least, that “substance” is a spiritual rather than a physical concept. Am I on the right track?
Click to expand...
Substance is what something is. Does the atomic structure change? Usually not since that still is only an outward appearance. However God has in many instances unveiled the Blessed Sacrament and examination has found human tissue, blood and heart muscle in those instances.
 
Transubstance—change substance. Therefore the substance of the host truly become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord. The accidents is what stays the same. Accidents is the apperance of the hosts.
 
Br. Rich SFO:
Substance is what something is. Does the atomic structure change? Usually not since that still is only an outward appearance. However God has in many instances unveiled the Blessed Sacrament and examination has found human tissue, blood and heart muscle in those instances.
Click to expand...
Thanks–not sure, though, that I know what “unveiling” means in this context. Who examined it, and in what way?
 
Le Cracquere:
Thanks–not sure, though, that I know what “unveiling” means in this context. Who examined it, and in what way?
Click to expand...
I think one specific example you could look at for an occurence where the Body and Blood also took the Physical appearance of live flesh and blood would be the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano.

Here’s a site with information on it: therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html
In 1970-'71 and taken up again partly in 1981 there took place a scientific investigation by the most illustrious scientist Prof. Odoardo Linoli, eminent Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy. He was assisted by Prof. Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena.
Click to expand...
The analyses were conducted with absolute and unquestionable scientific precision and they were documented with a series of microscopic photographs.
These analyses sustained the following conclusions:

  1. *]The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.
    *]The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.
    *]The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.
    *]In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.
    *]The Flesh is a “HEART” complete in its essential structure.
    *]The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).
    *]In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.
    *]In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.
    *]The preservation of the Flesh and of the Blood, which were left in their natural state for twelve centuries and exposed to the action of atmospheric and biological agents, remains an extraordinary phenomenon.
Click to expand...

  1. Good luck with your searches 👍
 
Le Cracquere:
Of course, maybe the best question of all is, “does the Church really want the sort of catechumen to whom questions like these occur?” :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I think that kind of catechumen is one of the best types to have- one that thinks and doesn’t accept things “just because I was told”.
 
Le Cracquere:
Folks, I hereby apologise in advance, because I truly don’t know how to put these questions without risking giving grave offence that, with all my heart, I don’t mean. So, forgive me. And here goes:
  1. If the Host, or wafer, is literally transformed into the body of Christ, then why is our Lord’s Body crispy, starchy, and otherwise breadlike? Shouldn’t Its physical properties undergo some fairly obvious sort of change?
  2. I’m sure it would be a grave impiety to put a consecrated Host under the microscope, and I neither recommend nor propose it. However, if someone with more curiosity than righteousness were to do so, what do Catholics suppose the observer would see through his lens?
Of course, maybe the best question of all is, “does the Church really want the sort of catechumen to whom questions like these occur?” :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
These questions ahev been bandied about ever since the days of the early church. As far as the change itself it is truly mysterious and miraculous, and requires one thing above all else

FAITH

Without faith, the miracle is so great that it cannot ever be explained. Anti-Catholic apologists, Hank Hannegraff , Dave Hunt and the Ministry" The Berean Call" come to mind, pin their arguments squarely on this issue.

As far as putting a consecrated Host under a microscope, it’s been done, often, repeatedly, numerous studies done, some posted on the internet. High School students have done it, College students have done it ad nauseum. It’s been placed under electron microscopes, etc. The result is almost always the same.

The Bread retains its’ composition as bread and the Wine as wine.

That being said there have been documented instances where **certain specific consecrated hosts, do have physical properties. **Why that is, no one knows.A mystery of faith. But it is a fact

As far as if the church welcome someone who asks these questions? Of course, they would why not? Acceptance of the truth of the mystery of the Eucharist is not an easy concept. And in fact most of those who drop out of RCIA do so for that very reaswon. They simply cannot accept the mystery. It is too grat for them to understand.

No my friend, don’t be ashamed of questioning or not understanding. It took me years before I discovered that FAITH is what you need, not studies, not proof, not validation, just FAITH.

May God bless you and keep you and yours. I hope that your journey is a good one. 👍
 
Let’s put it this way.

At the moment of transubstantiation 2 miracles occur.
  1. The bread and wine become the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
  2. The greater miracle is that the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ takes on the appearance of bread and wine.
 
Thanks to everyone–I’ll check out the links, see what else I can’t find … and oh, yeah. Faith.
 
40.png
OutinChgoburbs:
I think that kind of catechumen is one of the best types to have- one that thinks and doesn’t accept things “just because I was told”.
Click to expand...
AMEN! Would that more “cradle Catholics” would ask these questions, too.

If you have ever studied Aristoleian philosophy, you will understand transubstantiation so much better.

Basically, the substance is what makes something what it is. I heard a Dominican use the term “whatness.” For example, “chairness” would be what makes a chair a chair. The accidents would be the size, shape, color, material.

So, in the Eucharist the “breadness” is changed to the substance of Christ’s Body, blood, sould and divinity, while the accidents of wheat flour baked with water remain.
 
Another way to think of it is the fact that God became Man, but if you had examined Jesus’ cells under a microscope you would have simply seen human cells, not evidence of “Godness”. We know He was God because of Faith and what was revealed, but no physical examination could ever prove it. In fact, the only “physical exam” He received, at the hands of St. Thomas, was to prove He was human.

It’s a little different of course, since Jesus was both human and God, whereas the Eucharist is only God, but it serves as an illustration of “how” such things can be true despite lacking sensory evidence. That being said, check out the Miracle of Lanciano, it’s mindblowing.

Peace and God bless!
 
Firstly, there is nothing in either your questions or your tone that should give the least offence (for which I thank you).

If Jesus had come today rather than 2000 years ago, what tests could we perform on Him that would show Him to be anything other than human? What tests would demonstrate that this man was God incarnate?
 
40.png
Ghosty:
Another way to think of it is the fact that God became Man, but if you had examined Jesus’ cells under a microscope you would have simply seen human cells, not evidence of “Godness”. We know He was God because of Faith and what was revealed, but no physical examination could ever prove it. In fact, the only “physical exam” He received, at the hands of St. Thomas, was to prove He was human.
Click to expand...
That ugly “clunk” sound you just heard was things falling neatly into place inside my head. Milles beaucoups de thanks, Ghosty, and God bless!
 
Le Cracquere:
That ugly “clunk” sound you just heard was things falling neatly into place inside my head. Milles beaucoups de thanks, Ghosty, and God bless!
Click to expand...
I’m glad to help! You ask some wonderful questions and you will be a great Catholic, I’m certain. Never be afraid to ask such questions; one of our greatest theologians, St. Thomas Aquinas, did nothing BUT ask such questions, and then work out the answers based on the Catholic Faith and general use of reason 😃

Peace and God bless!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top