Question about Transubstantiation

[tee_eff_em]

Aside: You continue using the word *transformation *in cases where it clearly does not apply]

The same Catholic philosophy that explains how bread and wine can become the body and blood of Christ applies equally to this car…yet a car being transformed seems silly.

IMHO

God’s greatest gift to us is the gift of reason. Faith and reason can co-exist quite easily, but

reason must always take precedence when there is a conflict between the two

. True faith follows reason, not blind obedience. Belief in something merely because that’s what you were told is as much a sin as denying the existence of God; because it’s denying God’s greatest gift. The best Christians are the ones that examine their beliefs with the eye of reason.

I think the *

IMHO

*is key here.

As with an earlier poster on this thread, the Church in her Catechism disagrees, viz. #'s 156-159 and surrounding, and particularly #159.

Faith and understanding

156 What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe “because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived”. So “that the submission of our faith might nevertheless be in accordance with reason, God willed that external proofs of his Revelation should be joined to the internal helps of the Holy Spirit.” Thus the miracles of Christ and the saints, prophecies, the Church’s growth and holiness, and her fruitfulness and stability “are the most certain signs of divine Revelation, adapted to the intelligence of all”; they are “motives of credibility” (motiva credibilitatis), which show that the assent of faith is “by no means a blind impulse of the mind”.

157 Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but “the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.” “Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt.”

158 “Faith seeks understanding”: it is intrinsic to faith that a believer desires to know better the One in whom he has put his faith, and to understand better what He has revealed; a more penetrating knowledge will in turn call forth a greater faith, increasingly set afire by love. the grace of faith opens “the eyes of your hearts” to a lively understanding of the contents of Revelation: that is, of the totality of God’s plan and the mysteries of faith, of their connection with each other and with Christ, the centre of the revealed mystery. “The same Holy Spirit constantly perfects faith by his gifts, so that Revelation may be more and more profoundly understood.” In the words of St. Augustine, “I believe, in order to understand; and I understand, the better to believe.”

159 Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason

, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth." “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. the humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.”

tee

 

[Allnamesused]

Holy stuff. You missed the main point.

Jesus picked up bread and said this is my body. He picked up the cup and said this is my blood. He said do this. He had already said that his flesh was food indeed and his blood was drink

Now, explain how he was wrong. Was he lying? Did he let them leave over metaphors? Was he crazy?

Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables and all the time. In the Gospel of Matthew alone he can be quoted telling people that they were made of salt and light. He told people not to bury the dead, He mentions that the Lord’s Prayer is the only prayer one should ever utter(I don’t know any Catholic who takes that one seriously). He declared that his mother was one of his disciples (umm…all males); The Kingdom of God is like a mustard seed; one must produce fruit to enter the Kingdom of Heaven (should we all get apple branches grafted to our body?); He described himself as a Shepard. Jesus spoke almost exclusively in metaphors. Even if you take the words he spoke at the last Supper literally, he certainly never stated that for now on humans would be able to recreate this action. This is literally the one time that today’s Catholics take the bible literally. I’m just asking this: examine what it means to insist that a priest can transform a wafer of bread into God; a claim that is believed despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence (let alone proof) that said miracle has even occurred. Every Catholic will admit that the transformed wafer is physically identical in every regard to the mundane wafer. Digesting the “transformed” wafer has no benefits that the mundane wafer doesn’t provide (a modicum of nutritional value and probably 1 or 2 calories). Catholics believe this because Jesus, an individual who spoke almost exclusively in metaphor, said “this is my body, this is my blood”. Like I said, the true miracle is the fact that you all actually believe this.

 

[tGette]

Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables and all the time. In the Gospel of Matthew alone he can be quoted telling people that they were made of salt and light. He told people not to bury the dead, He mentions that the Lord’s Prayer is the only prayer one should ever utter(I don’t know any Catholic who takes that one seriously). He declared that his mother was one of his disciples (umm…all males); The Kingdom of God is like a mustard seed; one must produce fruit to enter the Kingdom of Heaven (should we all get apple branches grafted to our body?); He described himself as a Shepard. Jesus spoke almost exclusively in metaphors. Even if you take the words he spoke at the last Supper literally, he certainly never stated that for now on humans would be able to recreate this action. This is literally the one time that today’s Catholics take the bible literally. I’m just asking this: examine what it means to insist that a priest can transform a wafer of bread into God; a claim that is believed despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence (let alone proof) that said miracle has even occurred. Every Catholic will admit that the transformed wafer is physically identical in every regard to the mundane wafer. Digesting the “transformed” wafer has no benefits that the mundane wafer doesn’t provide (a modicum of nutritional value and probably 1 or 2 calories). Catholics believe this because Jesus, an individual who spoke almost exclusively in metaphor, said “this is my body, this is my blood”. Like I said, the true miracle is the fact that you all actually believe this.

I am just butting in:

You say Jesus spoke ALMOST exclusively in metaphor. So that means NOT exclusively.

Also…the priest does not change the bread and wine…the Holy Spirit does!

I’m out!

 

[ncgolf]

Like I said, the true miracle is the fact that you all actually believe this.

No … the sad part is that you don’t. I will say … Jesus I took you at your word … you said it, I believe it … case closed.

You will have to say … Jesus you said it but I just couldn’t come to believe.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

This is literally the one time that today’s Catholics take the bible literally.

That is patently untrue, and an insult to Catholics.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Reflection of the Eucharist:

In the beginning when God created; God spoke His Word, those things that were not into existance; Then God said: “Let there be”; followed by a creation, God saw how Good it was an evening came, and morning followed by a numbered day.

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God; and the Word became flesh;

Jesus spoke his Word saying; Let this bread be my body, let this wine be my blood, for all humanity in the New and Everlasting Covenant (Luke 22:17-22)

God saw how good it was, blessed the Eucharist, witnessed by the apostles, God commanded them “do this in rememberance of me”

Jesus looked at everything while he was lifted up from the earth. Jesus saw what he created in the New Covenant; Jesus saw how good it was and said; “IT IS FINISHED”

Evening came, the crucifixion, Jesus layed in the tomb, Morning followed to the glorious resurrection, the 8th day.

The bread and wine are truly the body,blood, soul and divinity of Jesus, because the Word made flesh say’s it is.

FAITH; Hebrews 11:1
**1 Faith is the realization of what is hoped for and evidence 2 of things not seen. **
2
Because of it the ancients were well attested.
3
**By faith we understand that the universe was ordered by the word of God, 3 so that what is visible came into being through the invisible. **

Hebrews 10:19
9 Therefore, brothers, since through the blood of Jesus we have confidence of entrance into the sanctuary
20
10 by the new and living way he opened for us through the veil, that is, his flesh,

John 6:51
I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."
52
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”
53
Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54
Whoever eats 19 my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Let him hear who have ears to hear

Peace

 

[abucs]

If you believe that God created the universe then it is a logical step to say that our physical universe is not real in the sense that it is not ‘made up’ of the underlying reality. It is a creation - for a purpose.

The eucharist points to and upholds that view very clearly.

If you think that the physical universe is the underlying base of reality, then the eucharist will not make sense to you because you come to the concept with a worldview that is incompatible with a transcendant God who upholds creation.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

If you believe that God created the universe then it is a logical step to say that our physical universe is not real in the sense that it is not ‘made up’ of the underlying reality. It is a creation - for a purpose.

The eucharist points to and upholds that view very clearly.

If you think that the physical universe is the underlying base of reality, then the eucharist will not make sense to you because you come to the concept with a worldview that is incompatible with a transcendant God who upholds creation.

**AMEN; Catholics can understand Transubstantiation because the Spirit gives life while the flesh is of no avail. The mystery of the Eucharist deals with wisdom taught by the Spirit not the flesh, describing Spiritual realities as Paul teaches the 1Corinthian Church his words still hold today to those who deny the true body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ revealed in the Eucharist.

1Corinthians 2:12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God.

13 And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms.

14 Now the natural person 8 does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually.

15 The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment 9 by anyone. 16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ. **

Peace be with you

 

[abucs]

Gabriel, I think your quoted comments from Paul are very relevant in viewing the eucharist, especially regarding what he calls ‘spiritual matters’.

It’s interesting to read Paul’s writings in the light of the fact that his only interaction with Jesus was not of the (normal) material kind.

From much of Paul’s writings, including the ones above, he comes across as very confident in his views but aware that people will have a different view to his, because of experience and the perceptions that come out of that experience.

It seems the two experiences he is trying to contrast is flesh and spirit which i might describe as ‘material’ and ‘real’ or ‘created’ and ‘underlying’.

I agree with you that some problems people have with seeing the Eucharist as what we call ‘the body and blood of Christ’, can be seen in the contrast between what Paul calls the different views of the flesh and spirit.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Gabriel, I think your quoted comments from Paul are very relevant in viewing the eucharist, especially regarding what he calls ‘spiritual matters’.

It’s interesting to read Paul’s writings in the light of the fact that his only interaction with Jesus was not of the (normal) material kind.

From much of Paul’s writings, including the ones above, he comes across as very confident in his views but aware that people will have a different view to his, because of experience and the perceptions that come out of that experience.

It seems the two experiences he is trying to contrast is flesh and spirit which i might describe as ‘material’ and ‘real’ or ‘created’ and ‘underlying’.

I agree with you that some problems people have with seeing the Eucharist as what we call ‘the body and blood of Christ’, can be seen in the contrast between what Paul calls the different views of the flesh and spirit.

I agree with you abucs. What one must remember from Sacred Scripture is that the word Spirit is never meant to be taken symbolically, for the Spirit is eternal, and the flesh is temporal. This mystical body of Jesus Christ in his Eucharist calls humanity to faith in God’s word in the new covenant of the Spirit which gives eternal life and out of the old covenant of the flesh which is death.

Peace

 

[abucs]

Peace Gabriel.

 

[cazayoux]

I agree with you abucs. What one must remember from Sacred Scripture is that the word Spirit is never meant to be taken symbolically, for the Spirit is eternal, and the flesh is temporal. This mystical body of Jesus Christ in his Eucharist calls humanity to faith in God’s word in the new covenant of the Spirit which gives eternal life and out of the old covenant of the flesh which is death.

Peace

I agree. Spiritual does not equal Symbolic.

We have called things like ghosts, ‘spirits’ as if it something that isn’t fully ‘real’.
From the bible it seems to me like ‘the spirit’ is MORE real than anything we know. Compared to our spirit, this body is the one that is more ethereal and less substantive.

Cheers!

michel

 

[imroc]

Uum, no, please don’t use that analogy. This guy was not for real. Did you read the whole post? It seems he was poking fun. Besides, a car?

A better analogy that I like to use is with a person. Let’s say you know of a man who does not know Jesus. This man leads a bad lifestyle. One day this man finds out about Jesus through a friend of a friend. This man has a change of heart. This man has been transformed. His heart is different, softer. He changed as a man on the inside but we cannot see a change on the outside. He still looks the same. He still has the same color hair & eyes. But he is definitely different on the inside.

I wasn’t actually planning on using it as a good analogy, but as a bad analogy

 

[Allnamesused]

No … the sad part is that you don’t. I will say … Jesus I took you at your word … you said it, I believe it … case closed.

You will have to say … Jesus you said it but I just couldn’t come to believe.

Say for example you go to mass next Sunday like you would normally. Except this Sunday, your pastor Fr. Bob is on another of his three week vacations to Rome. “Fr. Pepe” a missionary from Peru is presiding over todays mass. He consecrates the bread and wine; you receive the Eucharist like you normally do and then return to your pews to mediate on the wonderful mystery you just swallowed. But what if Fr. Pepe was an imposter, never ordained and nobody knew it. Turns out that wafer was a mere piece of bread…nothing more. Of course, the kicker is…not a single one of you were able to tell the difference…not one of you. Nobody, upon placing the wafer upon their tounge thought to themself: “Hmmm, there’s something just not right about this wafer of Jesus…something’s off”.

Let me ask you, what’s the difference between consuming the mundane wafer and the transformed wafer? What advantage is there to eating the one that isn’t contained in the other? Obviously good Catholics fall victim to all of the same ailments that the rest of us experience. Catholics die in wars; get raped; burn to death in fires just like everyone else. A vast number of wellknown evil men received the eucharist on a regular basis. So…why should I or anyone care if we recieve the “Holy Eucharist”? WHY? Let me guess…it’s because God will condemn me to eternal damnation if I fail to consume this bread and wine in good faith. But do you honestly believe that God is so petty as to allow one of his children to be cast into hell for such an arbitrary reason? Will God actually say to me “Sorry my child, you never ate one of these so you’ll spend eternity in hell”? If so…why? If why = “cause there are a few line’s in the bible that clearly state this” then consider the possibility that the bible might contain a few errors. While you’re at it, consider this: the gospels were written 1600 years ago by men who had never ever even met Jesus. The Didache (the precursor to the gospels) makes no mention of the true presence and there was great debate about it in the church up until the 4th century (afterwards all deniers we classfied as heretics).

I know how awesome it must be to believe in this “miracle”, but how can anyone posible believe in something, when there is zero evidence that it ever happened. I will continue to not partake in this miracle. If God is so petty as to deny me entrance into heaven for this simple reason, then I suspect that he’ll have no problem finding a reason to condemn us all to hell.

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

I asked in another thread, but if we read in Acts about how invalids were brought into the street so that Peter’s shadow could be cast upon them when he walked past and heal the sick…wouldn’t consuming the flesh and blood of the Messiah have an even greater effect? Wouldn’t we see the sick healed? For that matter, couldn’t you place communion post-transubstantiation upon a dead body and see it resurrected?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I know how awesome it must be to believe in this “miracle”, but how can anyone posible believe in something, when there is zero evidence that it ever happened. I will continue to not partake in this miracle. If God is so petty as to deny me entrance into heaven for this simple reason, then I suspect that he’ll have no problem finding a reason to condemn us all to hell.

Do you believe that you are a new creation when you accept Christ as Lord of your life?

 

[SimonArizona]

"For He is the life according to His nature as God, and when He became united to His flesh, He made it also to be life-giving."-St. Cyril

 

[SimonArizona]

I asked in another thread, but if we read in Acts about how invalids were brought into the street so that Peter’s shadow could be cast upon them when he walked past and heal the sick…wouldn’t consuming the flesh and blood of the Messiah have an even greater effect? Wouldn’t we see the sick healed? For that matter, couldn’t you place communion post-transubstantiation upon a dead body and see it resurrected?

And truly we are healed but the healing is mostly Spiritual in nature. although I have seen many healings of physical nature.

Healing the heart and spirit is more important.

 

[Allnamesused]

Do you believe that you are a new creation when you accept Christ as Lord of your life?

Not sure what you mean. Wish I knew what that has to do with any of this.

 

[Allnamesused]

And truly we are healed but the healing is mostly Spiritual in nature. although I have seen many healings of physical nature.

Healing the heart and spirit is more important.

Every Catholic who beats the odds assumes that it was due to the eucharist; every muslim assumes it was Allah; every hindu assumes Vishnu saved them.

I don’t doubt that believing that you had just consumed “God” would do a great deal for your mental and “spiritual” situation, but this would be true regardless of the actual status of the wafer. Perception is often more important that reality when it comes to mental and “spiritual” health.