Questions about the Eucharist, Again!

  • Thread starter Thread starter dizzy_dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dizzy_dave

Guest
I’m really trying to understand this concept of the Eucharist, it’s hard for me but I know how important it is for me to believe it as a Catholic. After the Host HAS BEEN CONSECRATED is it BOTH Jesus (Body, Blood, soul and Divinity) AND actual bread, or is it only Jesus with an “illusion” of bread, is it also a physical illusion, because when we touch it and feel it and taste it it seems to be bread. I can’t seem to find anything or anyone to explain just what I am to think about this (in laymen’s terms).
 
Dizzy Dave…the consecrated Host has the species of the bread…meaning it still has the properties of the flour and water, made into the Host, but it is no longer bread. It is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ.

Perhaps you could look at it by looking at water…when water evaporates, it no longer looks like water, but if you catch it and you see condensation, it is water again. The property remains the same, but it has undergone a transformation.

God Bless you -
 
It is Jesus. It appears to be bread and wine to our earthly senses, when in reality it is not.
 
Look at it this way:

it is the flesh and blood of Christ that:
  • is white
  • is tasteless, and
  • in any appearance and chemical properties, identical to that of an unleavened bread’s’
but it’s NOT. It is, in fact, the body and blood of the Crucified One. 👍
 
40.png
dizzy_dave:
I’m really trying to understand this concept of the Eucharist, it’s hard for me but I know how important it is for me to believe it as a Catholic. After the Host HAS BEEN CONSECRATED is it BOTH Jesus (Body, Blood, soul and Divinity) AND actual bread, or is it only Jesus with an “illusion” of bread, is it also a physical illusion, because when we touch it and feel it and taste it it seems to be bread. I can’t seem to find anything or anyone to explain just what I am to think about this (in laymen’s terms).
Basically you’re asking the difference between transubstantiation: the complete changing of something’s substance to another, and consubstantiation: the coexistence of the substances of 2 things. The Church infallibly defined the Eucharistic consecration as the transubstantiation of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. The substance of the bread and wine is completely wiped away and replaced with the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus. What remains are the accidents, or the physical appearances, of bread and wine. But it is most definitely no longer what it appears to be. There are documented cases such as the host in Lanciano (sp?) Italy where even the physical aspects of the Eucharist are changed (the host there actually turned into cardiac muscle).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top