Secular defense of the true presence?

[GaryTaylor]

I think you’d need to explain that a little more clearly.

What part do you not understand? All of it?

 

[Tomoko]

Dear Kwiggs,
God has made the eucharist for himself. It is a way for him to join with his body, his people. But only with those who perceive him through faith.

Imagine if God himself was detectable, and containable in the eucharist for all non-beleivers and scientists, and any random person, even evil persons to scrutinize and manipulate. God set it up in the most sublime way instead.

I am sorry but your atheist friend gets no proof. That would be impossible based on the way that God has decided to interact with us.

Jesus instructed us in this practice and you either believe him or you don’t.

Is belief real?

Can you prove that belief exists?

The only way is to observe the outward visible signs of someone’s belief. A person with belief that their team will win in soccer plays harder and tries harder. The one without belief gives up. So while we can’t see belief itself we can see its effect. So is belief itself real then? Of course it is.

With the Eucharist, your faith in Jesus is part of what makes the eucharist real. You cannot have the Eucharist without faith.

That means for your atheist friend that the Eucharist in fact does not contain the body of Christ (for him). And so we see that he is trapped in his own beliefs.

They can have proof, just not the proof they want. I think that’s less based on the way God interacts with us, more on the way that they’ve set the ‘rules’ for the discussion. It’s like asking a lawyer to prove his client is innocent without using the law.

 

[GaryTaylor]

They can have proof, just not the proof they want. I think that’s less based on the way God interacts with us, more on the way that they’ve set the ‘rules’ for the discussion. It’s like asking a lawyer to prove his client is innocent without using the law.

Exactly we can talk all the way to the end of science, here one may prefer to say its a “mystery”, the Church calls that mystery “God” and an atheist may say whatever, such as the universe does not demand a creators hand to guide it, all it needs is the right circumstances to act in.

 

[Gorgias]

Agreed, but do you think the OP’s friends are going to give any weight to philosophy if they aren’t interested in theology? it seems they’re after scientific evidence, i.e. would a consecrated host look different under a microscope?

Well, to be fair, Kwiggs didn’t ask “can anyone give me a scientific proof of the Real Presence?”. If that’s what he’s asking for, then you’re right – since the theology of the Eucharist asserts that there’s no physically perceptible difference, there’s no possibility for providing a scientific explanation. (And, if that were the case, and if they already knew that this is what the Church teaches, then the request is an unreasonable one, akin to asking “please prove God’s existence by telling me what color his hair is”.)

On the other hand, if they don’t know what the Church’s teaching on the Real Presence is, then perhaps it’s possible to give an explanation that they at least understand (even if they don’t accept it).

 

[Frankenfurter]

Don’t get too caught up with atheists. They can drag you down. Sort of like a guy on your soccer team who thinks that we can’t win, so he doesn’t really try.