The Eucharist

[Faith1960]

Jesus’ Real Presence in the Eucharist is sometimes called a sacramental Presence in order to distinguish this Real Presence from his presence as a human being. Jesus is fully present in the sacred Host, body blood soul and divinity even though all that we see feel, touch and taste is bread. How do we know that he is really and wholely present? Because He said so. Not only that but God has allowed some Eucharistic Miracles to occur in order that some may believe. In these Eucharistic Miracles we can see that the Host is real flesh and blood. Among the most noted are the Miracle of Santarem in Portugual and Lanciano, Italy. It is not only a miracle that the consecrated Host changed into flesh and blood but that it has not deteriorated after hundreds of years. And at certain times, the coagulated blood, liquefies and then hardens again. So there are miracles within a miracle. Now these miracles are only meant for us to believe that Jesus is truly present, not to consume in that state. We would not eat the Eucharist in the form of flesh and blood. We eat the Eucharist in the form that is meant for people to consume food which in this case is bread and wine. We are not cannibals who eat human flesh and blood. This is why Jesus’ Presence in the Eucharist is referred to as a sacramental presence. Jesus changed water into wine. And he can change his Presence into bread and wine so that we may be able to take him inside us.

Thanks for bringing up Eucharistic miracles. That helps. Another ones in Buenos Aires. It’s my favorite one.

 

[ProVobis]

Thanks for bringing up Eucharistic miracles. That helps. Another ones in Buenos Aires. It’s my favorite one.

Be careful with “miracles.” They have not been all substantiated. Besides, one’s faith depends on faith, not some physical “proof.” Otherwise it’s not faith. I’m always skeptical about what people see and hear, anyway. Light and sound can play a lot of tricks.

 

[Faith1960]

Be careful with “miracles.” They have not been all substantiated. Besides, one’s faith depends on faith, not some physical “proof.” Otherwise it’s not faith. I’m always skeptical about what people see and hear, anyway. Light and sound can play a lot of tricks.

You don’t believe in the Lanciano or Buenos Aires miracles? I don’t believe in all the miracles that were shown during the Eucharistic miracles exposition but the more recent ones that have been subject to investigation, I do.

 

[Gorgias]

Then you’re doing it wrong.

You are to believe that the Eucharist is the very flesh, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, the son of God.

Not the spirit of Jesus, his actual flesh and blood.

… just not present in physical accidents. If you think that we are to believe that we’re consuming physically present flesh and blood, then you’re doing it wrong.

 

[Gorgias]

For starters, “sacramental manner of being” I just don’t get what that is.

OK. Let’s take an example, then.

If we were sitting in a coffeehouse, chatting away, then the mode of presence that we’d be experiencing is ‘physical’ – I’d see you, four feet away from me, and you’d see me. We’d be experiencing each others’ presence through our senses, of course, but we’d be doing so by virtue of our shared physical presence.

Now imagine that we’re having the same conversation, but sitting at our computers, Skyping one another. We’re still experiencing each other through our senses (sight, hearing), but now, it’s not by virtue of our shared physical presence – it’s by virtue of a computer-and-network-based interface. Our mode of presence will have changed (it’s now ‘virtual’ – still real, mind you, but ‘virtual’ not ‘physically present’). In other words, our “manner of being” present to one another is different. Does that mean that we aren’t experiencing one another? Of course not – we definitely are! However, the manner is different.

In a similar way, Christ is truly present in the Eucharist – but His presence isn’t in the mode that we’re accustomed to (that is, by virtue of physical presence that’s able to be perceived through physical accidents). Rather, His presence in the Eucharist is sacramental – we see a physical sign that really does what it signifies. He’s really present, even though we see the physical signs of ‘bread’ and ‘wine’.

A ‘sacramental manner’ is one that’s real and true, but only visible in physical signs that signify a supernatural reality.

Does that help?

 

[Vico]

For starters, “sacramental manner of being” I just don’t get what that is.

The original is mode of being. Scholastics used Aristotle Metaphysics when writing about theology and philosophy. Substance is “what is a thing composed of”. The primary mode of being is called substance, and all things have secondary modes of beings called accidents. Accidents give physicality.

So Christ is present in the new sacrament that he instituted, in the Eucharist, and it is a mode of being.

 

[Faith1960]

The original is mode of being. Scholastics used Aristotle Metaphysics when writing about theology and philosophy. Substance is “what is a thing composed of”. The primary mode of being is called substance, and all things have secondary modes of beings called accidents. Accidents give physicality.

So Christ is present in the new sacrament that he instituted, in the Eucharist, and it is a mode of being.

That’s very confusing.

 

[Vico]

That’s very confusing.

Didn’t take philosophy?

 

[Faith1960]

Didn’t take philosophy?

Lol, no.

 

[Vico]

Lol, no.

So there is first bread and wine that looks like bread and wine, and then at transubstantiation the bread and wine becomes the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, but is made by God to continue looking like bread and wine. Since this sacrament instituted by Christ is a way for Him to be present with the appearance of bread and wine, is it another way (mode) for Him to be (being).

 

[Faith1960]

So there is first bread and wine that looks like bread and wine, and then at transubstantiation the bread and wine becomes the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, but is made by God to continue looking like bread and wine. Since this sacrament instituted by Christ is a way for Him to be present with the appearance of bread and wine, is it another way (mode) for Him to be (being).

Ok, I think I get it.

 

[Faith1960]

So there is first bread and wine that looks like bread and wine, and then at transubstantiation the bread and wine becomes the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, but is made by God to continue looking like bread and wine. Since this sacrament instituted by Christ is a way for Him to be present with the appearance of bread and wine, is it another way (mode) for Him to be (being).

Why did Jesus institute the Eucharist? To be with us? If so, Hes already with us all day, every day, 24/7.

 

[Vico]

Why did Jesus institute the Eucharist? To be with us? If so, Hes already with us all day, every day, 24/7.

Each sacraments produces its own special effects. This one is for nourishment, as Jesus said in John 6:53:

The Lord addresses an invitation to us, urging us to receive him in the sacrament of the Eucharist: “Truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.”

Baltimore Catechism No. 3:

Q. 895. Why did Christ institute the Holy Eucharist?

A. Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist:

1.To unite us to Himself and to nourish our soul with His divine life.
2.To increase sanctifying grace and all virtues in our soul.
3.To lessen our evil inclinations.
4.To be a pledge of everlasting life.
5.To fit our bodies for a glorious resurrection.
6.To continue the sacrifice of the Cross in His Church.