The same "species"?

[Verbum_Caro]

PV

Can you clarify what your objection to my post is then?

Thnaks,
VC

 

[ProVobis]

PV

Can you clarify what your objection to my post is then?

Thnaks,
VC

I apologize if I had made it sound like an objection. It appears you were asking for some kind of clarification and that is understandable. As it’s mentioned in the consecration, “Mysterium fidei,” it’s a mystery of faith. Our human minds aren’t supposed to understand it, just believe it.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

No problem. Thanks!

It was more of a rhetorical question. What i am getting at is that it is clear that we receive both body and blood anytime (since the resurrection) we receive. But it is less clear to me that we drink blood everytime. I argue that Trent doesnt say this, and that there is no reason to argue it for, as Trent points out not all the faithful were enjoined to drink.

VC

 

[Brendan]

No problem. Thanks!

It was more of a rhetorical question. What i am getting at is that it is clear that we receive both body and blood anytime (since the resurrection) we receive. But it is less clear to me that we drink blood everytime. I argue that Trent doesnt say this, and that there is no reason to argue it for, as Trent points out not all the faithful were enjoined to drink.

VC

Webster defines the verb ‘to drink’ as

intransitive verb
1
a: to take liquid into the mouth for swallowing
b: to receive into one’s consciousness

I would have to say that both apply

Take the visual senses… What do we see when we look at Host.

1. We see something small, round, thin, having the appence of bread
2. We see our Lord Jesus Christ Present in the Eucharist.

Both are 100% correct.

We can describe the sensual (sense) experince, or what is actually looked upon.

Likewise we can describe a sense experience of eating bread, but what is actually happening is the consumption of the complete Body and Blood of Christ.