Theory on the Eucharist

[PaulinePresbytr]

Here’s my theory on the Eucharist and Eucharistic Miracles:

The substance is not usually physical in the material sense (ie matter), though it is in cases like Lanciano. It is spiritual, Christ is consciously part of the Eucharist just as we are consciously part of our bodies. We know that consciousness is a series of electrical impulses, and that life comes from the soul which regulates these electrical impulses to make choices. Our substance, our soul can interact with matter in order to do this. Now Christ, unlike us, is God, he has creative power. We know from quantum mechanics that bread can be changed to flesh by adding and taking away particles on a quantum level. Christ, having creative power, can do this and so, just as we interact with our bodies through electrical impulses, he added and took away particles on a quantum level so as to turn the bread to his flesh, in the case of Lanciano and similar cases.

 

[dshix]

Here’s my theory on the Eucharist and Eucharistic Miracles:

The substance is not usually physical in the material sense (ie matter), though it is in cases like Lanciano. It is spiritual, Christ is consciously part of the Eucharist just as we are consciously part of our bodies. We know that consciousness is a series of electrical impulses, and that life comes from the soul which regulates these electrical impulses to make choices. Our substance, our soul can interact with matter in order to do this. Now Christ, unlike us, is God, he has creative power. We know from quantum mechanics that bread can be changed to flesh by adding and taking away particles on a quantum level. Christ, having creative power, can do this and so, just as we interact with our bodies through electrical impulses, he added and took away particles on a quantum level so as to turn the bread to his flesh, in the case of Lanciano and similar cases.

When bread and wine is consecrated into the Precious Body and Blood of Christ, the substance changes into His Body and Blood. The form remains. Therefore, you have Christ’s body and blood under the accidents of bread and wine. It looks the same, smells the same, has the same texture, and tastes the same, but the substance has been changed.

I suggest not messing around too much with “Theories on the Eucharist.” The Church has already laid down the truth for us to know, and there is no need to speculate about whether or not God does a transformation on the quantum level or if he changes the form as well as the substance. The Church has given us the answer.

 

[twopekinguys]

When bread and wine is consecrated into the Precious Body and Blood of Christ, the substance changes into His Body and Blood. The form remains. Therefore, you have Christ’s body and blood under the accidents of bread and wine. It looks the same, smells the same, has the same texture, and tastes the same, but the substance has been changed.

I suggest not messing around too much with “Theories on the Eucharist.” The Church has already laid down the truth for us to know, and there is no need to speculate about whether or not God does a transformation on the quantum level or if he changes the form as well as the substance. The Church has given us the answer.

 

[Molokai_fire]

By speculating too much, you detract from the mystery of the body and blood of Christ, which is the belief that the bread and wine is transformed into the body and blood of Christ before our skeptical eyes every Sunday at Mass.
Curiousity and Truth-seeking is essential to a sincere relationship with God, but strive rather to know God, for true love stems from this and our religion is one of love and sacrifice

 

[dshix]

By speculating too much, you detract from the mystery of the body and blood of Christ, which is the belief that the bread and wine is transformed into the body and blood of Christ before our skeptical eyes every Sunday at Mass.

I hate being pedantic, but when it comes to Church doctrine I’m a pedant. Transubstantiated, not transformed.

Sorry! Other than that your post was perfect.

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

By speculating too much, you detract from the mystery of the body and blood of Christ, which is the belief that the bread and wine is transformed into the body and blood of Christ before our skeptical eyes every Sunday at Mass.
Curiousity and Truth-seeking is essential to a sincere relationship with God, but strive rather to know God, for true love stems from this and our religion is one of love and sacrifice

Well I suppose that the “mysterious” elements have become less and less mysterious in light of science. Or, rather to say, they are absolutely possible in light of science, so the mysterious factor transfers over to science because the science which makes it possible is just as hard to understand or comprehend.

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

When bread and wine is consecrated into the Precious Body and Blood of Christ, the substance changes into His Body and Blood. The form remains. Therefore, you have Christ’s body and blood under the accidents of bread and wine. It looks the same, smells the same, has the same texture, and tastes the same, but the substance has been changed.

I suggest not messing around too much with “Theories on the Eucharist.” The Church has already laid down the truth for us to know, and there is no need to speculate about whether or not God does a transformation on the quantum level or if he changes the form as well as the substance. The Church has given us the answer.

I posted it on here for that purpose. I wanted to make sure I wasn’t doing anything in opposition to the magesterium

 

[dshix]

I posted it on here for that purpose. I wanted to make sure I wasn’t doing anything in opposition to the magesterium

And that’s a good thing.

 

[tamedlion]

Too much science, not enough faith!

 

[R_C]

We know from quantum mechanics that bread can be changed to flesh by adding and taking away particles on a quantum level. Christ, having creative power, can do this

Wow, I don’t know what to say! It’s a theory, but with an issue. St. Thomas Aquinas describes miracles as follows:

These works that are sometimes done by God outside the usual order assigned to things are wont to be called miracles: because we are astonished at a thing when we see an effect without knowing the cause. And since at times one and the same cause is known to some and unknown to others, it happens that of several who see an effect, some are astonished and some not

This refers to the Latin miraculum, “marvelous thing”.

However, St. Thomas speaks of three degrees of miracles.

The highest degree in miracles comprises those works wherein something is done by God, that nature can never do: for instance, that two bodies occupy the same place

Perhaps transubstantiation can be counted amidst these miracles of highest degree, while an event in which the consecrated host became flesh can be in some way “something that nature can do, but not in the same order” - and there would be nothing intrinsically wrong in finding out how can nature do it, in order for instance to counteract the ridiculous explanations that unbelievers try to give about these miracles using science

 

[frjohnmaryt]

Thanks dshix. You have defended the Catholic faith and teaching from Pauline quotes from somewhere. Dshix I am with you.

 

[dshix]

Thanks dshix. You have defended the Catholic faith and teaching from Pauline quotes from somewhere. Dshix I am with you.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Here’s my theory on the Eucharist and Eucharistic Miracles:

The substance is not usually physical in the material sense (ie matter), though it is in cases like Lanciano. It is spiritual, Christ is consciously part of the Eucharist just as we are consciously part of our bodies. We know that consciousness is a series of electrical impulses, and that life comes from the soul which regulates these electrical impulses to make choices. Our substance, our soul can interact with matter in order to do this. Now Christ, unlike us, is God, he has creative power. We know from quantum mechanics that bread can be changed to flesh by adding and taking away particles on a quantum level. Christ, having creative power, can do this and so, just as we interact with our bodies through electrical impulses, he added and took away particles on a quantum level so as to turn the bread to his flesh, in the case of Lanciano and similar cases.

I really don’t think " theories " about Eucharistic Miracles, theories based on highly questionable human psychology and questionable science, are helpful. They may also lead to serious errors in faith. A miracle is a miracle, let’s just accept it for what it is.
Unless you are someone with stature of Thomas Aquinas or St. Augustine I think is just better to stick to the Catechism. Linus

 

[Bonocorium]

Someone said that the priest and the parishioner must do their job in the Mass having the right intentions and if their intentions are wrong, then the Mass doesnt work and doesnt have a salvific value. Can someone elaborate more on this?

Has any Pope infallibly declared any Eucharistic miracle or any miracle at all (outside the Bible) to be true?

Thanks.

 

[NeedImprovement]

Here’s my theory on the Eucharist and Eucharistic Miracles:

. . .

When we consider juxtaposing quantum numbers with either transubstantiation and /or with miraculous physical manifestations which can augment our faith in and subsequent to transubstantiation (ie Miracle of Lanciano), the moment we try to establish a quantum link to either of the two , it can be the beginning of attempting to explain “how” our Lord is present in the Blessed Sacrament. That’s the part we are better off to avoid. Precisely “how” our Blessed Lord is present in the Blessed Sacrament remains a mystery of faith.

Excerpt from Behind The Mass, Rev. Albert Joseph Mary Shamon : [p 27]

First of all, transubstantiation does not explain how our Lord is present in the Blessed Sacrament . That is a mystery of faith . Transubstantiation simply shows that the doctrine of His Presence is not something contrary to reason.

Father Shamon also quotes St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa in this same book :

St. Thomas says that transubstantiation is “entirely supernatural, and effected by God’s power alone.” Then He quotes St. Ambrose:

See how Christ’s word changes nature’s lawst as He wills : a man is not wont to be born save of man and woman : see therefore that against the established law and order a man is born of a Virgin. . . It is clear that a Virgin begot beyond the order of nature: and what we make is the body from the Virgin. Why then, do you look for nature’s order in Christ’s body, since the Lord Jesus was Himself brought forth of a Virgin beyond nature? (SummaTheologica III. Q. 75, Art. 4)

 

[NeedImprovement]

Well I suppose that the “mysterious” elements have become less and less mysterious in light of science. Or, rather to say, they are absolutely possible in light of science, so the mysterious factor transfers over to science because the science which makes it possible is just as hard to understand or comprehend.

There are also “new” perspectives to some spiritual mysteries , so to speak, that we may use to contemplate ; thanks to the windows which science has opened on the Miracle of Lanciano :

Below is an excerpt of a transcript from a homily on the linked video here by Father J. Lawrence Polis, and based on the scientific findings presented at this link therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html ] that confirm the tissue of the miraculous Host of Lanciano to be heart muscle:

• The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.

• In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.

• The Flesh is a “HEART” complete in its essential structure.

*Excerpt from Fr. J. Lawrence Polis’ homily *:

“And so in this miracle of Lanciano , the Lord, in His Mercy, wanted to give us a sign to show, in the 8th century and even down to our days preserved miraculously this Flesh and Blood so that we can see it over 1200 years later – which certainly is a very great miracle. It shows God’s almighty power and when He decided to reveal Himself – to show flesh instead of the Host - instead of the bread that normally appears. He chose to show us His Heart ; to show us His Sacred heart – that Heart which so loved men , that Heart for which He gave us the Eucharist , as if to say “ the Eucharist is a sign of my love, in the Eucharist is my Sacred Heart , in the Eucharist is all my love for you. If you want to be loved by me come to the Eucharist. If you want to be consoled by my love come to the Eucharist. In all these things this is His Heart . . .”

Twice , the globules of Precious Blood from the Miracle of Lanciano were weighed and it was discovered ,

. . . each individual globule weighed the same as the other individual ones (although different in size) or as all five together or as any other combination.
catholicherald.com/stories/bThe-Miracle-of-Lancianob,6233

This confirms to our faith that Our Lord is wholly and entirely present in the most minute particle of the Blessed Sacrament, just as He is in the largest; and as in all particles together.

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

I posted this here to make sure I wasn’t making any errors. You have all been helpful with that, and you are right that we should not consider such things, regardless of whether or not it is in opposition to the church, unless we are a theologian the likes of Aquinas or Augustine.

 

[dshix]

I posted this here to make sure I wasn’t making any errors. You have all been helpful with that, and you are right that we should not consider such things, regardless of whether or not it is in opposition to the church, unless we are a theologian the likes of Aquinas or Augustine.

Thanks for understanding.

 

[PaulinePresbytr]

Thanks for understanding.

Thanks for explaining my error

 

[buc_fan33]

Here’s my theory on the Eucharist and Eucharistic Miracles:

The substance is not usually physical in the material sense (ie matter), though it is in cases like Lanciano. It is spiritual, Christ is consciously part of the Eucharist just as we are consciously part of our bodies. We know that consciousness is a series of electrical impulses, and that life comes from the soul which regulates these electrical impulses to make choices. Our substance, our soul can interact with matter in order to do this. Now Christ, unlike us, is God, he has creative power. We know from quantum mechanics that bread can be changed to flesh by adding and taking away particles on a quantum level. Christ, having creative power, can do this and so, just as we interact with our bodies through electrical impulses, he added and took away particles on a quantum level so as to turn the bread to his flesh, in the case of Lanciano and similar cases.

I have to be honest with you…I have some real problems with how this is worded. Please don’t take offense, but let me offer some friendly critiques.

You said,

The substance is not usually physical in the material sense (ie matter), though it is in cases like Lanciano.

I know what you’re getting at here, and you have the right idea. But, be careful with your wording “not usually physical.” In fact, the substantial change that happens in the Eucharist, turning bread into wine, IS a physical change. It’s just that most of the time the accidents of bread and wine (what we see, feel, smell, and most importantly, taste) rarely change. Sometimes they do. But, what happened at Lancianno and others places happens at EVERY Mass. It’s just that there, the accidents were removed, revealing the true physical substance that was there.

You also said this,

It is spiritual, Christ is consciously part of the Eucharist just as we are consciously part of our bodies.

Again, I would reword this. I know what you mean, but taken at face value, it’s incorrect. Christ is not PART of the Eucharist; He IS the Eucharist. And, the Eucharist IS Christ. Saying He is “part” of the Eucharist makes it sound like there is more to the Eucharist than Jesus, when in fact, there is not. I also have a problem with the wording on consciousness. It sounds too dualistic and too Cartesian for my tastes.

You’re on the right track…I think you just need to reword some things.