A
alphacat7
Guest
Can anyone explain the “essence and ‘incidence’” of the Eucharist so that a Methodist minister can understand it.
Thanks, Cathy Heckler (alphacat7)
Thanks, Cathy Heckler (alphacat7)
- Status
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Do you mean substance and accidents? Because essence is a whole other ball of wax.
T
thistle
Guest
CCC 1373 “Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us,” is present in many ways to his Church:197 in his word, in his Church’s prayer, "where two or three are gathered in my name,"199 in the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned,199 in the sacraments of which he is the author, in the sacrifice of the Mass, and in the person of the minister. But "he is present . . . most especially in the Eucharistic species."200
CCC 1374 The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique. It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as "the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend."201 In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained."202 "This presence is called ‘real’ - by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be ‘real’ too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present."203
CCC 1375 It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament. The Church Fathers strongly affirmed the faith of the Church in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion. Thus St. John Chrysostom declares:
It is not man that causes the things offered to become the Body and Blood of Christ, but he who was crucified for us, Christ himself. The priest, in the role of Christ, pronounces these words, but their power and grace are God’s. This is my body, he says. This word transforms the things offered.204
And St. Ambrose says about this conversion:
Be convinced that this is not what nature has formed, but what the blessing has consecrated. The power of the blessing prevails over that of nature, because by the blessing nature itself is changed. . . . Could not Christ’s word, which can make from nothing what did not exist, change existing things into what they were not before? It is no less a feat to give things their original nature than to change their nature.205
CCC 1376 The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."206
CCC 1377 The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.207
CCC 1413 By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651).
Also see this website:
www.catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9307iron.asp
www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0501clas.asp
D
Deacon_Ed
Guest
Hmmm…the two terms you have given have little bearing on transubstantiation. Rather, the terms we normally refer to are “accidents” and “substance” – unless, of course, by “essence” you are referring to ousias or nature of a thing which is, in fact, “substance.”
But, to put it simply we can consider all matter as having two components, accidents and substance. The term “accidents” refers to the measurable or sensate properties of a thing. If, for example, we are speaking of a rose we can speak of the color, scent, size, shape, and so on of the rose as its accidents. However, the accidents to not make it a rose but, rather, the substance of the rose makes it a rose and because the substance of the rose it there it follows that the accidents are there (St. Thomas Aquinas calls this “concomitance”).
You are you not because of your height, color of hair, skin tone, weight or any other measireable thing but you are you because you are 1) human and have a human nature and, 2) are an individuated nature possessing certain qualities.
In the Eucharist we start with bread and wine: both substance of bread and wine and accidents of bread and wine. This is the “natural” state of these two elements. After the Eucharist is confected (consecration) we have the accidents of bread and wine (that is, the sensate properties) but we have the substance (essence, ousias) of Jesus.
That’s it in a nutshell. Jesus present under the form of bread and wine.
Deacon Ed
H
Ham1
Guest
Ooops…Deacon Ed beat me to it but I’ll leave this up in case it helps.
To the OP…
You may have some luck speaking about the basic philosophical terms of substance and accidents.
All things are made up of substance (essence) and accidents. Substance is what a thing IS. Accidents are characteristics that make up the thing. Got it? Confusing, I know. Examples can help here. Take a chair. “Chair” is what the thing is. The accidents of the chair could be wood, specific color, shape, texture, etc. Basically, accidents are the outward appearances of the chair. It is useful to note that we can only describe things by describing their accidents. In this example, one cannot describe “chairness” without describing the accidents of the chair.
In the Eucharist, the substance of bread changes and miraculously becomes fully the substance of Jesus Christ. At the same time, the accidents of the bread remain unchanged. So, what the Eucharist IS is the body of Christ even though it “appears” to be bread.
This explains rationally how it is possible that this occurs but of course the big hurdle is the faith to believe that the substance truly changes despite the appearances that remain.
To the OP…
You may have some luck speaking about the basic philosophical terms of substance and accidents.
All things are made up of substance (essence) and accidents. Substance is what a thing IS. Accidents are characteristics that make up the thing. Got it? Confusing, I know. Examples can help here. Take a chair. “Chair” is what the thing is. The accidents of the chair could be wood, specific color, shape, texture, etc. Basically, accidents are the outward appearances of the chair. It is useful to note that we can only describe things by describing their accidents. In this example, one cannot describe “chairness” without describing the accidents of the chair.
In the Eucharist, the substance of bread changes and miraculously becomes fully the substance of Jesus Christ. At the same time, the accidents of the bread remain unchanged. So, what the Eucharist IS is the body of Christ even though it “appears” to be bread.
This explains rationally how it is possible that this occurs but of course the big hurdle is the faith to believe that the substance truly changes despite the appearances that remain.
T
thistle
Guest
There is a good section (pages 156-158) on this in F.J. Sheed’s book Theology for Beginners.
- Status