What is substance? Some ideas

[epaget]

Hello,

When we say the bread and wine substantially change during the consecration to the Body and Blood of Jesus, what do we mean by substance?

Some say substance means the physical aspect of an object, but others say the physical aspect of an object is an accident to that object. For example, a chair can be made of wood or metal and still be a chair -here, the physical makeup’s of metal or wood are accidental, but they both have the substance of “chair”. So what is the substance of “chair”?

Is substance how the accidents are held together? Is the substance basically the relationship the accidents have to one another? So then, during the consecration is the relationship the accidents have to one another changed? That doesn’t seem right either, or at least entirely right.

Maybe substance is not only the relationship the accidents have to one another but also to things outside of itself -to other objects -to the rest of the world –to me. In this case I can see how the substance of bread and wine change during the consecration. The relationship they have with one another within the bread stay the say, but the relationship they have with the rest of the world changes to that of the Body and Blood of Jesus.

Hmm, not sure if this is right, but this would mean that the accidents of bread and wine are still really there after consecration, but the relationship we have with the Eucharist has now changed.

Now, here would be a possible danger in thinking -since a relationship has two sides (us and the Eucharist), some might say it is our side of the relationship that has changed the relationship. As some Protestants will maintain -that since “they” believe they are receiving Jesus in their communion service, it really is Jesus and not just a symbol. I think this is false thinking. It would give the impression that because of “my” belief I can change the substance of bread into the Body of Jesus. Rather, I think we would have to maintain that it’s not any individuals doing that can change the relationship to the point of consecration, but the doing of God through the Priest at consecration that can change the relationship the accidents have to us from that of bread and wine to that of the Body and Blood of Jesus.

Any thoughts?

Eric

 

[LilyM]

‘Substance’ has many definitions, some to do with physical properties, others not. The two that I’ve come across that are most relevant are these:

‘a. Essential nature; essence.
b. Gist; heart.’

In other words my substance is my essence - my essence is what makes me the same person I was as a one-hour old baby even though I am almost literally completely different physically and mentally and in other ways.

And my substance is what makes me myself and not my identical twin even though physically we are almost completely the same.

As to where it resides, who knows. But the point behind transubstantiation is, as the definitions above show, that substance is not necessarily a physical thing at all, thus not related to the accidents.

The accidents of the Blessed Sacrament are the same as they always were. You will get drunk if you take too much Precious Blood just as you would if you take too much wine, and if you’re allergic to wheat products you will react to the Sacred Host just as you would to ordinary bread. So there’s not any physical change but there is a change in the ESSENCE of the Blessed Sacrament, it becomes truly and substantially Christ, and Him alone.

 

[epaget]

Thanks for your answer. I suppose I have the same questions about essence. What is essence?

 

[LilyM]

Thanks for your answer. I suppose I have the same questions about essence. What is essence?

"es·sence (sns)
n.

1. The intrinsic or indispensable properties that serve to characterize or identify something.
2. The most important ingredient; the crucial element.
3. The inherent, unchanging nature of a thing or class of things.
4. a. An extract that has the fundamental properties of a substance in concentrated form.
   b. Such an extract in a solution of alcohol.
   c. A perfume or scent.
5. One that has or shows an abundance of a quality as if highly concentrated: a neighbor who is the essence of hospitality.
6. Something that exists, especially a spiritual or incorporeal entity."

So Christ’s substance/essence is the inherent, crucial or indispensable parts/elements/properties of Him, the substance/essence of bread is the inherent, crucial or indispensable parts/elements/properties of bread.

Remember the inherent or indispensable properties of a person or a thing aren’t necessarily physical or in a physical location - as per the examples of me as a baby v an adult and me v my identical twin.

And this applies to food too - I can make a piece of fruit out of wax and it will look like but not BE a piece of fruit, and there are vegetarian meat substitutes that look, taste, smell and even behave in quite a similar way to meat but aren’t meat.

 

[thistle]

Hello,

When we say the bread and wine substantially change during the consecration to the Body and Blood of Jesus, what do we mean by substance?

Some say substance means the physical aspect of an object, but others say the physical aspect of an object is an accident to that object. For example, a chair can be made of wood or metal and still be a chair -here, the physical makeup’s of metal or wood are accidental, but they both have the substance of “chair”. So what is the substance of “chair”?

Is substance how the accidents are held together? Is the substance basically the relationship the accidents have to one another? So then, during the consecration is the relationship the accidents have to one another changed? That doesn’t seem right either, or at least entirely right.

Maybe substance is not only the relationship the accidents have to one another but also to things outside of itself -to other objects -to the rest of the world –to me. In this case I can see how the substance of bread and wine change during the consecration. The relationship they have with one another within the bread stay the say, but the relationship they have with the rest of the world changes to that of the Body and Blood of Jesus.

Hmm, not sure if this is right, but this would mean that the accidents of bread and wine are still really there after consecration, but the relationship we have with the Eucharist has now changed.

Now, here would be a possible danger in thinking -since a relationship has two sides (us and the Eucharist), some might say it is our side of the relationship that has changed the relationship. As some Protestants will maintain -that since “they” believe they are receiving Jesus in their communion service, it really is Jesus and not just a symbol. I think this is false thinking. It would give the impression that because of “my” belief I can change the substance of bread into the Body of Jesus. Rather, I think we would have to maintain that it’s not any individuals doing that can change the relationship to the point of consecration, but the doing of God through the Priest at consecration that can change the relationship the accidents have to us from that of bread and wine to that of the Body and Blood of Jesus.

Any thoughts?

Eric

Read this:

catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9307iron.asp

 

[CUAGRAD08]

I don’t know if this will help you, but it is the clearest way I have heard over my last 17 years of Catholic education. This was taught to me by my Metaphysics professor.

There are two principles that make up all things. These are Substance and Accidents (these are philosophical terms when referring to the Eucharist). The easier one to explain is Accidents so I will start there. Accidents are the way we experience an object. Take the Chair for example, it has a flat surface with four legs and a back, It may be green or blue or purple, it might be cold or hot, etc. These are all accidentals of the chair. Even the material it is made of is an accidental. Accidents are most commonly thought to be things that we can use our five senses to experience.

Substance on the other hand is a little harder to grasp. Substance is that underlying principle that makes an object that object, its “itness”. For the chair, its substance is its participation in chairness for that specific chair. Substance cannot be shared with another object even if they are the both the same. This blue chair here is of different substance than that blue chair over there.

I hope this helps a little.