I was wondering everybody's thoughts on transubstantiation (e.g. when somebody takes communion and the wafer turns to the actual body of Christ).

I don't know of any churches, other than the Catholic church, that still believes in it. To the Protestant church, the Eucharist is a symbol, nothing more.

Of course, scientifically, it's absurd.

So what is your take on it?

-- Mav (mavefoob@yahoo.com), January 26, 2005

Answers

Scientifically absurd? So is the bodily resurrection of Christ from the dead, the virgin birth, the incarnation of God as the human Jesus, all His miracles, and many other truths of Christianity.

To be a Christian is to believe in the God of the universe, who can overrule natural laws (patterns, really) at will--He is the Lawgiver after all, and the universe runs on His say so.

If Christ changed water into wine, is it too much to believe He could change bread into His Body?

By the way, look into the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, Italy. You may have to think again.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 26, 2005.

Mav,

While the Catholic Church is the only church that I'm aware of that actually uses the term transubstantiation, other churches believe in the Real Presence, which is basically the same thing but with a little less specificity. Those churches are all of the Orthodox Churches, the Episcopal Churches and the Charismatic Episcopal Church. There are many other, but those are the only off the top of my head.

No one ever claimed miracles have anything to do with science.

David

-- non-Catholic Christian (no@spam.com), January 26, 2005.

Many things were absurd based on the scientific knowledge at the time. Travelling to the moon? Absurd! Speaking to someone half way around the world as if they were sitting next to you? Absurd!

Science is science. Faith is faith.

-- Pat Thompson (pat.thompson.45@gmail.com), January 26, 2005.

Those Churches which believe in transubstantiation comprise about 90% of all Christians.

And there is no such thing as "the Proestant Church". There are 40,000+ protestant denominations which dispute among themsleves on this and every other article of Christian belief.

The wafer doesn't "turn into" the actual body of Christ when someone takes Communion, but earlier during the Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass.

Like you, Mav, most of Jesus' original disciples found this teaching just too incredible as well, and so they stopped following Him. See St John's gospel chapter 6. Pray that your faith in Jesus will be stronger than theirs.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), January 26, 2005.

And there is no such thing as "the Proestant Church". There are 40,000+ protestant denominations which dispute among themsleves on this and every other article of Christian belief.

Interestign how this arugment acts like the fish sogry for Catholci apologetics... the number of Protestant Chruhces rise daily...why just last November the same arument said there where 30'000+ Peroterstant denominations... either an additional 10'000 arose or else this figures are wrong i one statement.

In reality there are only about 8000 Protestant Denominations, with splintering within a Denomination often couned as "Seperate". Indeed, several Catolic chruches ae considered "Seperate" in the encyclopidia where the 30'000 figire came from, even if in communion wihthe Pope.

Lets nto exagerate the numbers.

And the episcopalians and Charismatic episcopalians are both iN Commuion with Canterberry, makign them Anglican, but the Anglican Communion hdls to Cnsubsantiation rather than Transubstantiation , wich is to say, spiritual rpreasence, noit actal transformation.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 26, 2005.

Actually, although the Anglican Church (not the whole "Communion") teaches, generally, transubstantiation, they emphatically reject Eucharistic exposition and adoration.

The Episcopalians regard the 'presence' of Jesus as symbolic.

The Lutherans hold consubstantiation--real presence, but presence along side the substances of bread and wine. Moreover, they believe that Jesus leaves the bread and wine after the service.

For Catholics, the whole substance of the bread and wine become the whole substance, body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ, so that the Church may partake of his Body and become One in him. Unity is the key to the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist.

And, scientifically, it is absurd. Modern science--qua the Enlightenment invention--not only is restricted to "accidents" (i.e. appearances), but it cannot even say anything positive or negative about realities beyond appearances.

To say that all reality is nothing more than particle physics, is not a scientific claim. It's just an atheistic feeling decorating itself in big words and calling itself "science."

Theology is the queen of the sciences; theology alone can speak to the probability and the sensibility of transubstantiation, and no other "science" can take her place.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), January 26, 2005.

Great post Skoub!

-- - (David@excite.com), January 27, 2005.

OK Zarove if you insist, I'll say "There are about 8,000 protestant denominations which dispute among themsleves on this and every other article of Christian belief." Maybe I was thinking "30,000+" when I said "40,000+" but I understand the 30,000+ figure comes from a learned Protestant source. The precise figure doesn't affect my point.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), January 27, 2005.

Would you say that there is much division within the Catholic church? First of all between mods/trads/in betweeners? Would you say that any other divisions exist also? I'd also be interested to hear your take on the relationship of the churches in America with Rome.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 27, 2005.

I'm curious, what age is Mav?

''Of course, scientifically, it's absurd.

So what is your take on it?''

''Scientifically'' sounds so important; but what is science, after all? It's some accumulated wisdom based on men's curiosity; wisdom which is forever incomplete and never brings us full knowledge.

There's not a thing we actually see and feel which can't be broken down into pure energy. Like countless atoms making up our own bodies, and endless nerves conducting these thoughts in all those minds everywhere.

Jesus Christ is divine; God, all- powerful. He created what we call nature. NOTHING is a mystery to God. God knows what life and death really are; and we don't.

So much for our wisdom. (Why is a baby born without memories or experience giving him/her consciousness? At birth, he can't even control his bowels. But ten years later he can write and calculate; some even write symphonies!) And God has created him.

Do you see that Jesus knows everything we don't know about matter? Or spirit? A slice of bread will change in your stomach to glutens and enzymes and energy; without you wondering HOW. Your cells absorb it and burn it to give you a long life. But what is it? Nobody knows. It came from the earth as wheat.

Jesus knows. His words make it by something unknown, into His own substance. He transforms that bread into the very body He lives in; so we should consume, and draw eternal life out of it. We eat and drink of Jesus Christ's own body and blood--His living DNA!!!

But we don't have power to see it; we only have His word. He demands FAITH of all souls claiming to be Christians. --Not science; faith. Science never made a thing in our universe. It only studies. Everything science helps you study was made already by Almighty God. Why should man doubt Him?

Unfortunately, man's pride leads him to think he knows; Christ says we have His body-- ''but it's just bread.'' --Here's the Word, from the Old Testament: The fool has said in his heart, ''There is no God.''

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 27, 2005.

Uhh Gene:

“We eat and drink of Jesus Christ's own body and blood--His living DNA!!!”

I am willing to be corrected, but I don’t think that is a correct example of Transubstantiation. If I recall, Catholics believe it is the substance and not the accident of the bread and wine that is transformed. Thus, what you are eating would still have the scientific or observable and functional features of bread and wine, but its substance (the ideal or realness) would be the body and blood of Christ feeding the soul (or spirit?).

-- Robert Fretz (pastorfretz@oldstonechurchonline.org), January 27, 2005.

We believe as it has been revealed to the apostles. What appears as bread and wine are no longer bread or wine. The accidents are the veil behind which the true substance, His transubstantiation --truly is. That is Christ's living body and His blood.

It was for the wonder of it that I say DNA. When I speak of my brother, Robert, as that man; it includes all of him. It even means your DNA. Jesus Christ is truly present in the sacrament; under the appearance of bread and wine. The appearance remains, complete with accidents and everything else. But not the reality which was bread and wine in the past. We know it is a new reality.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 27, 2005.

Eugene,

An important nuance to put with your words comes from Paul VI:

"Christ is present whole and entire in His physical "reality," corporeally present, although not in the manner in which bodies are in a place."

Paul VI is quoting the Summa Theologica which disucsses whether the Body of Christ is present locally in the host and cup.

Also note that St. Thomas considered the following words valid: "The body of Christ is made out of bread, so long as by "bread" is understood the accidents thereof.

Contrary to what some theology professors say, there hasn't been any condemnation of anything called "physicalism," i.e., that Christ is present physically in the Eucharist. However, transubstantiation is not physicalism, and according to St. Thomas, it is false to say things like "our teeth rend the flesh of Christ."

To say that Christ is BODILY present in the Eucharist is simply this: his body is there substantially, but not locally (i.e., as in a place); we truly consume it, but we do not "chew" it or "rip it apart."

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), January 27, 2005.

Excuse the double-post, but I found something else.

To affirm what Eugene said, St. Thomas wrote: "By the power of the sacrament there is contained under it, as to the species of the bread, not only the flesh, but the entire body of Christ, that is, the bones the nerves, and the like." Source.

Yay.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), January 27, 2005.

Sorry--triple post!

Oliver,

There is division of opinions within the Church; but the Church herself is not divided, nor ever has been, because the Body of Christ cannot be divided.

Moreover, factions which pop up along political lines are often (but not always) the result of the infiltration of poisonous ideological strains--like pragmatism, individualism, relativism, secularism, and fundamentalism--and not of authentic diversity. Within certain limits, people who are victim to these ideologies are still within the Church by virtue of their baptism. But many are living in sin, whether they have sinful lifestyles, sinful obstinancy against the Church, or a malformed conscience. Baptised Catholics have less recourse to 'invincible ignorance' for their sins; if they sin because they were not properly taught, then the guilt is on their teachers.

Sounds dour. I'm depressed now. Anyway. :|

A Church plagued by the erosion of Catholic education and self-evangelization is not a divided Church but a pilgrim Church. The Pope calls for the New Evangelization, and Catholics deeply in Communion with Christ mobilize daily to make the unity of the Body more visible than it is.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), January 27, 2005.

Anon:
Your cautioning words, An important nuance to put with your words comes from Paul VI:

"Christ is present whole and entire in His physical "reality," corporeally present, although not in the manner in which bodies are in a place."

--Is correct. I wasn't forgetting this. We also have the mystery of a body that can have no limitations as to free extension in space. It makes of the body of Christ the reality present upon many thousands of altars simultaneously; without fragmenting or losing His identity, holiness, and true presence. This follows naturally; Matter itself is something created miraculously, yet in nature. Only our minds thrust into compartments many mysteries we shall never fully understand.

If I don't have true understanding of why my body, all of it dust; is almost 98% space, the world of molecules;

And --it walks and talks and serves me-- How am I to fathom a mystery like the Holy Eucharist? Yet, I believe; because Jesus is my Lord and Master. He teaches and I believe.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 27, 2005.

There is division of opinions within the Church; but the Church herself is not divided, nor ever has been, because the Body of Christ cannot be divided.

I hardly think what has been going on between traditionalists and modernists can be merely described as a division of opinion. There is division of faith regarding the trustworthiness of the magisterium, even the current pope, as well as division of practice and belief regarding the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass, the validity of invincible ignorance, and the belief regarding salvation within the catholic church only and the extent of its meaning.

Let us take this forum as a miniture of the situation of the Catholic church today. Now, granted, it cannot account for the entire sphere of the church in its representation, but let's take a look at those who are "staunch catholics" here. I've seen so much malice and Christless words of vulgarity that it leaves me not only disgusted, but also rather sobered as to the reality of the fact that division has struck at the heart of those who claim to be without it, and a shining example to those thousands of denominations, many of whom as a matter of fact are quite comfortable to have fellowship and have unity, despite differences in particular practices or whatever.

In saying that, yes, the state of protestantism is far from shiny. And naming churches "Baptist" or "Lutheran" or "Methodist" etc is disgusting, and completely contradicts Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians chapter 1. Churches ought to be named by locality. Geography ought to be all that separates us.

I have much more to speak on this matter, but really, I want to get down to the nuts and bolts here. Why do so many trash protestantism for division when Catholicism is riddled with it?

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 28, 2005.

You are assuming that "traditionalist" and "modernist" extremists are still Catholic, simply because they claim to be. No-one who rejects the authority of the Magisterium and the Pope, the validity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as defined by the Church, and the doctrinal teaching of the Church is Catholic. Some schismatics and heretics admit they are outside the Catholic Church. Others still claim to be within it. But the facts speak for themselves. Such individuals do not represent division within the Church but rather separation from the Church.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 28, 2005.

Oliver,

I think you have misunderstood me. I'm less inclined to bash Protestantism for being divided than I am about it's being false. Outside of the Church, no authentic union is possible.

In terms of the degree of division, well, it is difficult to argue that Catholicism does not have a distinct advantage for having an authoritative Magisterium and a single Pope. Importantly, you should recognize that any divisions within the Catholic Church (or recent schisms from her) are of an entirely different cause and nature; that's because Catholic and Protestant ecclesiology are exactly opposed.

In Catholic ecclesiology, the Church is the Mystical, visible Body of Christ; it must be visibly One, and membership is vital for all who discover (or openly suspect) that she is indeed the bride of Christ.

Protestant ecclesiology--speakingly broadly--begins not with the Church but the individual who is saved via a personal relationship to Jesus. The Church comes after the fact; it is the conglomeration of individuals. Hence Protestants will often speak of the "invisible Church", which for Catholics was condemned by Pius XII.

For that reason, Protestantism goes through mitosis almost naturally. People leave their Methodist pastor to go to the more exciting Baptist church down the street. Or a guy will start a church because he disagrees with the Eucharistic theology or a Biblical interpretation of his old pastor.

Catholic division occurs in spite of, rather than because of its ecclesiology. And inevitably it follows the pattern of heresy established long before Protestantism: a rigorist sect holds its own practice to be the exclusive standard of Catholicism (the essence of Donatism). Of course, Protestant individualism is always complicit within Catholic divisions, and many of our present divisions are unavoidable, given that the Church must live in the midst of Protestants and is constantly affected by them.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), January 28, 2005.