There are no "magic words" but the priest dopes repeat what Jesus said at the last supper and those words are the words of consecration.
.
What I do know is that when I was young, growing up in an extremely Catholic city, all of my Catholic friends were quite insistent that at a Catholic mass, the priest said the magic words in Latin, the bells chimed, and the bread became the flesh of Jesus Christ and the wine became the very blood of Jesus Christ. They did not believe that the "accidents" remained unchanged.
What I do know is that when I was young, growing up in an extremely Catholic city, all of my Catholic friends were quite insistent that at a Catholic mass, the priest said the magic words in Latin, the bells chimed, and the bread became the flesh of Jesus Christ and the wine became the very blood of Jesus Christ. They did not believe that the "accidents" remained unchanged.
Why would one expect that the DNA of the consecrated bread and wine be different than what they appear to be?
This is my body.
This is my blood.
I am the door.
I am the true vine.
All flesh is grass.
You are the salt of the earth.
Much to do about...METAPHORS.
If you want to think that what Jesus said was a metaphor that's up to you.
To be completely fair, this is an understanding of children, many years ago?
I've met little children who think that there is a tiny Baby Jesus physically residing in their hearts. .
The RCC evolved over time as error after error was incorporated.
No pugatory in the NT.
no "Mary mother of God" in the NT
no prayers to the dead in the NT.
No "confecting the body and divinity of Christ" in the NT.
No indulgences in the NT.
No exterminating heretics in the NT.
No Pope Peter in the NT - as we see in Acts 15 - James is the leader.
No infant baptism in the NT
No order of priests in the NT
And without all of that - do you really have the RCC in the NT?
No.
hint - even Catholic sources themselves admit that the RCC doctrines "evolved over time" see "A Concise history of the Catholic Church" and "Catholic Digest" as they research the history of infant baptism and priests.
There are no "magic words" but the priest dopes repeat what Jesus said at the last supper and those words are the words of consecration.
Jesus said, 'Take it and eat, this is my body.'
Jesus also said, 'Drink from this, all of you, for this is my blood, the blood of the covenant, poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.'
If your friends didn't believe that the substance changed and the accidents remained unchanged then they are either well over 500 years old and wouldn't use that vocabulary or they knew very little of the Catholic faith (or you may be remembering things not quite the way they were?). The vocabulary of transubstantiation was given conciliar approval at the council of Trent in the 16th century. So no Catholic can accurately present Catholic teaching without knowing what the Church teaches about the ideas of substance and accidents in the explanation of the real presence.
So in the case where God removed the accidents, you would expect the DNA of bread and wine?
To be completely fair, this is an understanding of children, many years ago?
I've met little children who think that there is a tiny Baby Jesus physically residing in their hearts. Admittedly this reflects thinking even less sophisticated than what you are describing of (probably older) children, but it might be fair to think that the children did not have a perfect understanding of all aspects of their Church's theology?
At least if we want to know what any particular Church actually teaches, it seems fairer to ask someone who knows?
FWIW, I had always thought that's what "transubstantiation" meant too, and that the belief was that there was literal blood in a cup being drunk. Sounded spooky and gross to me. But that was an understanding and prejudice I'd carried since childhood too.
Really? Every parish I have been to the sacrament still looks like bread and wine. Must have been a funky city you grew up in.
In all seriousness.....not all Catholics are well cathecatized.
Actually, it was not just children, but their parents who intervened to attempt to convince me and other neighborhood kids.
However, the difficulty does remain that many of us, both non-Catholic as well as Catholic do struggle to grasp the nuances of transubstantiation.
Of course not. However, because the actual flesh has been preserved for posterity, would it not be a matter of some interest to perform a DNA test on it? After all, similar testing was performed on the Shroud of Turin.
Actually, it was not just children, but their parents who intervened to attempt to convince me and other neighborhood kids.
However, the difficulty does remain that many of us, both non-Catholic as well as Catholic do struggle to grasp the nuances of transubstantiation.
Not on your life:
Prov 14:9 Fools make a mock at sin....
Did you ever ask anyone that question in the thread "Protestant errors and inventions"? Mock City in that one.
It is fiction from the dark ages and even the RCC claims that if you study the bread you will find that going right down to the carbon atoms - it is just bread.
in Christ,
Bob
In the case that was cited, the bread is believed to have been completely transformed into human flesh and this has been preserved as evidence of the miracle. Thus, the RCC is in a particular situation where it cannot claim that the "accidents" (i.e. bread) remained unchanged.
Here is an interesting Wikipedia article - Eucharistic miracle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Catholic Eucharistic Doctrine hinges on a quasi-Aristotelian understanding of reality,[1] in which the core substance or essential reality of a given thing is bound to, but not equivalent with, its sensible realities or accidents.
Yeah. The Greeks stepped in many a Biblical doctrine and made God a liar.
In the case that was cited, the bread is believed to have been completely transformed into human flesh and this has been preserved as evidence of the miracle. Thus, the RCC is in a particular situation where it cannot claim that the "accidents" (i.e. bread) remained unchanged.
Here is an interesting Wikipedia article - Eucharistic miracle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Catholic Eucharistic Doctrine hinges on a quasi-Aristotelian understanding of reality,[1] in which the core substance or essential reality of a given thing is bound to, but not equivalent with, its sensible realities or accidents.
Yeah. The Greeks stepped in many a Biblical doctrine and made God a liar.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?