Christ in the Eucharist: Really, truly, substantially... and physically?
#41
(04-28-2010, 08:48 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: glgas,

I don't know what you are saying. I am presenting one teaching of the Church and one only: the Body, Blood, soul, and divinity of Christ is present within each species.

You said in your previous post:

"But God is all-present in each." [species]. Which is true in generic way as God is all present in everything.

The Church document talk about bodily presence (Council of Constance D583) or transubstantiation (Tridentinum D874) of the body and blood of Christ into the species of the bread and vine. Naturaly Christ is present with his body, and the second divine person is present with Christ, and only in cosequencial way.

This means that sacrileges do not hurt God, only the ones who commit sacrilege.

Also you can not say that the Church was wrong allowing to receive the Eucharist under both species. The two species was established by Christ, and trusted to the Church and not to me, or you, not even to Archbishop Lefevbre, after he lost his jurisdiction. There is some real distinction between the two species.
Reply
#42
(04-28-2010, 03:43 PM)glgas Wrote:
(04-28-2010, 08:48 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: glgas,

I don't know what you are saying. I am presenting one teaching of the Church and one only: the Body, Blood, soul, and divinity of Christ is present within each species.

You said in your previous post:

"But God is all-present in each." [species]. Which is true in generic way as God is all present in everything.

I was correcting your statement. My post is about your statement, not about my statement. I am only asking that you acknowledge that the Body and Blood are present in each. Don't try to turn this onto me as if I'm the one who made the initial dubious statement.

Quote:The Church document talk about bodily presence (Council of Constance D583) or transubstantiation (Tridentinum D874) of the body and blood of Christ into the species of the bread and vine. Naturaly Christ is present with his body, and the second divine person is present with Christ, and only in cosequencial way.

This means that sacrileges do not hurt God, only the ones who commit sacrilege.

My correction of your post does not treat of this. You keep bringing this up as if this justified you saying that when we receive the Host we only receive the Body of Christ. That is not true and that is the only thing I am debating here right now.

Quote:Also you can not say that the Church was wrong allowing to receive the Eucharist under both species. The two species was established by Christ, and trusted to the Church and not to me, or you, not even to Archbishop Lefevbre, after he lost his jurisdiction. There is some real distinction between the two species.

Also, I never said that the Church was wrong. That is a strawman that you have set up yourself. I am commenting on one thing and one thing only: in receiving the Host, we receive both the Body and Blood. Anything else is not of my concern at this time.
Reply
#43
INPEFESS,
This is what you mean, right?

"The Whole Christ is present under each of the two Species. (De fide.)"

http://jloughnan.tripod.com/dogma.htm

I think glgas was trying to clarify that the Soul and Divinity of Christ are together with His Body and Blood by way of concomitance.

Quote:CONCOMITANCE
The doctrine that explains why the whole Christ is present under each Eucharistic species. Christ is indivisible, so that his body cannot be separated from his blood, his human soul, his divine nature, and his divine personality. Consequently he is wholly present in the Eucharist. But only the substance of his body is the specific effect of the first consecration at Mass; his blood, soul, divinity, and personality become present by concomitance, i.e., by the inseparable connection that they have with his body. The Church also says the "substance" of Christ's body because its accidents, though imperceptible, are also present by same concomitance, not precisely because of the words of consecration.

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/l...m?id=32692
Reply
#44
glgas Wrote:Also we do not say : God's body, because God as nature has no body, only the Incarnated Second Divine Person Jesus Christ has body. Also as a matter of fact it is Jesus Christ's command to receive the Eucharist.
Jesus is God by Nature and not just by His Person. Therefore it is proper to say God's Body, though more properly to say, God's Human Body.
Quote:The clear distinction between the nature (God) and the Persons (including the Son with hypostatical union with Jesus Christ the historical man) was made in the Christological ecumenical councils, please do not want to wash it out.
There is a distinction between the Divine Persons, but there is no distinction between God and His Persons. God is His Persons. Hence the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, but there is one God, not three." This is the Infinite Mystery of the Most Blessed Trinity.
Quote:Jesus Christ's body and blood is present in the Eucharist, and the Church wants to keep the difference between the two species. I do not know why, but this is the matter of faith and subduing of the mind, not think thank.
The two Species symbolize and represent the beginning Bloody manner of our Lord's Sacrifice, that is, the separation of Christ's Body and Blood in His Passion and on the Cross.
Reply
#45
glgas Wrote:but we are not God eaters (theophagi), we receive only the body (and some receive the blood) of Jesus Christ. The personality is hold by the immortal soul, not by the body. The human body is connectedto a person, but it is not the person. (similar way as the locus, tempus and other accidentalia are not connected to His body, those remain with the specii)
This is heresy. We receive Christ, whole and entire, His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

Quote:Possibly God could be incarnated similar way to the  hypostatical (person-based) union with the Earth of a Solar system, whatever; but He choose that personal union with a human person whom we call Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ is a Divine Person not a human person. He has no human person, but only a human nature. Jesus is true God and true Man in one Divine Person, God the Son.

Quote:This is important to know, that is somebody deliberately commit sacrilege with the Eucharist, that people are hurt (spiritually) but Our Lord as person is not hurt by sacrilegious acts, no matter how heinous they are.
He is certainly offended by such sacrileges as they are sins.
Reply
#46
(04-28-2010, 05:59 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: INPEFESS,
This is what you mean, right?

"The Whole Christ is present under each of the two Species. (De fide.)"

http://jloughnan.tripod.com/dogma.htm

I think glgas was trying to clarify that the Soul and Divinity of Christ are together with His Body and Blood by way of concomitance.

Quote:CONCOMITANCE
The doctrine that explains why the whole Christ is present under each Eucharistic species. Christ is indivisible, so that his body cannot be separated from his blood, his human soul, his divine nature, and his divine personality. Consequently he is wholly present in the Eucharist. But only the substance of his body is the specific effect of the first consecration at Mass; his blood, soul, divinity, and personality become present by concomitance, i.e., by the inseparable connection that they have with his body. The Church also says the "substance" of Christ's body because its accidents, though imperceptible, are also present by same concomitance, not precisely because of the words of consecration.

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/l...m?id=32692

Okay, I understand, but if I haven't denied this, then how is this relevant to my very specific correction?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)