Transubstantiation in modern science: How can substance change without accidents
#58
(12-14-2012, 10:57 AM)newyorkcatholic Wrote: Christ is on the altar, in reality, whether considered in the natural order or the supernatural order, but not "physically" so if by physically we mean in terms of what can be observed or analyzed through instrumentation - which is what scientists, who speak materialistically even when they may not be philosophical materialists, mean by the word "physically"?

Despite how scientists may employ the term, I don't think the word "physically" necessarily means "perceptible," "quantifiable," or "empirical." Substance is physical material but not its quantifiable, measurable, or quantifiable attributes.

Christ is physically present on the altar, but not in any detectable sense. The two concepts are distinct.

The problem, I think, is not with the meaning of the word employed but with the approach of modern science, which, as the article points out, denies a physical existence beyond what is quantifiable. From a theological standpoint, the word "physical" is as apt as it ever was. It is not our fault that modern science fails to acknowledge the existence of a reality beyond the lens of their microscopes. 
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Transubstantiation in modern science: How can substance change without accidents - by INPEFESS - 12-15-2012, 12:49 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)