Then it isn't the literal Body and Blood of Christ. If it's changed in form, it's changed in form and ought to be detectable. If there's no physically or chemically detectable change in the physical substance, than it hasn't been changed and it's not the LITERAL body and blood of Christ.
Saying otherwise is wanting to have your cake and eat it too. It's not possible to have it both ways.
OF COURSE
THEY WANT THEIR CAKE/WAFER AND EAT IT TOO!
They don’t treasure the
2nd STATION OF THE STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY SO MUCH FOR NOTHING!
TO WIT:
2.THE BLACK/WHITE ICON OF DUPLICITY, THE DOUBLE STANDARD DOOFUS FLIP-FLOP DANCE
Can you spell
R A T I O N A L I Z A T I O N?
Detectable to whom?
Are you suggesting that molecular changes are always visible to the human eye?
Are you suggesting that the Body of Christ must look like what you think It should look like?
Did Jesus Christ LOOK different to those who accepted Him than He did to those who rejected Him?
If there's no physically or chemically detectable change in the physical substance, than it hasn't been changed and it's not the LITERAL body and blood of Christ.
I suggest you research Eucharistic miracles.
And what do you mean by "chemically detectable"? A century ago mankind was unable to split an atom, now scientists can. Are you suggesting that if something isn't scientifically provable as of September 10, 2010, that it is false?
“Then it isn't the literal Body and Blood of Christ. If it's changed in form, it's changed in form and ought to be detectable.”
That's your view of things. I understand that. I disagree, but I understand. My view is that that's a rather flat, materialist view of things.
“Saying otherwise is wanting to have your cake and eat it too. It's not possible to have it both ways.”
In your view. It's certainly not possible from a strictly natural view, and it's certainly not possible from strictly natural causes or processes. But the Catholic view is that at the consecration, a supernatural process has taken place. The power of God has caused the bread and wine to cease to be, and for the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ to take its place on the altar. Literally.
But it continues to appear to be bread and wine.
Now, you are free to disagree with what we believe, even to say that it doesn't make sense to you. But equally, I'll tell you that I believe it, and it is what the Catholic Church teaches infallibly, whether you think it's possible or not.
I've had many folks who aren't Christian at all point out the “impossibility” of the Resurrection, of the miracles of Jesus, etc. I understand. What they believe doesn't allow for these things.
All I ask is that, whether you agree with Catholic teaching or not, you at least acknowledge it as it is, rather than as you would wish it to be.
sitetest
I love it when people—who believe in magic, inivsible things, miracles, talking donkeys, and what not—dismiss each others' beliefs as "impossible." LOL!
It seems to me, that
at a MINIMUM
the change
ought to be TANGIBLE.
And THAT all the more so, given that they are ranting and emphasizing EXTREMELY TO THE MAX
A TANGIBLE SORT OF PRESENCE.
IF it’s NOT TANGIBLE,
Then it ends up, it seems to me, being FUNCTIONALLY SYMBOLIC
. . . WHICH IS THE PRODDY PERSPECTIVE.
Sounds like the
2nd STATION OF THE STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY YET AGAIN:
2. THE BLACK/WHITE ICON OF DUPLICITY, THE DOUBLE STANDARD DOOFUS FLIP-FLOP DANCE