Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: CynicalBear

The words of the priest are the direct efficient cause of the change of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ. His human soul and divinity become present by “concomitance,” not as a direct effect of the words of consecration.

According to Thomas Aquinas, the Eucharist at the Last Supper was the same body and blood of Jesus that the apostles saw at table with them. If one of the apostles had celebrated the Eucharist while Jesus was in the tomb, the Eucharistic species would have contained his dead body, and his dead blood. It would have contained his divinity as well, because his divinity is the “act of existence” of his body and blood. I.e, even in death, the body and blood were hypostatically united with his divinity Person. His human soul would not have been present, because he was dead. After the Resurrection, the Eucharist contains the body and blood, and the human soul, and the divine Person of the Risen Christ.

AFAIK, the Magisterium has not dealt with the hypothetical portion of Thomas Aquinas’s teaching (i.e., the part about the celebration of the Eucharist while Jesus was dead), but I am quite sure that it is not correct to say that the Real Presence in the Eucharist did not occur at the Last Supper, and could not occur until after Pentecost.


142 posted on 03/01/2015 6:16:58 PM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies ]


To: Arthur McGowan
>>but I am quite sure that it is not correct to say that the Real Presence in the Eucharist did not occur at the Last Supper, and could not occur until after Pentecost.<<

So you don't know if Jesus and the apostles were eating the real flesh and blood of Jesus at the last supper? Is that what you are saying?

143 posted on 03/01/2015 6:19:46 PM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies ]

To: Arthur McGowan
After the Resurrection, the Eucharist contains the body and blood, and the human soul, and the divine Person of the Risen Christ.

So the flesh and blood that the Catholic church claims people are eating and drinking is from the RISEN Christ.

Except that flesh and blood does not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

And there's no record of Christ's risen body having any blood since it was all poured out.

Not to mention that the CCC states that the eucharist is a participation in the BLOODLESS sacrifice of Christ, which accomplishes nothing because without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins.

Unbloody sacrifice

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner."188

So if the Catholic church is claiming they are offering an unbloody sacrifice, it is NOT the same one as Christ made.

145 posted on 03/01/2015 6:33:01 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson