Alright. A few questions regarding Aquinas.

First
Aquinas agrees with Augustine that "You are not to eat this body which you see" and explains that Augustine means that the body will not be eaten in the species in which the apostles saw Him, but in a spiritual or invisible way by power of the spirit.

What the heck does that mean?
A little more help: "Christ's body is not in this sacrament in the same way as a body is in a place, which by its dimensions is commensurate with the place; but in a special manner which is proper to this sacrament."
Still, what is the special manner?

Second
Regarding whether the bread and wine remains after consecration:
He shows that a thing cannot be in any place where it was not previously unless either
a. change of place
or
b. conversion of another thing into itself
and goes on to show that it is, in fact, the latter.
"But what is changed into another thing, no loner remains after such change. Hence, the conclusion is that, saving the truth of this sacrament, the substance of the bread cannot remain after the consecration."

Why is that so? I thought of turning a tree into a chair, but that doesn't work because the wood/carbon (substance) still remains in a chair.

Replace "species" with "shape, form, appearance" and the Augustine quote makes more sense. Species originally means shape, appearance, etc. It is a derived meaning to mean "this kind of thing" as we take the name species (or morphe in Greek) and apply it to catergorizations


Christ's proper place is heaven. His body is physically present there. Were He to be physically present here, it would mean that all 6th, 170 lbs of him taking up that space is right here. (making up the measurements obviously)

Rather, while the matter and form of bread become His body, He is not moved from heaven. He does not take on the accidents of the bread. Rather, His body and His body alone is made present by the "force of the sacrament" and, since they are necessarily joined to His Body, His soul, divinity, blood, etc is present with it. But not His accidents as those are separable.

The special manner than is "substantial" in that Christ, matter and form, is present, and "sacramental" in that it is through the sacrament (as the "res et sacramentum" of the sacrament, that is "the reality which is itself a sign" )but not physical, in that He does not subsume the physical accidents of the bread nor does He move from heaven.

Now for the second part, when I take wood and make a chair, this is strictly speaking accidental change (at least assume the tree is already dead!). I am merely moving parts and imposing a shape. Just as bronze remains bronze when it is cast in a statute. Another sort of change is substantial change, which something is changed into another thing, as when paper is burned and ash remains, or when Ole Yeller is shot. He is no more. There is not a variety of substances, which are further being changed into other substance (say into maggots as they eat the meat and get fatter, and say soil as it is decomposed). Still, this sort of change involves the matter receiving a new substantial form. The matter remains in the change, taking a new form.

The change in the Eucharist is a change of the matter and form into the matter and form of Christ. Christ does not gain new matter, rather than matter in the Eucharist is the matter that is in heaven that is Christ, and informed by His soul and divinity

Excellent. Poor ole yeller.

Rather, while the matter and form of bread become His body, He is not moved from heaven. He does not take on the accidents of the bread. Rather, His body and His body alone is made present by the "force of the sacrament" and, since they are necessarily joined to His Body, His soul, divinity, blood, etc is present with it. But not His accidents as those are separable.

- I think we can funnel my questions down to this one. If Christ does not become the Eucharist as the Apostles physically saw him, then in what way does Christ become the Eucharist? In other words, which parts of Christ's physical body are accidents? Which parts are separable.

I imagine fingernails and such are separable but maybe not.

By accident I do not mean material parts. There is a problem of language here. Modern speaks use physical and material interchangeably.

By accidents I mean anything which exists only in something, and unable to exist outside of it. Like color, size, etc. You cannot have blue existing by itself, there must be something that is blue. And so on.

All of Christ is substantially present in the Eucharist. We do that say that His brain is there, but not His hair. Rather we mean that His presence is not physical, that is His body is not contained by this space, His color and shape is not present to us. Rather, what is present is He Himself. A thing is not its color, it is not its size, it is not its place. It is the thing that is colored, that is this size, etcd. And those things change without it ceasing to be that same thing. That is what I mean by separable. I can move, I can lose weight, but I am still I.

I think I know what you are getting at, Will.

One of the RCIA leaders (and a dear friend) is allergic to wheat. She cannot partake of or even handle the host. She is lobbying for a gluten-free host, and I think it's a good idea.

Yes, once consecrated, the host IS the Body of Christ, but no, my friend cannot partake of it.

And that, my friend, is the Mystery of Faith.

Very helpful. But, this does not lead us to say that there is something common between wheat and all of Christ's substance. We say the wheat has changed and become something else.

I guess, similarly, Ole Yeller has stopped being old yeller when he is shot. But if you were allergic to meat you would not be able to take a bite out of Ole Yeller or a dog corpse...?




Ok. I am going to tell you what I think a person needs to be a person (the things of Christ's which are the host) and you will tell me what I am saying wrongly (hehe)

soul, brain, heart, stuff that allows the brain and heart to function.

Now, are you trying to tell me that these things do not have matter but substance only?

There are two sisters in a Benedictine Convent in Clyde, Missouri that have developed a "low gluten" host that has been approved as valid for the Eucharist.

Here is an article about.

And here is a link to the convent website.

Lisa

Lisa

I invite correction from others if this is irrelevant, but yesterday I was doing my contemplation on John's gospel where Mary Magdalene comes to the tomb to find it empty. First she encounters 2 angels and next she encounters who she thinks is the gardener. When this man says her name "Mary"... she immediately recognises the risen Christ. Not only in a spiritual way, but also physically even though He looks different to how she knew Him. We know that she tried to engage Him physically by clinging to Him. It occurred to me then and there what a brilliant phenomenological artifact that moment is for approaching Eucharist for us today who never knew Jesus in the way His contemporaries did.

Gluten-free hosts are invalid matter. Extremely low-gluten hosts are valid. I have two parishioners who need them, and they do work (i.e., they don't cause the allergic reaction). I get them from the place kage_ar linked.

why

I didn't know that either until yesterday, Will. From the links provided above, the rationale is that wheat bread is what was used at the Last Supper. The Church hierarchy insists on wheat being present in the host to preserve that tradition and prevent the de-evolution of the host to go on such a rabbit trail as to become unrecognizeable.

I can understand that reasoning. I once attended an outdoor service at a Disciples of Christ church that included a communion made up of potato chips and Coca-Cola.

It's not simply a matter of preserving tradition and it's not anything that anyone in the hierarchy can change. Jesus established the matter of this sacrament and it's not ours to change it.

Thanks, Obi-Wan, for clarifying. See what happens when a mere Padawan tries to grasp concepts too quickly?

I find this offensive. I have German ancestry (Bavarian to be exact) and I want beer and pretzels to be Eucharist....potato chips and Coca Cola, they are deliberately trying to exclude my German heritage.

I don't like that answer.

I am not sure how to say that nicely.

Also, I want to know what the essentials of Christ are that are present in the Eucharist.

Are those essentials made up of matter or are they substance only.

Christ Himself, entirely, is substantially and sacramentally present in the Eucharist. Not a part of Him, but He Himself.

I don't understand your question at all. A substance (unless it is spiritual) certainly has matter.

Whether or not you like it doesn't change the fact of it being the truth.

Did you read the article that I linked to above about the lite gluten? It explains why gluten free is impossible but lite gluten is acceptable.

Lisa

That was nice enough. At least, I took no offense. I am curious, however, if you can tell me why you don't like that answer.

Which parts of Christ are involved when you say entirely. are his fingernails included?

I thought that you could have a substance without it having matter... Like Faith is a substance I think.





That is right. I guess I am just not sure why it is the truth.

And no, I haven't read it. but I will now. I thought it was just an article saying that kind of thing happens. I didn't realize it explained things also.