Comments on: Transubstantiation http://www.john-wright.net/2008/08/26/transubstantiation/ Free speech on terrestrial radio Sun, 25 Jul 2010 09:07:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: John http://www.john-wright.net/2008/08/26/transubstantiation/comment-page-1/#comment-2590 John Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:06:43 +0000 http://www.john-wright.net/?p=922#comment-2590 Yep, it's the orthodox Catholic belief. And yet they don't believe you can perceive, in any human way, the change, even though it's supposed to be a literal change. Brilliant. Yep, it’s the orthodox Catholic belief. And yet they don’t believe you can perceive, in any human way, the change, even though it’s supposed to be a literal change. Brilliant.

]]> By: Richard http://www.john-wright.net/2008/08/26/transubstantiation/comment-page-1/#comment-2588 Richard Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:40:01 +0000 http://www.john-wright.net/?p=922#comment-2588 I asked a Catholic friend of mine if she believes that the Eucharist *literally is* the body of Christ and she said "Yes." I asked a Catholic friend of mine if she believes that the Eucharist *literally is* the body of Christ and she said “Yes.”

]]> By: Ryan http://www.john-wright.net/2008/08/26/transubstantiation/comment-page-1/#comment-2584 Ryan Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:02:58 +0000 http://www.john-wright.net/?p=922#comment-2584 Well gosh, I learned something new today. That *is* a rather odd claim. Well gosh, I learned something new today. That *is* a rather odd claim.

]]> By: John http://www.john-wright.net/2008/08/26/transubstantiation/comment-page-1/#comment-2583 John Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:43:10 +0000 http://www.john-wright.net/?p=922#comment-2583 Ryan, their position is an attempt to occupy the best of both worlds. On one hand, they don't want to admit that the bread and wine are only being used as an aid to remembrance ("Do this in memory of me..."); on the other, they won't be able to substantiate a claim that the bread and wine are, in a real, verifiable sense, the body and blood (which would also be gross). How to occupy the best of both worlds? Claim that substance is different than, well, substance. Claim that substance changes, but doesn't change verifiably. Claim that substance is something other than taste, smell, texture, touch, molecular structure. It's garbage. Of course, the sensible doctrine would claim it's a symbol to aid reflection. Ryan, their position is an attempt to occupy the best of both worlds. On one hand, they don’t want to admit that the bread and wine are only being used as an aid to remembrance (“Do this in memory of me…”); on the other, they won’t be able to substantiate a claim that the bread and wine are, in a real, verifiable sense, the body and blood (which would also be gross).

How to occupy the best of both worlds? Claim that substance is different than, well, substance. Claim that substance changes, but doesn’t change verifiably. Claim that substance is something other than taste, smell, texture, touch, molecular structure. It’s garbage.

Of course, the sensible doctrine would claim it’s a symbol to aid reflection.

]]> By: Ryan http://www.john-wright.net/2008/08/26/transubstantiation/comment-page-1/#comment-2582 Ryan Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:08:21 +0000 http://www.john-wright.net/?p=922#comment-2582 Well....does he understand that those substances, while indeed being what they are, are being used as symbols? I realize a cracker is still a cracker.... but it represents Christ's body. I think his understanding may be skewed... Or it's very possible my understanding of the Catholic understanding of communion is wrong too. Well….does he understand that those substances, while indeed being what they are, are being used as symbols? I realize a cracker is still a cracker…. but it represents Christ’s body. I think his understanding may be skewed…

Or it’s very possible my understanding of the Catholic understanding of communion is wrong too.

]]>