Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jhpb@lancia.att.com Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: help needed Message-ID:Date: 29 Sep 89 07:04:27 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: AT&T Bell Labs (Liberty Corner) Lines: 28 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu David Cruz-Uribe writes: I think a technical correction is in order here. If this is the case, why are consecrated hosts reserved and adored as the body of Christ? This sounds more like a description of Luther's doctrine of Consubstantiation than of Catholic Transubstantiation. And our moderator comments: [I think he's referring to hosts that are eaten. I'm reasonably sure that Joe accepts the practice of the reserved sacrament. --clh] Moderator is correct. I was referring to Hosts that have been consumed. The general teaching of Catholic theologians is that the Real Presence ceases when the accidents are altered enough so that you no longer have the appearance of bread or wine. Other than that, the Presence is permanent and unchangeable. Transubstantiation (by definition) does not alter any of the observable properties of a host; eventually the accidents will do what is normal for the accidents of bread -- spoil. So Hosts are not left in a tabernacle indefinitely. St. Thomas covers this in the Summa Theologica in the articles on the Eucharist. Joe