substance/accident example..

[Fides_et_Ratio]

So, other than the Eucharist, is there an example of something that undergoes a substantial change while still maintaining the accidents (and thus "appears", etc. like another substance)?

[Cam42]

Short answer, no.

Long answer, nope.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

not helpful.

There's gotta be something! A seminarian friend of mine mentioned death and conception (which sort of falls apart), and I don't think I want to compare the Eucharist to death...

[Cam42]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Jun 11 2005, 08:17 PM']not helpful.

There's gotta be something! A seminarian friend of mine mentioned death and conception (which sort of falls apart), and I don't think I want to compare the Eucharist to death...
[right][snapback]609469[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

It is something wholly and completely unique to the Eucharistic Sacramental action.

Sorry if it doesn't get you what you want, but the answer is still no.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Jun 11 2005, 09:20 PM']It is something wholly and completely unique to the Eucharistic Sacramental action.

Sorry if it doesn't get you what you want, but the answer is still no.
[right][snapback]609472[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Well, I get that much. I was just hoping for something at least analogous (other than death).

[Cam42]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Jun 11 2005, 08:23 PM']Well, I get that much. I was just hoping for something  at least analogous (other than death).
[right][snapback]609474[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

There is nothing and death is not a valid analogy...as you have surmised.

[God Conquers]

ALthough it is another Sacrament, would Baptism be an example... as in you are substantially changed, become part of the Kingdom of God?


And... it's far far far from a good example and is one I use with kids and teens, totally changing your look, like getting completely different clothes and hairstyle and losing/gaining tons of weight... you might not look the same (bread) but you are the same you (Jesus)

[Cam42]

Nope...there is an ontological change, but you don't take on the aspects of something totally different while still looking like a human.

To assume what you are assuming undermines free will.

[God Conquers]

ah, I see.

I'll stick witht the preppy big Matt changing to a punked out skinny Matt comparison.

[Cam42]

Just so long as you don't use it as a comparison to transubstantiation.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='God Conquers' date='Jun 12 2005, 04:03 PM']ALthough it is another Sacrament, would Baptism be an example... as in you are substantially changed, become part of the Kingdom of God?
[right][snapback]609918[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
There is no analogy that will really convey the nature of the change that occurs through the consecration of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ during the Divine Liturgy.

It is of course a [i]de fide[/i] teaching that through the prayer of consecration the entire substance of the bread and wine are transformed into the entire substance of the body and blood of Christ, in such a way that the substance of the bread and wine no longer exist. As a consequence, the comparison that you've made between the Eucharist and Baptism would involve asserting something that is false, i.e., the idea that man's entire substance is changed into the entire substance of Christ by the sacrament of Baptism. Now by its very nature this type of change would involve the annihilation of the human person as he is transformed substantially into Christ, and this clearly is contrary to the faith of the Church, because the Church has never accepted any monistic or pantheistic ideas in connection with man's communion with God in Christ. Thus, I would avoid this type of comparison, especially in conversations with non-Catholics.

[Fides_et_Ratio]

yeah, thanks for the help/explanations. I was attempting to think of a way to explain it to kids with questions (i.e., "how do we know that's Jesus even when it still looks and tastes like bread?") without seeming to "brush it off" (as one accused) by stating we know it by faith.

[HomeTeamFamily]

the best i can offer you is to think of it like this:

take you and one of your best friends........each of you has a physical element and a nonphysical element (personality, sense of humor, knowledge, etc)

now take your best friends nonphysical elements and put them into the shell of your physical elements.....so it looks like you and feels like you, but has the sense of humor of your friend, your friends personality, etc

i know its an imperfect example to try to describe something so perfect, but i think its pretty close

[Cam42]

The best example is to teach clearly, the dogma of transubstantiation. There will be no ambiguity, then.

[marboniface]

What age are the kids?

An old teaching nun once told me to be conscious at all times that the faith of a child is different from the faith of an adult.

A child can believe simply - that the priest takes bread to the altar and that Christ Jesus descends from the altar to them in Holy Communion, looking like bread.

Adults do need analogies to understand, but not to believe.

If you are looking for an analogy, it is usually best to give an example that is so far removed from what you are explaining that the listeners could not accidentally confuse what you are doing in the analogy, with what happens in what you are explaining.


As for the Eucharist, the best explanation for adolescents is probably not 'how it works', but exactly what the Church believes: the full version of one of Aquinas' hymns is probably a good resource. (eg. '... seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived....' ie. the accidents do not show forth the reality of the Blessed Sacrament - the only sense which evidences the reality is the sense of hearing. 'This is my body...')

Marboniface


PS. The death analogy is understandable, but unhelpful - because it is true that Aquinas mentions that after death the flesh is not a human body but a corpse, or 'pile of decaying flesh', because it has lost the human form, the soul. But a HUMAN SUBSTANCE is composed of body and soul, so that neither the body nor the soul are complete substances alone, which introduces new complications to the example, because the corpse is 'transcendentally' related to the soul insofar as they will be rejoined on the last day. But the main reason that the death analogy doesn't work is because the body has not changed in substance, but has lost its form - like (this is an analogy) a bronze statue of a man will lose the form of man if melted.