If there is no "miracle" of these elements being visibly changed every time they are "consecrated" ...
I have a question for you. And I ask it respectfully. Is God under obligation to perform a sign on demand? What's your interpretation of Mk 8:11-12? What's the reason for the deep sigh and refusal to perform a miracle? Other passages that come to mind are Mt 12:39, Lk 11:29, Jn 2:18-21. That sign of Jonah (the Resurrection), is what Catholics believe about the Eucharist, that it is the true risen Christ, body, blood, soul, and divinity.
...then why is a Catholic Eucharistic celebration any more holy or efficacious than that of another Christian group that observes the remembrance celebration?
Because Jesus gave authority to his apostles, the Catholic view is that groups that split from the apostles do not have valid authority to celebrate the Eucharist. For most of these groups, the Catholic view is that they are receiving symbols, not the actual body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. I ask one of my Catholic brethren to correct me if I have misstated this.
A Catholic who "receives" the communion wafer is no more sanctified than someone else who has believed on the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and participates in his own church's communion service, remembering the body and blood of Christ given for his salvation.
I leave it to God to do the sanctifying. He can come to me in Holy Communion or any way he chooses :) While Catholics hold that most nonCatholic communion celebrations are not actually the body, blood, soul, and divinity of the Lord, I am not willing to say that Jesus doesn't visit devout nonCatholics in their worship. His is the business of making holy. I see mine as drawing as close to Him as I can, and conducting myself in my personal and spiritual life as those He put in authority over me encourage me to do. Personally, I have all the proof I need about Jesus coming to me in the Eucharist, praise be to God :) I am thankful I wasn't alive in Jesus' day. I would have been one of those who walked away. I know I would have :(
Peace be with all following this thread.
I am grateful for this post.
And I thoroughly understand all that you have written.
‘Bleeding’ Eucharist at Primary School in Moruga [Trinidad]
The Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, Italy (The Body and Blood of Christ) [Catholic Caucus]
Do You Believe in Eucharistic Miracles?
Eucharistic Miracle at St. Stephen's in New Boston MI.(Catholic Caucas)
[CATHOLIC CAUCUS] EUCHARISTIC MIRACLES
[CATHOLIC CAUCUS]'Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity': The Miracle and Gift of the Most Holy Eucharist
Looking After a Eucharistic Miracle (Franciscan Recounts His Special Mission in Siena)
Eucharistic Miracle: 2009?
Possible Eucharistic Miracle in Poland
The Eucharistic Miracles(Catholic Caucus)
Vatican display exhibits eucharistic miracles
Eucharistic Miracle - Bolsena-Orvieto, Italy
Physician Tells of Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano -Verifies Authenticity of the Phenomenon
BLOOD TYPE FOUND IN ICONS IS SAME AS IN SHROUD OF TURIN AND 'LANCIANO MIRACLE'
Eucharistic Miracle: Lanciano,Italy-8th Century A.D.
I am not saying that God is under "obligation" to perform miracles on demand, only that what this article as well as the Roman Catholic dogma states is that the "transubstantiation" in the Eucharistic service IS the changing of the elements into the LITERAL (and it DOES use that word) body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. My contention is simply that this is NOT literal at all but a perception of the person who believes it occurs. What I object to most of all is not that someone believes in the "real presence" but that participating in the communion service and receiving the host MUST be done in order to have an infusion of sanctifying grace AND that only those who believe in the LITERAL presence ARE given grace to save them. If you read some of the early fathers of the Christian faith you will see that they were not in agreement about what the Roman Catholic Church says today about the Eucharist and that most of them that speak about the "physical" nature do so in response to the Docetists and Gnostics who DENIED that Jesus even HAD a physical body. Understood in that context, makes their teachings a little more clear.
As to "groups that split from the apostles", all I can say is that the ONLY way that anyone can be counted among the followers of Jesus Christ is by their faith in what Scripture says about Him and the Apostles and their designated disciples taught what is contained in the Bible. It is the Bible that, as God-breathed, is our authority and the early theologians that stayed true to the faith held that NOTHING they taught should be received if it could not be proved by Holy Scripture. As you may know, the Reformation came about because of the apostasy of the Catholic Church and because its leaders had strayed from the clear Gospel of Jesus Christ, putting the traditions of men ABOVE what the Bible said. I would rather follow the faith as it is taught in Scripture than a church that only claims it IS the true church. That should be ALL of ours criteria for truth claims.
Thank you for your respectful comments. I bid you peace.