According to Thomas Aquinas, in the case of extraordinary Eucharistic Miracles in which the appearance of the accidents are altered, this further alteration is not considered to be transubstantiation, but is a subsequent miracle that takes place for the building up of faith. Nor does the extraordinary manifestation alter or heighten the presence of Christ in the Eucharist, as the miracle does not manifest the physical presence of Christ: "in apparitions of this sort. . . the proper species [actual flesh and blood] of Christ is not seen, but a species formed miraculously either in the eyes of the viewers, or in the sacramental dimensions themselves...." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharistic_miracle
If the claim is that this "tissue" is truly from the body of Jesus Christ, then it is either his pre-glorified body - which was what was broken for our sins, and blood - which was shed for our sins, or it is Jesus' glorified body which is seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven. So which is it? If it is the pre-glorified body, then such theology is what Monophysites were accused of heresy for separating the humanity of Christ from His deity. The conundrum is discussed HERE:
"It would seem that, if transubstantiation is true, then the RC position leads to a denial of the true human nature of Christ, because the substantial, real human body of Christ is simultaneously in thousands of different places, thus applying a divine trait to Christ's human nature. Not Chalcedonian at all, then; more like Monophysite." Monophysitism holds that Jesus Christ, who is identical with the Son, is one person and one hypostasis in one nature: divine.
Monophysitism was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon in 451, which among other things adopted the Definition of Chalcedon (often known as the "Chalcedonian Creed") stating that Christ is the eternal Son of God "made known in two natures without confusion [i.e. mixture], without change, without division, without separation, the difference of the natures being by no means removed because of the union, but the property of each nature being preserved and coalescing in one prosopon [person] and one hupostasis [subsistence]--not parted or divided into two prosopa [persons], but one and the same Son, only-begotten, divine Word, the Lord Jesus Christ." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monophysitism)
Oh, that's such an old, lame James White argument. [sigh]
First of all, everyone at the Council of Chalcedon believed in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Should we believe that they set out to contradict their own beliefs? Of course not.
Second, being "in thousands of places at once" is not "omnipresence," which is a divine attribute, but multilocation. I think Christ's glorified body is perfectly capable of multilocating, just as it was capable of walking through walls and doors.
If the claim is that this "tissue" is truly from the body of Jesus Christ, then it is either his pre-glorified body - which was what was broken for our sins, and blood - which was shed for our sins, or it is Jesus' glorified body which is seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven.
The humanity of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist is certainly his glorified humanity. As to what you see in a Eucharistic Miracle ... the definition of a miracle is a manifestation encouraging faith which cannot be explained by natural means. Beyond that, it's hard to tie down.
People asked me for a miracle. There are lots of miracles associated with the Eucharist.
John 6: 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Still they focus on the flesh.