Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: flaglady47
The main difference is that in transubstantiation it is believed that the substance of the bread and wine are actually changed into the substance of the body and blood of our Lord; that only the appearance of bread and wine remain, not their substance. The "trans" in transubstantiation mean beyond the substance.

In consubstantiation it is believed that the substanstance of the bread and wine remain and that our Lord becomes present with the continuing presence of the bread and wine. The "con" in consubstantiation means with the substance.

The Catholic belief in transubstantiation is based on the fact that our Lord said: "This is my body," rather than "Here is my body."

94 posted on 09/15/2006 6:04:57 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: Petrosius

The Catholic belief in transubstantiation is based on the fact that our Lord said: "This is my body," rather than "Here is my body."

Thanks. That helps clear it up a bit; however, it still seems a bit of hairsplitting, as both definitions seem to say that the body and blood of Christ is within the wafer and wine. Am I interpreting this right, that with trans it is actual body and blood even though looking like wafer and wine, whereas with con it is body and blood somehow mixed in with still actual bread and wine?


96 posted on 09/15/2006 6:11:57 PM PDT by flaglady47 (Thinking out Loud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson