[Claud]

Rome dwells on the inconsequential.

It's only "inconsequential" when Geneva hasn't got the chops to understand it.

Count-your-change's point, if that's what you are referring to, is mistaken in making a mystical connection into an equality of substance. Christ's body is not Mary's body. The two are related in a deep mystical and physical way--a way which I cannot even begin to speculate on--but they are not the same thing. And yes, in the mystical and physical sense as Da-Shrimp already pointed out, Christ's body *does* have a human connection to Anne an Joachim and all the way back to Adam and Eve. That is what "becoming man" is all about--entering a family.

Mary is mystically present in the Eucharist, not SUBSTANTIALLY present in the Eucharist. She is present in the sense that her body gave rise to Christ's. But her soul is not in it. She has no divinity to put in it.

So what you saw as some glaring example of heresy is, in fact, a complete misreading of the idea.

[count-your-change]

“Mary is mystically present in the Eucharist, not SUBSTANTIALLY present in the Eucharist. She is present in the sense that her body gave rise to Christ's. But her soul is not in it. She has no divinity to put in it.”

Maybe the essence of her nature or the nature of her spirit of essence was mysteriously, incorporeal present but only not in substance but still substantially in the mystical sense of a non-speculative compounded presence. Or not.