Q. OK. So I've reread that quotation several times... It's beginning to make a little sense...
A. But...
Q. But what I find really hard to swallow is that you guys believe that the unleavened bread that Jesus blessed, broke and distributed or that the unleavened bread your own priests bless, break and distribute is actually the body of the same Jesus who was born 2000 years ago, lived, worked, suffered, died and rose again.
A. The good news is that's an understandable difficulty.
Q. The bad news?
A. It's a take it or leave it, all or nothing situation. Either Jesus actually turned that bread into His body or He didn't. There is no third option. Again, either priests can perform the same miracle or they can't.
Q. Transubstantiation. Is that what you guys call it?
A. Yes. Transubstantiation. Big word.
Q. What does it even mean?
A. That the whole substance of the bread and the whole substance of the wine change (trans-) into the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ.
You'd need a bit of Aristotle's philosophy to understand those terms...
Q. I ain't afraid of no philosophy!
A. Haha! That's the spirit!
So basically Aristotle came up with a system of thinking about created reality.
Q. Including God and angels?
A. God is uncreated so it doesn't apply to Him. Angels, yes.
Q. OK. So...
A. So a "substance" in his philosophical terms is something that can exist on its own. In language, these are usually all nouns: dog, car, human, rock, angel, phone, etc.
The properties - physical or otherwise - of that noun are its "accidents". Accidents can't exist on their own. They need some thing - a substance - to exist in. For example colour. Whatever colour you think of, you always think of it - or more likely imagine it - in something. Take white for example. The moment I mention the word you immediately imagine a white sheet or white wall or white paint... But white itself, without some substance is impossible. So too with shape, weight, intellect, location, number, etc.
To be continued...
11th December 2016