Bleeding wafer

Luther and Calvin had reduced the Eucharist to a memorial, they did not affirm "the" real presence in the literal and strong sense that the Catholic Church designates as "transubstantiation", but only what THEY themselves understood by "real presence". And what did they understand? Luther said that the Eucharistic species were NOT TRANSMUTED into the body and blood of the Savior, but remained intact in their material structure, on which Jesus only "deposited" himself by a means that came to be called "consubstantiation" and that Luther confessed that he didn't know what the hell it was. Calvin, for his part, believed that Jesus was there only "in spirit" and "for faith".

A good theory is, by definition, one that explains the facts. Transubstantiation explains the phenomenon of bleeding wafers, infinitely repeated throughout the world and conformed in laboratory by dr. Ricardo Castañon

It is obvious that if a host bleeds, it is flesh and not just bread, let alone "spiritual presence".

Not being able to account for this phenomenon either by Luther's theory or Calvin's theory, many Protestants have to explain this Eucharistic miracle either as cheating or as the work of the devil. In the first case, there was never even a serious attempt to prove cheating in the case of some Eucharistic miracle officially recognized by the Church. The second hypothesis may have a tremendous impact as an insult, but, of course, it results in saying that the devil has the power to transmute matter, which God does not. Sto. Augustine already observed that nothing pleases demons more than exaggerating the reach of their powers. The involuntary diabolism of this explanation already denotes a mental confusion that can be explained either as a result of natural ineptitude or as the work of demons.

The Eucharist is the means by which the faithful, absorbing Christ's body and blood, transform their own body and blood into them, and thus participate in the sacrifice of Calvary not only in spirit, but materially, through their terrestrial sufferings.

If there is no transmutation, if bread and wine are not materially the body of Christ, if they are only the unchanged material support of a mysterious presence, what is eaten and drank in the Eucharist is only that support, and not necessarily the presence, since Luther himself refuses to expose any nexus of necessity between one thing and the other.

If, even worse, the presence is only spiritual and "for the faith", it is not seen how a purely spiritual element could be eaten or drunk. Christ's words, "Whoever does not eat of my body or drink of my blood will not have eternal life", thus reduce to an unreasonable metaphor and a macabre bad taste. This is literally how Protestants interpret them, believing themselves to be very faithful to Christ, which shows an almost psychotic state of mental disorientation.

It follows from this the inevitable conclusion that, both in Lutheranism and in Calvinism, there is no integration of the body of the believer in the body of Christ, nor real participation in the sacrifice of Calvary, nor, therefore, any Eucharist, just an intention or vague imitation of Eucharist - a “memorial”, at best.

The problem with evangelicals is that, reading poorly, they cling to the immediate and apparent meaning of the text, instead of understanding its internal logic.


PS: I couldn't find the video with english subtitles, but in short, Ricardo sends the bleeding wafer to one of the best doctors in the USA (who, by the way, is an atheist) without telling him what it was about, and the doctor notes that the blood was from some 'patient' who was in agony of pain, with difficulty breathing. He also identified that the blood came precisely from the heart.