Eating and Touching Divinity

Zoxsasi

Hi,

As you all maybe aware, there has been a lot of issue in our Church concerning this issue. His Holiness has written many articles responding to those who believe that we eat the Divine nature with the Human Nature in the Eucharist. The Pope's response was simple and very succinct: We cannot eat Divinity. Therefore, in the Holy Communion, we are only taking the Holy Body, and not the "Divine Holy Body".

But what I fail to understand is this: The Priest, during the mass says : "This is TRULY Christ's body, that He has taken from the Queen and Lady of us All Saint Mary... I believe that His Divinity did not depart His Humanity, for a single instance nor a twinkle of an eye...".

So, there appears to be some confusion: Christ's Divinity did NOT leave His Humanity. Therefore, why does the CoC now say we do not partake of Divinity?

Now, let's look at another issue:
------------------------------

Christ was born of Saint Mary (Human) and the Holy Spirit (Divine). We believe that, as Orthodox Coptic Christians, that Christ's nature is a nature where the Divinity united with every single part of His Humanity in the Person of Christ.

Therefore, when the adulteress washed and kissed Our Lord's feet, was she kissing and touching the Human Nature, the Divine Nature, or BOTH?

If she touched both, can we answer and say likewise, with the Holy Communion, we are partaking of both?

Do you all see the predicament or confusion here: we cannot eat Divinity, yet we partake of it. Even if we do not partake of it, then others who touched Christ, touched His Divine Body. Even in our mass, we say:
He took bread on His Divine and Spotless hands and gave thanks. (During the consecration of the bread into the Holy Body).

So, we can see evidently that as a human, He was Divine and Human, and His Divinity was united completely with His Humanity. If we cannot eat, nor touch the Divine Nature, then how did the others cope when they touched Him? We cannot say they touched only His Holy Body, because that would mean that His Divinity departed from His Humanity.

So, for example, the soldiers who nailed Him to the cross, they touched His Divine Body also. How? If we cannot eat NOR touch Divinity, how did they manage that??

What did Saint Peter mean when he said "Partakers of the Divine Nature"?


Thanks

joeg

It is non-nonsensical to talk of two Natures after the union. The complete union of the Divine and Human Natures of Christ is referred to in our Church as the "One Nature of the Incarnate Logos". I suggest you read Chapter 3 of H.H.'s "The Nature of Christ" (which I'll quote here):

"3
The Nature of this Union
Union Without Mingling, Confusion, Alteration or Transmutation:
BY "one Nature", we mean a real union. This does not involve mingling as of wheat and
barely, nor confusion as of wine and water or milk and tea. Moreover, no change
occurred as in the case of chemical reaction. For example carbon dioxide consists of
carbon and oxygen, and the nature of both changes when they are combined; each
loses its properties which distinguished it before the unity. In contrast, no change
occurred in the Divine or Human nature as a result of their unity.
Furthermore, unity between the two natures occurred without transmutation.
Thus, neither did the Divine nature transmute to the human nature, nor did the human
nature, transmute to the Divine nature. The Divine nature did not mix with the human
nature nor mingle with it, but it was a unity that led to Oneness of Nature.
The Example of the Union of Iron and Fire:
St., Cyril the Great used this analogy and so did St. Dioscorus. In the case of ignited
iron, we do not say that there are two natures: iron and fire, but we say iron united with
fire. Similarly, we speak about the nature of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Incarnate God,
and we do not say "God and man".
In the union of iron with fire, the iron is not changed into fire nor fire into iron.
Both are united without mingling, confusion or alteration. Although this situation is not
permanent in the case of iron, and here is the point of disagreement, but we only want
to say that once iron is ignited with fire, it continues to retain all the properties of iron
and all the properties of fire.
Likewise, the nature of the Incarnate Logos is One Nature, having all the Divine
characteristics and all the human as well.
The Example of the Union between the Soul and the Body:
This example was used by St. Cyril, St. Augustine and a large number of ancient and
recent theologians.
In this simile, the nature of the soul unites with the physical earthly nature of the body to
form a union of one nature, which is the human nature.
This united nature does not include the body alone nor the soul alone but both together
are combined without mixing, confusion, alteration or transmutation. No transmutation
occurs of the soul into the body nor of the body into the soul, yet both become one in
essence and in nature, so we say that this is one nature and one person.
Hence, if we accept the idea of the unity between the soul and the body in one nature,
why do we not accept the unity of the Divine and the human into one Nature?!
Here we’d like to raise an important question regarding the One Nature and the
Two Natures:
Do we not all admit that the nature which we call Human Natures contained before the
unity two Natures: the soul and the body? yet, those who claim that there are two
natures in Christ: a divine and a human, do not mention the two natures of manhood i.e.
the soul and the body but consider them one.
8
If we go into details we would find ourselves before three natures in Christ!!! the Divinity,
the soul and the body, and each of them has its distinct entity and essence... Of course,
this is unacceptable on both sides.
When we accept the union of the soul and the body in one nature in Christ, and when
we use the expression theologically, it becomes easier for us to use the expression
"One Nature of Christ" or "One Nature of God, the Incarnate Logos".
Just as we say that the human nature is one nature consisting of two elements or
natures, we can also say about the Incarnate Logos, that He is one entity of two
elements or natures.
If the Divine nature is claimed to differ from the human nature, how then do they unite?
The reply is that the nature of the soul is fundamentally different from the nature of the
body, yet it is united with it in one nature, which is the human nature.
Although man is formed of these two natures, we never say that He is two, but
one person. All man’s acts are attributed to this one nature and not to the soul
alone or to the body alone.
Thus when we want to say that a certain individual ate, or became hungry, or slept, or
felt pain, we do not say that it is his body which ate, or became hungry, or got tired or
slept or felt pain. All man’s acts are attributed to him as a whole and not only to his
body.
Similarly, all the acts of Christ were attributed to Rim as a whole and not to His
Divine nature alone (independently) or to His human nature alone.
This was explained by Leo in the Council of Chalcedon and we shall give further
explanation to this point later on, God willing.
The union of the soul and body is an intrinsic real union, a Hypostatic one. So is
the union of the Divine nature of Christ with the human nature in the Virgin’s
womb. It is a hypostatic union, self-essential and real and not a mere connection,
then separation as Nestorus claimed.
Though the example of the union of the soul and body in the human nature is inclusive,
still it is incomplete as it does not explain how the soul departs the body by death nor
how they reunite again in the resurrection.
But as for the unity of the Divine and human natures of Christ, it is an inseparable union
as the Divine nature never departed the human nature for one single moment nor for a
twinkle of an eye."

Therefore, when the adulteress washed and kissed Our Lord's feet, was she kissing and touching the Human Nature, the Divine Nature, or BOTH?

If she touched both, can we answer and say likewise, with the Holy Communion, we are partaking of both?

We don't talk of two natures after the hypostatic union - it is now the One Nature of the Incarnate Logos. You can't say she touched this one or the other one, as they are now ONE.

As for the idea of partaking of the Divinity, its linked to Theosis, which I know very little about. I'll let someone more knowledgeable talk about that as I would like to understand too.

pray for me

joe

Zoxsasi

hi Joe, thanks!

But then if we do not talk about the 2 natures, why does the Pope say we do not eat Divinity if Christ's ONE nature is Divine AND Human?

peterfarrington

How can we eat divinity? As if it was some 'thing'.

The Holy Trinity is not made of 'stuff'. It is beyond being and beyond knowing and beyond describing. As soon as we speak of 'eating the divinity' we are in error because the divinity has no being like any created substance.

Yet when we receive communion we receive the Divine Word incarnate. There is no separation. If we only consume what could be considered 'mere flesh' then we are professing Nestorianism. The Body of our Lord is the body of the Divine Word of God and is God's body. He is entirely united with it so that we receive him both spiritually and physically.

Let me be plain, we receive God the Word in the eucharist. But the divine nature is not subject to touch, much less to being consumed. This is what HH is guarding against, even while he also correctly insists that 'the divinity was not separated from the humanity for a moment' - nor is it now.

But divinity is not seen or touched or consumed, even when it is united to the humanity. We truly receive God the Word, in his Body, but we do not consume the divine nature. The divine Word is known in his humanity, and received in the Body, but he remains in his own divine nature hidden from our sight, beyond our touch, making himself subject to sight and touch by his incarnation and by the transformation of bread and wine.

Father Peter

joeg

Haha, hey Vas, hope its all good  :D

I don't know the answer to your question exactly, so I'll chuck in a few links that may help:

http://www.suscopts.org/messages/lectures/soterlecture1.pdf (look at the "Deification" section)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,5978.0.html

pray for me

joe

EDIT: Thanks for your post Fr. Peter, I benefited much  :D

kefleyohannes

Yes Fr Peter

You are right to point out that it is not sensical to speak of two natures as though there were some separation, thinking in terms of "she touched his body not his divinity and so on" the Word incarnate has a new nature which is a perfect Union Without Mingling, Confusion, Alteration or Transmutation...

Such truths can be mediated upon with the guidance of great teachers and writers, such as the books of H.Holiness Pope Shenouda "the nature of Christ"

please read on these subjects to get a fuller understanding as opposed to isolating one sentence.