A Tale of Two Eucharists

[mikeledes]

God is not the sun that gives us light,
nor the moon that woos us in the night.

God is not the earth rising from the sea,
nor a warm summer breeze we cannot see.

God is not a temple made by hands,
nor streams giving life to dying sands.

Nor is God is a consuming fire;
We know this is true; Jesus is no liar.

How then can it be truly said
our God, our Creator is a loaf of bread?

http://oldmanhonda.com/MC/Images/questionm.gif

BTW, the same kind of objection is raised by those who believe that Jesus Christ is God incarnate:

The following is from an Islamic website:

**The question which remains is Did God become Man? Logically speaking, the answer is no, because the concept of God becoming man contradicts the basic meaning of the term “God.” People commonly say that God is able to do all things; whatever He wants to do, He can do. In the Bible of Christians it is said, “… through God all things are possible (Matthew, 19: 26; Mark 10: 27, 14: 36).”

The Quran of Muslims states:

“…Indeed, Allah (God) is able to do all things.” (Quran 2:20)

…and the Hindu scriptures carry texts of similar meanings.

All the major religious texts contain general expressions regarding the basic concept of God’s omnipotence. He is Greater than all things, and through Him all things are possible. If this general concept is to be translated into practical terms, one has to first identify and understand the basic attributes of God. Most societies perceive God as an eternal being without beginning or end. If, on the basis that God is able to do all things, and it was asked whether God could die, what would be the answer? Since dying is part of “all things,” can it be said, “If He wants to?” Of course this cannot be said.

So, there is a problem here. God is defined as being ever-living, without end, and dying means “coming to an end.” Consequently, to ask if He can die is actually a nonsensical question. It is self-contradictory. Similarly, to ask whether God can be born, is also absurd because God has already been defined as eternal, having no beginning. Being born means having a beginning, coming into existence after not existing. In this same vein, atheist philosophers enjoy asking theists: “Can God create a stone too heavy for Him to lift?” If the theist says yes, it means that God can create something greater than Himself. And if he says no, it means that God is unable to do all things.

Therefore, the term “all things” in the phrase “God is able to do all things” excludes the absurdities. It cannot include things that contradict His divine attributes; things that would make Him less than God, like, forgetting, sleeping, repenting, growing, eating, etc. Instead, it includes only “all things” that are consistent with Him being God. This is what the statement “God is able to do all things” means. It cannot be understood in the absolute sense; it must be qualified.

The claim that God became man is also an absurdity. It is not befitting of God to take on human characteristics because it means that the Creator has become His creation. However, the creation is a product of the creative act of the Creator. If the Creator became His creation, it would mean that the Creator created Himself, which is an obvious absurdity. To be created, He would first have to not exist, and, if He did not exist, how could He then create? Furthermore, if He were created, it would mean that He had a beginning, which also contradicts His being eternal. By definition creation is in need of a creator. For created beings to exist they must have a creator to bring them into existence. God cannot need a creator because God is the Creator. Thus, there is an obvious contradiction in terms. The claim that God became His creation implies that He would need a creator, which is a ludicrous concept. It contradicts the fundamental concept of God being uncreated, needing no creator and being the Creator…**

**Can Man Become God?

Man is a finite being (i.e., creation). Man is born, and he dies. These are characteristics which cannot be attributed to God because they equate Him with His creation. Therefore, God did not and will not ever become man. On the other hand, man also cannot become God. The created cannot become its own creator. The created at one time did not exist. It came into being by the creative act of a Creator who always existed. What is nonexistent cannot make itself exist…**

islamreligion.com/articles/578/

So non-Christians can use the same argument against the incarnation.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[luv_pis]

snip**

The claim that God became man is also an absurdity. It is not befitting of God to take on human characteristics because it means that the Creator has become His creation.

**

Sorry for hijacking your quote mikeledes, but that part of your quote is SO beautiful. This is actually the reason why I love Christianity…because the God who teaches us how to be humble loves us so much He has taught us by example how: by loving us enough to take a form not befitting of God.

 

[mikeledes]

Sorry for hijacking your quote mikeledes, but that part of your quote is SO beautiful. This is actually the reason why I love Christianity…because the God who teaches us how to be humble loves us so much He has taught us by example how: by loving us enough to take a form not befitting of God.

:clapping: A beautiful and profound response!

God Bless,
Michael

 

[po18guy]

I’d be interested in discussing what these early church fathers had to say, Po, if you will be willing to select a few good quotes from them. The earlier the quote, the better. Quotes by Polycarp and Irenaeus would be a good start.

Justin Martyr (AD 110-165) “And this food is called among us Eucharistia (The Eucharist) , of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise we have been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the Apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels have delivered unto us which was enjoined upon them…” (First Apology, Ch LXVI)

Irenaeus (AD 120-202) “For as the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly; so also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptable, having the hope of the resurrection to eternity” (Against Heresies, Book 4, Ch XVIII)

Tertullian (AD 145-220) “Our flesh eats the body and blood of Christ so that our soul is filled with God. Therefore what He joins together in His work cannot be separated in His reward”

Augustine (AD 354-430) “Receive in this bread that which was hanged on the cross; receive in this cup that which was poured from Christ’s side. For he will gain death, not life, who thinks Christ is a liar” (Ad neophytos)

“We however, take into our believing hearts and mouths the Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ with His flesh given us to eat and His blood given us to drink” (Contra aversarium legis et prophetarum, Bk 2, Ch 9)

Chrysostom (AD 347-407) “The table of the Lord takes the place of the manger, for in it lies the body of the Lord, not indeed wrapped in swaddling clothes but clothed with the Holy Spirit” (Oratio de philogonio)

(Regarding 1 Cor.10:16)…“That which is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and that is what we participate in” “When we hold that cup in our hands we glorify God and stand amazed at the ineffable gift, namely, that He shed this very thing, and not only shed it but also distributes it to us all” (Homily 24 on First Corinthians)

Martin Luther (AD 1483-1546) “What is the Sacrament of the altar? It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the bread and wine, for Christains to eat and drink, instituted by Christ Himself” (Small Catechism)

“Apply in the Sacrament what is true in the person of Christ. In order that the Godhead dwell in Him, it is not necessary that the human nature be transubstantiated and the Godhead be contained under the accidents, but since both natures are present in their entirety, it is truly said: This man is God, and, This God is man. Even though philosophy does not grasp this, faith does grasp it; and the authority of the Word of God is greater than the grasp of our intellect. Just so in the Sacrament. In order that the real body and the real blood may be in the Sacrament, it is not necessary that the bread and wine be transubstantiated and Christ be contained under their accidents; but both remain there together, and it is truly said: This bread is My body; This wine is My blood.” (Luther’s Works, St Louis ed. 19, 29f)

 

[MaryJohnZ]

Both views may hold some truth, Mary. Perhaps God had Moses leave it ambiguous so we might have cause for some good discussions like the one we are having now?

What do you think of the idea that Jesus was the rock in the desert and the Holy Spirit was the water and Moses was the Father, who asked Jesus to pour out the Holy Spirit on a lost and dying world that was thirsty for righteousness and eternal life?

Since the Trinity is completely united in all things it is hard for me to separate them out and say the Father is only responsible for ‘striking’ the Rcok…the Son is the 'Rock" and the Holy Spirit is the “Water”…I find it impossible to make those types of clear demarcations. I think the Trinity works in unison and the Eucharist contains Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The interpretation you give is therefore awkward and uncomfortable for me to live with. Jesus is the Revealtion of the Trinity and I think His Being is the physical revelation of all members of the Trinity.

A beautiful piece of art that expresses the Trinity at banquet together is the famous one titled: The Trinity Icon (The Hospitality of Abraham) Andrej Rublev, 1422-1427 which shows the Three Angels who visited Abraham but also represents the Unity of the
Trinity, a Unity which is revealed in the banquet they share.
cenacle.co.uk/products.asp?partno=I0122

The Old Testament time period did not have a clearly articulated Doctrine on the Trinity. My visual imagination tends to link the scenes described with Moses striking the Rock to the scene at Calvary where Jesus’ Heart is pierced and the Blood and Water flow out. I believe this scene becomes real again during the mass and the mecy of God is poured out on all the world. Some will receive because they are open to hearing and receiving God;s Love and Mercy, other’s may be hard hearted. Some present at the mass will be able to participate more because they have the graces to understand and believe more. So not everyone will receive the Blessed Sacrament in total belief and some may even receive it disbelieving and in a manner which displeases God
( just like the people in the desert with Moses).
But if Jesus is the Lamb of God whose blood we place on our door posts, that happens most clearly through the Mass, which is a new,more perfect Passover meal.

I am not a Theologian or Apologist so perhaps others can express things better, but I know these things in my heart.

God Bless, Mary

 

[MaryJohnZ]

God is not the sun that gives us light,
nor the moon that woos us in the night.

God is not the earth rising from the sea,
nor a warm summer breeze we cannot see.

God is not a temple made by hands,
nor streams giving life to dying sands.

Nor is God is a consuming fire;
We know this is true; Jesus is no liar.

How then can it be truly said
our God, our Creator is a loaf of bread?

http://oldmanhonda.com/MC/Images/questionm.gif

All the metaphors given teach us the about the nature of God–
and Jesus in the Eucharist is NOT bread, he takes the appearance of bread and He teaches us through the metaphorical sign that we need spiritual food as well as physical food.

He is a SUN that warms us and bring light so we can see even in the darkest night when His light is reflected in the moon (symbol of Mary). He is the SUN which is at the center of our solar system, and are lives rotate around Him as the source of all life, blessing and goodness.

He is the soft whispering sound that surrounds me in deep prayer. He surrounds us like the molecules of the air. He is the atmosphere I strive to move in. He is the atmosphere of Love…
but that all sound trite, unless you experience it even once…

He is the stream we can find when all others streams seem dry and gone. He is what makes all spiritual flowers, fields grow…
If I find myself dry it is only His way of making me more aware of how much I need Him.

And God in His great wisdom becomes a food to nourish us because He was hungry in the desert and He told the temptor: “Man does not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from God”, and Jesus is the Living Word. The bread we see with our eyes is only the outer sign of the inner reality: The Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ.

Every aspect of Creation can teach us about who God is…
As someone who works with art I can tell you that the Artist is reflected in the artwork…

God Bless, MaryJohnZ

I am sure many others could write much more beautiful things.

 

[richardwy]

I really want to know the truth about Holy Communion

Read Pope John Paul II’s encyclical on the Eucharist and the section in the Catechism.

Sure beats the internet backyard fence!

 

[jmcrae]

[/INDENT]Since there is no explanation, am i supposed to believe that God is composed of molecules of H2O?

Maybe he is? What do you make of the fact that in the Book of Genesis, there is water, even before God begins to create?

(Not that I seriously think that God is water, nor that water is God. Still - as the man said, “Is a puzzlement, Teacher Anna.”)

 

[MaryJohnZ]

Sorry for hijacking your quote mikeledes, but that part of your quote is SO beautiful. This is actually the reason why I love Christianity…because the God who teaches us how to be humble loves us so much He has taught us by example how: by loving us enough to take a form not befitting of God.

I would question your last statement…“a form not befittting God”
simply because God Who is All Knowing created the form He was going to take…even before Creation came into being God knew He would enter it as a man. He created the form of “man” in His own image, and rightly so because he would enter that form. Now does that mean that God Who is eternal actually died? It means that God-Made-Man, the Eternal God who enetered human history took a form that died, and then rose again through the power of Life that is always a part of God’s identity… That is why St. Augustine said the Incarnate God , Jesus, was a “trap” for Satan, because He took a form that had the appearance of being able to be destroyed. In the attempt to destroy Jesus at the crucifixion, Satan entered that trap and Christ Who literally took on the appearance of sin and death, destroyed sin and death…

“Where O Death, where is your victory?” 1 Coritninians 15:55 Now death has been tamed and is no longer a curse but a door to be born into a new life with God in eternity. The curse of Adam’s sin has been turned into a blessing…

But my main point is God created the image He would take on and to say that image was too inferior for God to inhabit would be to question the Holiness of God and His omniscent knowledge and wisdom when He planned His creation, including how He would enter it.

If there is a material ‘big bang’ theory, perhaps there is another spiritual form of the 'big-bang"…we all came from God and we, all
all of creation, are called back into God in that spiritual sense of the perfected creation.

maryJohnZ

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

The “explanation” is that Jesus was not talking about the water in the well, which is what the Samaritan woman was talking about. The point is that when Jesus makes an ambiguous statement, his response - or the inspired author’s comments - will clarify whether that statement was figurative or literal and will give us some insight into what He meant. The inspired author later gives us an idea of what Jesus was talking about:

John 7:38-39

38"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’"
39But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

The Bible also clearly reaffirms what Jesus stated in John 6:

1 Corinthians 10:16

16Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ?

God Bless,
Michael

Yes, now that you mention it, that is the correct interpretation of our Rabbi’s words. I take it then, Mike, that you believe Jesus might not have given the meaning of the metaphor of Living Water to the party girl at the well. However, He did give the meaning later on to others.

Tell me, please, where does Jesus give the meaning of His words that He is the bread from heaven?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Are you a Oneness Penetecostal? If you’re a Trinitarian, you should know the answer to this.

God Bless,
Michael

I was asking the good doctor what she believed, not explaining what i believe, Michael.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

First you have to prove that He was speaking with a parable in John 6. Then you have to deal with the passages in John - particularly chapter 8 - in which Jesus clarifies what He says to the Jews. Also, the clarification is not only for the benefit of the immediate audience, but also for all who will be reading what Jesus said. Hence we have the following example:

John 2:19-21

**19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” **
**20The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?” **
21But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

John 21:22-23

**22Jesus said to him, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!” **
23Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?"

In John, the *inspired author *consistently makes clarifying comments - as my list of verses demonstrates - for the benefit of the reader. Whenever Jesus does not explain his statement Himself, the inspired author does it for Him. That does not occur in John 6.

God Bless,
Michael

Well, i’m not trying to prove anything to anyone but myself. As Socrates said: “The partisan wants only to convince others, i, on the other hand, seek only to convince myself.”

Pax and i, however, were having a good conversation about the reasons why Jesus might not have wanted to explain Himself to the mob. They wanted to force Him to be king and begin an insurrection against the Roman military occupation. Rather than give them reason to stick around, His words had the opposite effect. I believe this was intentional on His part. However, i’d be willing to look at an explanation of what Jesus meant by calling Himself the bread from heaven if you have one in mind.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

And Luke 3:22 says:

**22and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form **like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, “You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased.”

“Bodily form” means more than a mere similie.

God Bless,
Michael

Sorry, i thought you were joking, earlier. So, God is a bird?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Soc,

What I am trying to point out is the structure of John’s gospel and what it tells us about the discourse on the bread of life. The first part of the gospel is all about signs/miracles and the discourse is sandwiched in between nothing but miracles. The discourse is therefore talking about a miracle and is not a parable. This is simply a huge biblical clue about understanding John 6. Moreover, the types of miracles that are before and after the discourse are indicative that this will truly be a miracle having to do with food and with the body of the Lord.

Does this make sense to you? Wouldn’t it make more sense to sandwich John 6 in between parables if it too were only a parable?

Pax:

That is a good theory about John’s method of writing. If he were with us, i’d very much like to ask him if what you say is true. Without him being here, i do not know how i can know for certain what you say is true.

I have a theory about John’s method of writing, too. Would you be interested in hearing it?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Hmm… I would have preferred to say that the Eucharist is the Son of God. Sounds, and feels, better.

Quite mind-blowing, ain’t it? God’s Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in the form of a wee wafer of unleavened bread and some grape wine. Which is why there is such a thing as the Adoration of the Eucharist.

In the Adoration Chapel of our parish, there is a large-ish sign made of bronze beside the altar where it says in big capital letters:

“BE STILL, AND KNOW THAT I AM GOD” (Psalm 46:10)

Sounds and feels the SAME, LP! Consider the logic:

If

E = Eucharist

and

G = God

and

E = G

then

G = E

So, your God is a loaf of bread?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

The same way the One True God and Almighty Creator of all can appear under the form of a bird.

God Bless,
Michael

So, your God is a loaf of bread?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

The concept of the real presence in the Eucharist is easy to follow with these scriptual pointers. One point I’d like to add for the converting person who is struggling with not viewing eating the Eucharist as a vampire/cannabal act: Jesus wasn’t just a person. His body was divine as well as human. That unique nature of Jesus’ flesh distinguishes it from a mere vampire/cannabalistic act.

Still a few questions have always needled me. (1) What is the actual scriptual or theological basis for a Catholic priest actually effecting the transubstantiation at the Mass? The logic is a little lose that priests are simply like Jesus, take on his role, etc. Why couldn’t any deep believer have a private Eucharistic ceremony for spiritual feeding?

(2) If non Catholics won’t believe in the Eucharist but are devout Christians otherwise, how can we say the won’t be saved?

Are you saying, Alica, that your God is a loaf of bread?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

It is that kind of doubt, Socrates4Jesus, that I always see and feel in Jesus’ hearers when I read John chapter 6. Heck, I feel it sometimes too.

But can you escape the logic of that simple term “Lamb of God”, a term which I think all Christians believe but many never think about to its only conclusion? I honestly cannot, I don’t know how…it is a logic that defies all of my experience, but I cannot deny how it neatly summarizes all of Jesus’ mission and message.

And besides, so many people more intelligent and saintly than I have questioned yet believed this incredible conclusion and embrace it as Truth.

So actually there is nothing that I can do but follow Peter’s example and say in front of that Bread of Life: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the Lords of eternal life; and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” (John 6:68-69)

And you know what, Socrates4Jesus? I have never regretted in that belief

Yes, the sacrifices of lambs in ancient times was a picture of the one true sacrifice God the Father would provide for you and i, LP. Our Savior is not a lamb; He is LIKE a lamb. My question about the Eucharist is this: Is Jesus a loaf of bread, or is He LIKE a loaf of bread?

 

[sphilomena]

It occurred to me, recently, that i’m a Eucharist agonist. For i’m agonizing over two tales of this sacrament introduced by Jesus at His last supper. There are protagonists to the left of me, antagonists to the right; here i am stuck in the middle not knowing who is true.

The protagonists of the Eucharist tell me the bread really is Christ’s body and the wine really is His blood, and eating His flesh and drinking His blood is necessary for obtaining eternal life. They tell me to read my Redeemer’s words and consider them carefully:

Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever.”

(John 6:53-58)
“Nonsense!” the Eucharist antagonists counsel me, “Our Savior was speaking merely metaphorically.” They caution me to heed Paul’s words:

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

(1 Corinthians 11:23-26)

Now, i’m not asking for the sake of debate (however, i realize i’ll have to play devil’s advocate to learn the rebuttal to the opposing viewpoint). I really want to know the truth about Holy Communion, as the antagonists’ argument is one reason why i have not returned to the faith of my youth. Please help this agonist get the genuine gist of the true tale of the Eucharist.

You are asking if the Eucharist is the true Body and Blood of Jesus, right? I read some of the posts, but don’t have time to go through 14 pages, so I apologize if I’m repeating. Here’s my thought if you are questioning the reality. If it isn’t really His Body, why do Satanists go to the trouble of stealing a consecrated Host? They know it’s real. If it is, we need it for eternal life.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Question 10.

Is God a loaf of bread?

26Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”

28Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”

29Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

30So they asked him, “What miraculous sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” 32Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

(John 6)

biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=50&chapter=6&version=31

http://www.bread.com/pics/bread_pic1_big.jpg