How do we know the Eucharist is not Symbolic?

[brb3]

I can think of 3 ways …

We generally save the best for last…wishing to confer our most cherished reality/wisdom/blessing to those we love.

The Patriarchs did this …waiting til their last days to give out their blessing to sons, their tribe, etc. Examples: Moses, Isaac, etc.

Christ’s First miracle, turned water to wine …and the Steward saying that ‘last’ wine was the best !!
Christ’s Last miracle, turned bread & wine into his Real Presence, the Shewbread & Manna from Heaven !
Then, at the Cross …he gave us his Perfect Mother… as our own.

 

[bmonk]

The evidence of the Bible includes both John 6–Jesus insists on the need to eat (chew) his flesh and drink his blood, and when the listening Jewish believers get turned off by this apparent cannibalism, Jesus lets them go–he does not admit he’s speaking only symbolically.

Similarly, in 1 Cor 11, Paul gives his tradition of the Eucharist–what he received and in turn is handing on, including: “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Cor 11:27-29) He equates bread and cup with body and blood of the Lord, and it is more than a symbolic idea. You can eat a symbol without bringing judgment on yourself, but to eat a reality may bring judgment.

Beyond that is the constant teaching of the Church, from the Apostolic Fathers–the Didache comes to mind, but probably others. The Didache does not speak of the Real Presence–likely that was held to be a mystery, reserved to the baptized–but it does speak of the need to ordain pure ministers, “worthy of the Lord” so they may celebrate the Sacrifice properly.

 

[WaitingForJesus]

Here are a few more.

Because our Lord said so. He was not speaking in spiritual terms when he said “this is my body” and “this is my blood” in the last supper accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In addition, he discusses this at length in John 6. Many disciples turned away because they could not accept this.

Also, HE is God and can do anything HE wants no matter how crazy it seems to us.

 

[Della]

The Eucharist is a symbol but it’s not only a symbol–it’s also the body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ. Just because something is a symbol doesn’t mean it can’t be real, as well. The two concepts do not negate one another.

 

[cheezey]

Here are a few more.

Because our Lord said so. He was not speaking in spiritual terms when he said “this is my body” and “this is my blood” in the last supper accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In addition, he discusses this at length in John 6. Many disciples turned away because they could not accept this.

Also, HE is God and can do anything HE wants no matter how crazy it seems to us.

This, with a He said this before the crucifixion; he was still there and saying This is My Body… ???

The Eucharist is a symbol but it’s not only a symbol–it’s also the body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ. Just because something is a symbol doesn’t mean it can’t be real, as well. The two concepts do not negate one another.

 

[snarflemike]

One point that I think is telling, is the nature of our memorial to our Lord and Savior. Do we really honor him by eating crackers and taking a sip of wine or juice? Who in all of history has received such a pathetic memorial meal? Would you serve such a memorial meal even in memory of your gardener or cleaning woman? That’s like getting a cracker-jack prize after 30 years working for your company. And yet you would serve such a meal in memory of Jesus Christ?! It’s an embarrassment to memorialize our Lord and Savior with such sad fare (and remember what happened to Cain for not offering his best!).

But if the Eucharist is what we teach it is, then our memorial meal to our Lord and Savior is the one thing that is actually worthy of such a memorial, our Lord and Savior himself. This, and this alone, is a worthy memorial meal.

 

[Dorothy]

Amen. It is a Living Memorial.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Maybe the question should be posed another way: “Why does anybody think the Eucharist is only symbolic?” Jesus didn’t put it that way. You have to read “symbolic” into words that don’t say “symbolic”, but militate against that conclusion, to get it there.

 

[BarbG]

Several years ago I made a one day retreat regarding the Eucharist given by Fr. Ron Rolheiser and he was so inspiring and profound that I made a decision that I would try to go to Mass each and every day so that Jesus is with me all the time. If anyone thinks the Eucharist is symbolic I suggest they read any books by Fr. Rolheiser and I know they’ll change their mind.

 

[LegoGE1947]

This a difference between Catholic and many Protestant communities. The Protestants believe it is only a symbol that really doesn’t achieve anything. Much like baptism. That’s also just a symbol that they do simply because the Lord commanded it but they don’t believe it achieves anything. Catholics however believe as Peter wrote “baptism now saves you.” Catholics likewise believe, because God says so, the wafer and the wine actually become the body and blood of Christ in the hands of the priest who acts “in persona Christi” even when the two things retain the appearance of a wafer and some wine.

 

[Wildkit]

How many Eucharistic miracles does one need to see before there is a beginning of some factual knowledge that this is not symbolic,………but then facts always seem to get in the way of truth!

 

[brb3]

The evidence of the Bible includes both John 6–Jesus insists on the need to eat (chew) his flesh and drink his blood, and when the listening Jewish believers get turned off by this apparent cannibalism, Jesus lets them go–he does not admit he’s speaking only symbolically.

Similarly, in 1 Cor 11, Paul gives his tradition of the Eucharist–what he received and in turn is handing on, including: “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Cor 11:27-29) He equates bread and cup with body and blood of the Lord, and it is more than a symbolic idea. You can eat a symbol without bringing judgment on yourself, but to eat a reality may bring judgment.

Beyond that is the constant teaching of the Church, from the Apostolic Fathers–the Didache comes to mind, but probably others. The Didache does not speak of the Real Presence–likely that was held to be a mystery, reserved to the baptized–but it does speak of the need to ordain pure ministers, “worthy of the Lord” so they may celebrate the Sacrifice properly.

We can understand that early in Christianity, until the destruction of the Temple in 70AD, Christians had to be careful what the openly taught/wrote. To suggest that the Eucharist was now the true Bread of Presence and Manna , or that Mary was the Ark of the Covenant ----- would of set the Temple Jews on edge and invited vengence, stoning, etc.

Once the Temple was no more, and the Priesthood had perished … then these ideas would not of been so abominable/unacceptible to the Jewish ears.

The Gospel writers and Paul were very bold to write as they did… and all but John, were Martyred. Others, probably didn’t have their fortitude, until after 70 AD.

 

[brb3]

One point that I think is telling, is the nature of our memorial to our Lord and Savior. Do we really honor him by eating crackers and taking a sip of wine or juice? Who in all of history has received such a pathetic memorial meal? Would you serve such a memorial meal even in memory of your gardener or cleaning woman? That’s like getting a cracker-jack prize after 30 years working for your company. And yet you would serve such a meal in memory of Jesus Christ?! It’s an embarrassment to memorialize our Lord and Savior with such sad fare (and remember what happened to Cain for not offering his best!).

But if the Eucharist is what we teach it is, then our memorial meal to our Lord and Savior is the one thing that is actually worthy of such a memorial, our Lord and Savior himself. This, and this alone, is a worthy memorial meal.

Interesting !!

The Jews strongly believed in the Supernatural Properties of the Bread of Presence in the OT times. They had certain Priests who lived primarily on very small quantities of the leftover Bread … and thrived, w/o any signs of ill health or weight loss, etc. They considered it the Bread of Angels, the Food of Life, etc.

 

[JonNC]

**This a difference between Catholic and many Protestant communities. The Protestants believe it is only a symbol that really doesn’t achieve anything. Much like baptism. That’s also just a symbol that they do simply because the Lord commanded it but they don’t believe it achieves anything. **Catholics however believe as Peter wrote “baptism now saves you.” Catholics likewise believe, because God says so, the wafer and the wine actually become the body and blood of Christ in the hands of the priest who acts “in persona Christi” even when the two things retain the appearance of a wafer and some wine.

Well, clearly not all protestants.

Jon

 

[matthew2435]

Here are a few more.

Because our Lord said so. He was not speaking in spiritual terms when he said “this is my body” and “this is my blood” in the last supper accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In addition, he discusses this at length in John 6. Many disciples turned away because they could not accept this.

Also, HE is God and can do anything HE wants no matter how crazy it seems to us.

You know what they were there for in the first place? Read John 6 in context and in its entirety.

 

[thenobes]

You know what they were there for in the first place? Read John 6 in context and in its entirety.

They were there because they saw the “bread king”. The one who was prophesied to be the Messiah, who would perform a greater miracle of providing bread than even Moses did in the desert.

The Jews in Capernaum wanted to know if he was going to actually perform this miracle, seeing as they had heard/seen he had just done something similar.

Well, He has done even better, giving us His own Flesh and Blood as our Bread of Life for the last 2000 yrs.

peace
steve

 

[fhansen]

I can think of 3 ways …

We generally save the best for last…wishing to confer our most cherished reality/wisdom/blessing to those we love.

The Patriarchs did this …waiting til their last days to give out their blessing to sons, their tribe, etc. Examples: Moses, Isaac, etc.

Christ’s First miracle, turned water to wine …and the Steward saying that ‘last’ wine was the best !!
Christ’s Last miracle, turned bread & wine into his Real Presence, the Shewbread & Manna from Heaven !
Then, at the Cross …he gave us his Perfect Mother… as our own.

Because the only Church that was established by Jesus and has any way of resolving the question maintains, and has always maintained, that the Eucharist is not merely symbolic

 

[matthew2435]

Well, He did perform the miracle at the beginning of chapter 6 of the gospel of john. Did you read the whole thing? He feeds these people by multiplying loaves and fish, then they follow him to Capernaum, and Jesus says-

“Truly, Truly, I say to you, you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of loaves”.

So, it wasn’t the Jews IN Capernaum as you said , Steve. They were people who were fed and sought Jesus out. They were going to “take him by force to make him king”. . . Jesus withdraws to the hills by himself, then the disciples go out to sea and see Jesus walking towards them on water “and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going”.
This is where the next day the ones who had their fill of loaves see a boat missing and go looking for Jesus, because they want food.

SO. Jesus is talking to people who are only there to eat. And He knows that and addresses them with the quote above. In a nutshell, Jesus tells them they are laboring for the wrong kind of bread, they need the eternal bread Jesus.

Read the chapter closely you guys. See how these rude Jews murmur at Jesus. They are there to eat, not get preached to.

They murmur when he says he’s the bread of life! They dont understand he came from heaven. Jesus explained coming to him and you wouldnt hunger, believing in him and you wouldnt thirst. It’s pretty clean cut and they still murmur.

They dispute when he says “The bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh”.

Look. You can read the passage and if Jesus says anything BUT “here is some more bread”, they keep bothering him and eventually leave.

So, taking the ‘eat my flesh’ part literally isnt out of the question, but it being a metaphor does come into question. Jesus is also called the Word made Flesh.

How many of you take that literally? If you take him literally here at ‘eat my flesh’, surely you all believe he is the Word.

As Catholics you are called to believe he is the Word. The Word of God is one “utterance” of God. Therefore you all must believe he is present in your bibles. Or when John writes Jesus is the word it’s a metaphor, then I’m more inclined to believe the ‘eat my flesh’ is a metaphor- and I have a pretty good idea what it means.

 

[matthew2435]

BTW steve, I know what Eucharist is believed to be-

Can. 897 The most venerable sacrament is the blessed Eucharist, in which Christ the Lord himself is contained, offered and received, and by which the Church continually lives and grows. The eucharistic Sacrifice, the memorial of the death and resurrection of the Lord, in which the Sacrifice of the cross is forever perpetuated, is the summit and the source of all worship and christian life. By means of it the unity of God’s people is signified and brought about, and the building up of the body of Christ is perfected. The other sacraments and all the apostolic works of Christ are bound up with, and directed to, the blessed Eucharist.

Christ isn’t coming down from his thrown to be contained in a piece of bread and some wine. HE ONLY HAD TO BE SACRIFICED ONCE! And he’s sitting at his place in heaven until he comes again. In The Old Testament God makes it a point you are NOT suppose to eat a sacrificial animal, or it’s blood. Jesus=Lamb of God.

 

[snarflemike]

In The Old Testament God makes it a point you are NOT suppose to eat a sacrificial animal, or it’s blood. Jesus=Lamb of God.

Now Jesus is an animal?! You’re not serious, right? And not eating the sacrificial animal? Remind me what happens to the Passover lamb again.

Actually, if you cite the reason given in scripture for not drinking the blood of animals, you will find exactly why Jesus does want us to drink his blood. So what you think is an argument against the Catholic Eucharist, is actually an argument for it.