How do we know the Eucharist is not Symbolic?

[MichaelHowling]

It is a sacrifice because the idea and term used in scripture to “do this in memory” did not mean …“well, symbolize what’s going on in here to get nice warm fuzzy feelings of me in your mind and heart”

in their culture it meant to re-present what we’re doing here!

For instance…during passover. The jews understood the idea that passover was suppposed to be a “perpetual celebration”…did not mean, ok go through some actions and remember this holy night that saved you from death…it meant, go get a lamb and cut its throat!

So the eucharist is both a meal and sacrifice (just as passover is).

 

[aemcpa]

And because that many errors are at this time disseminated and many things are taught and maintained by divers persons, in opposition to this ancient faith, which is based on the sacred Gospel, the traditions of the Apostles, and the doctrine of the holy Fathers; the sacred and holy Synod, after many and grave deliberations maturely had touching these matters, has resolved, with the unanimous consent of all the Fathers, to condemn, and to eliminate from holy Church, by means of the canons subjoined, whatsoever is opposed to this most pure faith and sacred doctrine.

ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

CANON I.–If any one saith, that in the mass a true and proper sacriflce is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat; let him be anathema.

CANON II.–If any one saith, that by those words, Do this for the commemoration of me (Luke xxii. 19), Christ did not institute the apostles priests; or, did not ordain that they, and other priests should offer His own body and blood; let him be anathema.

CANON III.–If any one saith, that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and of thanksgiving; or, that it is a [Page 159] bare commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice; or, that it profits him only who receives; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, pains, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be anathema.

CANON IV.–If any one saith, that, by the sacrifice of the mass, a blasphemy is cast upon the most holy sacrifice of Christ consummated on the cross; or, that it is thereby derogated from; let him be anathema.

CANON V.–If any one saith, that it is an imposture to celebrate masses in honour of the saints, and for obtaining their intercession with God, as the Church intends; let him be anathema.

CANON VI.–If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

CANON VII.–If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema.

CANON VIII.–If any one saith, that masses, wherein the priest alone communicates sacramentally, are unlawful, and are, therefore, to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

CANON IX.–If any one saith, that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; or, that the mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue only; or, that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the chalice, for that it is contrary to the institution of Christ; let him be anathema.

 

[Dorothy]

And remember: When the priest says “Do this in memory of Me”…remember that it is

A LIVING MEMORIAL! Thanks be to the Lord!

 

[WD615]

The Greek word translated as remembrance or memorial in Lk 22:19 or 1 Cor 11:24-25 is “anamnesis.” It’s also used in Heb 10:3 to refer to the sacrifice of sins. In the Septuagint (Greek OT translation) it’s also used in Lev 24:7 and Numb 10:10 to refer to a sacrifice. So it definitely has a sacrificial meaning. Not to mention, Jesus connects the Eucharist to the sacrifice on the cross and implies He is the sacrificial paschal lamb.

Then, of course, it also food for us to eat as Jesus says in John 6. So it’s undoubtedly both a sacrifice and a feast.

 

[philial]

At the Passover meal there are 4 cups of wine which are ceremoniusly consumed. The 3rd cup is the cup of remembrance which is taken “when supper has ended”. The forth cup - the cup of consumation - is the last one taken. Re-read the gospels and you will see that Jesus never took this final cup, not did he touch wine again, until he said, whilst on the cross, " I thirst", and having sipped the wine from the sponge, he said “it is consumated”, bowed his head and died.

in this way we can see that the last supper and the crucifixion are intimately linked - one continuous action that also incorporates the agony in the garden & the torture under Pilate.

This leaves us with the Meal & the Sacrifice as one & the same act. Where from we have the Mass.

 

[Classicist]

There’s a lot of “either-or” theology in western minds. We can thank the Roman-Protestant controversies for this duality. It is better to think in terms of “both-and”, especially in this case. The Mass is a solemn remembrance, memorial, and celebration via sacrifice.

 

[Scottgun]

There’s a lot of “either-or” theology in western minds. We can thank the Roman-Protestant controversies for this duality. It is better to think in terms of “both-and”, especially in this case. The Mass is a solemn remembrance, memorial, and celebration via sacrifice.

Rather, we should think in terms of primary/secondary. The Mass is primarily a sacrifice. There are other things that are important, but that are secondary.

 

[brb3]

The vast majority of responses said its a ‘sacrifice’, not a 'remembrance/memorial.

Then why did Jesus use the word remembrance … or is that a bad translation ?

 

[aemcpa]

The vast majority of responses said its a ‘sacrifice’, not a 'remembrance/memorial.

Then why did Jesus use the word remembrance … or is that a bad translation ?

He didn’t say, “Do this as a remembrance of me.” First of all, that is bad grammar; there is no such thing as “a remembrance”. Remembrance is an act or state of being. He said, “Do this in remembrance of me.” The “this” that we’re doing in remembrance of Him is the Mass, which is a true sacrifice. We are doing the Mass in remembrance of Jesus, and we’re doing it in such a way that it makes truly present to us that thing that we’re remembering.

 

[jvan22]

If Jesus wanted to make it a symbol, he would of said so. He would of used the word “represents” instead of “is”.

There is 12 words that mean “represent” in the language christ spoke. Its just common sense to me.

 

[WD615]

The vast majority of responses said its a ‘sacrifice’, not a 'remembrance/memorial.

Then why did Jesus use the word remembrance … or is that a bad translation ?

See my quote on the meaning of “remembrance” in Greek

 

[Classicist]

If Jesus wanted to make it a symbol, he would of said so. He would of used the word “represents” instead of “is”.

There is 12 words that mean “represent” in the language christ spoke. Its just common sense to me.

To be fair, it’s possible to say “this is” without absolute equivalence. Someone may produce a picture of a family member and say “this is my mother”. Is it really his mother, or is it a picture, image, and symbol of her?

I don’t personally think we can apply John 6 to the Eucharist. Internal evidence of the Gospel of John makes it pretty clear that John’s focus is faith, belief, and the Name of Christ. He does not include the Institution Narrative in his account of the Last Supper. He does not finish the Gospel by saying that “these things were written that you might partake of the breaking of the bread”, but “these things were written that you might believe; and, believing, that you might have life in His Name”. The Bread of Life Discourse opens with this exchange:
John 6:28:

Then they said to him, ‘What must we do if we are to carry out God’s work?’ Jesus gave them this answer, ‘This is carrying out God’s work:** you must believe in the one he has sent**.’

Later,
John 6:40:

It is my Father’s will that whoever sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and that I should raise that person up on the last day.

The Holy Church has good reasons to believe that the Eucharist is not symbolic. We can look for the true non-symbolic presence of the Lord in the Eucharist elsewhere than John 6, however: 1 Cor. 11, and the Last Supper narratives.

 

[Nita]

I found the following thought very interesting to ponder in connection with the particular manner Jesus chose to communicate Himself to us.The Prophet Who Feeds the New Israel: The 17th Sunday of Ordinary Time
by John Bergsma
thesacredpage.com/2012/07/the-prophet-who-feeds-new-israel-17th.html

***God could have made us with solar cells in our skin, so all we would have to do is lie in the sun to get the energy we need for life.

But he didn’t. In his divine plan, God created us as creature that need to eat. The first command he ever gave us concerned food: what to eat and what not to eat. We turned away from him by an act of eating. And now, since the coming of Christ, we can turn back to him by an act of eating.***…​

 

[brb3]

The Greek word translated as remembrance or memorial in Lk 22:19 or 1 Cor 11:24-25 is “anamnesis.” It’s also used in Heb 10:3 to refer to the sacrifice of sins. In the Septuagint (Greek OT translation) it’s also used in Lev 24:7 and Numb 10:10 to refer to a sacrifice. So it definitely has a sacrificial meaning. Not to mention, Jesus connects the Eucharist to the sacrifice on the cross and implies He is the sacrificial paschal lamb.

Then, of course, it also food for us to eat as Jesus says in John 6. So it’s undoubtedly both a sacrifice and a feast.

So then, anamnesis is not the usual word in OT/NT for sacrifice. Does that have significance ? Perhaps a word chosen with double meaning?

 

[brb3]

I found the following thought very interesting to ponder in connection with the particular manner Jesus chose to communicate Himself to us.The Prophet Who Feeds the New Israel: The 17th Sunday of Ordinary Time
by John Bergsma
thesacredpage.com/2012/07/the-prophet-who-feeds-new-israel-17th.html

***God could have made us with solar cells in our skin, so all we would have to do is lie in the sun to get the energy we need for life.

But he didn’t. In his divine plan, God created us as creature that need to eat. The first command he ever gave us concerned food: what to eat and what not to eat. We turned away from him by an act of eating. And now, since the coming of Christ, we can turn back to him by an act of eating.***…​

Good !!
Food for thought, food for life. We must eat & drink to survive. Bread & wine …of supersubstantial reality.

 

[fred_conty]

The question answers itself if we look at the front of the inside of the church.
There…an altar…and a table.
Altar means priesthood and sacrifice.
Table means sharing a meal.

Just a thought.

 

[Nita]

…I don’t personally think we can apply John 6 to the Eucharist.

I have a few questions since you don’t see it as applying to the Eucharist.

"the bread…is my flesh" (John 6:51)
In this verse,
What does “bread” symbolize?
What does “flesh” symbolize?

“my flesh is food…my blood is drink” (John 6:55)
What does His flesh symbolize in this verse? What does His blood symbolize?

(John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the breadwhich I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."

6:55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. )

Internal evidence of the Gospel of John makes it pretty clear that John’s focus is faith, belief, and the Name of Christ. He does not include the Institution Narrative in his account of the Last Supper. He does not finish the Gospel by saying that “these things were written that you might partake of the breaking of the bread”, but “these things were written that you might believe; and, believing, that you might have life in His Name”. The Bread of Life Discourse opens with this exchange:

I see it a little different. I think Jesus’ main focus in the discourse is “life - eternal life” - and how we can receive it.

You might say Jesus’ main focus/part is informing us about eternal life and how we can receive it.
Our main focus/part is to believe all the words He is speaking in that discourse and act on them. As the verses you cited show, He earnestly desires us to believe His words (they tell us how to receive spirit and life vs. 63), to have faith that they are true, to trust that He will provide what He is promising.

John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the **bread which I shall give for the life **of the world is my flesh."
One more question. If somehow or other bread and wine refer to His words, why would Jesus use the future tense (I checked the Greek) for something He was already doing?

 

[brb3]

The question answers itself if we look at the front of the inside of the church.
There…an altar…and a table.
Altar means priesthood and sacrifice.
Table means sharing a meal.

Just a thought.

But, what Priesthood? Levite or otherwise …

 

[LegoGE1947]

Well, clearly not all protestants.

Jon

Yes I know there are some Protestant communities approach communion similar to Catholicism. What I am speaking of are evangelicals such as Baptists, non-denominationals, etc. Even Lutherans however consider that the elements don’t remain the Body and Blood once communion is over with. At least that is what it was told me.

 

[cheezey]

Yes I know there are some Protestant communities approach communion similar to Catholicism. What I am speaking of are evangelicals such as Baptists, non-denominationals, etc. Even Lutherans however consider that the elements don’t remain the Body and Blood once communion is over with. At least that is what it was told me.

I subscribe to waaaay too many threads and so could not possibly find it now.
Someone, somewhere said that even some Methodists believe in the Holy Presence. Can’t tell you how many I’ve attended where it is deemed symbolic only; I didn’t know otherwise.
Til yesterday. I stumbled upon the one in the area that deems it the Holy Presence… The whole thing was so reminiscent of a Catholic Mass. The procession, the Sign of the Cross, the Altar kids, going up to the altar for communion, the blessings, seemingly everything; but no kneeling…
it was a shocker to me. I never knew…