Protestants: Do you believe that Christ is truly present in the communion elements of bread and wine?

[Pete_Holter]

The way I see it, from Scripture, is that Christ’s is present through His Word

Vatican II, in agreement with what you are saying here and with Scripture, taught that Christ “is present in His word, since it is He Himself who speaks when the Holy Scriptures are read in the Church” (Sacrosanctum Concilium).

And the Instrumentum Laboris for the Synod of Bishops this past October quoted Pope Benedict on this very point:

“I would very much like to see theologians learn to interpret and love Scripture as the Council desired, in accordance with Dei Verbum: may they experience the inner unity of Scripture—something that today is helped by “canonical exegesis” (still to be found, of course, in its timid first stages)—and then make a spiritual interpretation of it that is not externally edifying but rather an inner immersion in the presence of the Word.”

; just as He would be present during any Church “sacrament.” But it is His Word used and dwelt upon during the sacrament, whereby He is present. For eg., with Mass; He is present in the experience, but not in the bread used during the experience. This is why I have no doubt that Catholics, atleast some, who do it “worthily,” do experience Christ’s presence during their sacrament of Eucharist. That has never been a question I have had in all our discussions. But conversely, that is also why I have called this thing about Jesus being a piece of bread as “heretical” and “apostate.” It is not right - and not needed, on many counts.

Hmmm… I think there are different levels of presence. Although God is omnipresent, I think that the presence of Christ in believers through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is of a more profound quality of presence than His presence in the rest of creation. Of course He is present to both. But somehow I think that “Christ in you” signifies a presence that runs deeper and is more intimate than “in Him all things hold together.”

Again, I return to Luke 24 and it seems that the relationship between the Word of God in Sacred Scripture and the Word of God in the Eucharist is a little different than what you propose. The preaching of the Word of God prepared them to have a profound experience of His presence at the breaking of the bread. I think that taking in the Word of God through reading Scripture is analogous to building a relationship with your spouse through all means except for sharing sexual intimacy. The Instrumentum, again, speaks to this,

“For this reason, in approaching the Scriptures, Dei Verbum recommends what is universally confirmed about the Word of God: ‘God…speaks to men and women as to a friend…so that he might invite and take them into fellowship with himself’ (DV 2). ‘In the Sacred Books, the Father who is in heaven meets his children with great love and speaks with them’ (DV 21). Revelation is a communion of love, which is oftentimes expressed in Sacred Scripture in terms of covenant. In summary, through a proper disposition in prayer, ‘God and man talk together; for “we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him, when we read the divine sayings”’” (DV 25)

This is very intimate, indeed; but it is only through the experience of the marital act that the building of relationship is consummated. Christ preached to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, but He was only known to them in the breaking of the bread. I think that it is purposeful that the Biblical language for sexual intimacy is used here and that this intimacy is also intimated in Scripture by the description of the Lord’s Supper as the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. Christ and His Church are the mystery referred to by the sexual union of husband and wife, of the two becoming one flesh, and this knowing is to be had, according to Luke 24, when we come to the celebration of the Eucharist. Reading Scripture and having it expounded prepare us for this union, and to experience it without building intimacy with Christ through reading Scripture and prayer would, I think, be something like prostitution.

 

[Pete_Holter]

When my kids were little, and I took them to what we call “Sabbath School” in our Church, I didn’t do it because of the denomination, or the teachings, or any such thing. A picture I once saw in some old Adventist literature tells it best. It was a picture of some people going into the front door of the church. The picture reflected an “apparition” type of Jesus standing there, opening the door for everyone who came to the door. The idea was that when we bring our children to Church, we bring them to Jesus. Ever since, I have had the growing conviction that when I go to church, I am going to see Jesus. That includes all parts of the church and fellowship. He is present at all these experiences, but never once is He present in an inanimate object of matter; at least not in ways we can “partake of” He is always present in Person.

This is very much the way the Catholic Church understands her own Church services. Here is a fuller quote from Sacrosanctum Concilium:

”To accomplish so great a work, Christ is always present in His Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, not only in the person of His minister, ‘the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross,’ but especially under the Eucharistic species. By His power He is present in the sacraments, so that when a man baptizes it is really Christ Himself who baptizes. He is present in His word, since it is He Himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church. He is present, lastly, when the Church prays and sings, for He promised: ‘Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them’ (Matt. 18:20).”

What do you mean “greater fulfillment?” How can it get any greater? Either He is present, or He is not.

Jesus is present everywhere in His Divinity. But Jesus, in His glorified, resurrected human body, as has been pointed out by others, is at the right hand of God in heaven. He is not everywhere present as the God-Man. But, in addition to being in heaven, He is also singularly and substantially present as the God-Man under the appearance of bread and wine after they have been consecrated by His word. This presence of Christ is unique this side of heaven, and I think that this uniqueness is borne out, once again, by Luke in his 24th chapter.

Something else that helped me on this point. Catholic apologists make what I think is a good point from the language used in 1 Corinthians 11:27: “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.” We believe that this verse supports the Catholic understanding of the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist because Paul says “or” in the first case but “and” in the second. Therefore, if you eat only the bread unworthily, you will be guilty of both the body and blood; or if you likewise only drink the cup unworthily, you will still be guilty of both the body and blood. This is because Jesus is fully present, body, blood, soul, and divinity, in either sacrament. This also agrees with Jesus’ vanishing from before the disciples on the road to Emmaus at the breaking of the bread: it wasn’t just His body that vanished, leaving His blood in a puddle on the ground.

This language from Paul also agrees with the place where Jesus says, “If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is My flesh” (John 6:51); whereby Jesus represents the entire Eucharistic mystery by the bread alone, which even by itself causes that we “live forever.” John also notes that “blood and water” came from the side of Jesus after His crucifixion (John 19:34), this time Scripture representing the whole mystery by the blood alone. Finally, it agrees with the words of the institution where we are told to “do this in remembrance of Me” after the consecration of the bread and to do this “in remembrance of Me” after the consecration of the wine (1 Cor 11:24 & 25), that is, in remembrance of the God-Man Jesus, in both cases, whole and entire.

Again, I think the experience of “greater fulfillment” makes sense on the ground that the work of redemption will be consummated at the Day of Christ when we will receive our bodies back, resurrected, spiritualized, and glorified. And we receive the firstfruits of this reality into our mortal bodies by receiving Christ in His glorified body at the Lord’s Supper.

This pledge of the future resurrection comes from the fact that the flesh of the Son of Man, given as food, is His body in its glorious state after the resurrection. With the Eucharist we digest, as it were, the ‘secret’ of the resurrection. For this reason Saint Ignatius of Antioch rightly defined the Eucharistic Bread as ‘a medicine of immortality, an antidote to death’” (John Paul II, Ecclesia de Eucharistia).

My thoughts were a little scattered, but I hope that I was able to share something helpful. Thanks for changing your signature, my brother.

With the Love of Christ,
Pete

 

[benedictus2]

Jesus is present everywhere in His Divinity. But Jesus, in His glorified, resurrected human body, as has been pointed out by others, is at the right hand of God in heaven. He is not everywhere present as the God-Man. But, in addition to being in heaven, He is also singularly and substantially present as the God-Man under the appearance of bread and wine after they have been consecrated by His word. This presence of Christ is unique this side of heaven, and I think that this uniqueness is borne out, once again, by Luke in his 24th chapter.

Something else that helped me on this point. Catholic apologists make what I think is a good point from the language used in 1 Corinthians 11:27: “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.” We believe that this verse supports the Catholic understanding of the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist because Paul says “or” in the first case but “and” in the second. Therefore, if you eat only the bread unworthily, you will be guilty of both the body and blood; or if you likewise only drink the cup unworthily, you will still be guilty of both the body and blood. This is because Jesus is fully present, body, blood, soul, and divinity, in either sacrament. This also agrees with Jesus’ vanishing from before the disciples on the road to Emmaus at the breaking of the bread: it wasn’t just His body that vanished, leaving His blood in a puddle on the ground.

Three thumbs up for, Peter

okay, so my math’s not so good

 

[Cinette]

For Pete - As always your posts are so profound and deep and I copy them for future re-reading as with those of tlqualey and others.

Benedictus also you are a constant participant and your words also touch me deeply.

I wish I had known of CAF years ago. I now tell everybody to come to CAF because one learns so much. Of course, one must be open and not have a closed mind and fixed ideas.

As Bill Pick pointed out :

"A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion."
Proverbs 18:

I guess we ought to pray that people will come to CAF with open minds and a loving and receptive heart.

God bless you all
Cinette

 

[benedictus2]

Benedictus also you are a constant participant and your words also touch me deeply.

Thank you and you to me.

I guess we ought to pray that people will come to CAF with open minds and a loving and receptive heart.

God bless you all
Cinette

And they will. And the tiny seeds of truth will grow into a tree. But all these on God’s time. As the song goes, He makes all things beautiful…In His Time.

If we do not seem to see any change, it does not mean that there is nothing happening. The seed may have started to sprout but the tiny sign of life is still underground.

 

[Robertwilliam]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned yet, but the very fact that Jesus is God the Word incarnate, his speaking " This is my Body…This is my Blood…" means what it says. The word translated “is” in greek is ESTIN. The bread and wine literally become the Glorified resurrected Son of God, Jesus.

 

[NonCatholic]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned yet, but the very fact that Jesus is God the Word incarnate, his speaking " This is my Body…This is my Blood…" means what it says. The word translated “is” in greek is ESTIN. The bread and wine literally become the Glorified resurrected Son of God, Jesus.

He is also a “door” and a “gate” and a “sheep herder” iterally…He is a real busy guy isn’t He?

 

[benedictus2]

He is also a “door” and a “gate” and a “sheep herder” iterally…He is a real busy guy isn’t He?

That line has been disproven time and again.

When he was speaking in that manner, every one knew he was talking metaphorically. That is why you don’t have them saying how can he be a door? How can he be a gate? Everyone knew it was metaphorical.

Not so with John 6. People listening to him knew he was talking literally as evidenced by their question and their refusal to abide with him. They knew he could not be speaking metaphorically because a metaphorical interpretation is not possible without making Jesus sound stupid. That is why he could not say he was speaking metaphorically either when they asked how can this man give us his flesh to eat. Rather than explaining, he makes it worse by emphasizing and repeating what he has said before.

 

[Protestant101]

That line has been disproven time and again.

When he was speaking in that manner, every one knew he was talking metaphorically. That is why you don’t have them saying how can he be a door? How can he be a gate? Everyone knew it was metaphorical.

Not so with John 6. People listening to him knew he was talking literally as evidenced by their question and their refusal to abide with him. They knew he could not be speaking metaphorically because a metaphorical interpretation is not possible without making Jesus sound stupid. That is why he could not say he was speaking metaphorically either when they asked how can this man give us his flesh to eat. Rather than explaining, he makes it worse by emphasizing and repeating what he has said before.

Ah, that’s not why they refused to abide with Him…It was their choice to not abide with Jesus for a much different reason; it had nothing to do with them not wanting to think Jesus was a piece of bread on the communion plate. That’s an inference made mostly by Catholics, which is not yet proven.

But; if I answer why I say that I might be accused of the horrendous crime of reading these posts too fast so I will wait for a bit before answering. Jesus said other things in the Scripture passages of John 6 which would strongly suggest that the ones who walked away had a much different reason for doing so than Catholics here at CAF are saying.

But, I guess you people like to follow your famous apologists, like Hahn, or the Pope, rather than the Bible, and ALL that it says on a subject.

 

[Cinette]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned yet, but the very fact that Jesus is God the Word incarnate, his speaking " This is my Body…This is my Blood…" means what it says. The word translated “is” in greek is ESTIN. The bread and wine literally become the Glorified resurrected Son of God, Jesus.

Welcome to Catholic Answers - I see this is your 2nd posting.

As to your response - we have stood on our heads. So we can now repeat what the scriptures teach us about private interpretations:

2 Peter 3:16

***“For there are many things in scripture that are hard to understand which ignorant and unstable people distort as they do the other scriptures to their destruction.”

“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”***
Proverbs 18:

God bless
Cinette

 

[latingirl]

Hey I follow the Bible, and the Bible says: “He who eats the flesh of the Son of Man and drinks his blood abides in me, and I in him.”

…and do I have to mention between John 6, The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke- and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, the Bible says that Christ’s body and blood are present at the Supper over 10 times!

 

[Cinette]

Hey I follow the Bible, and the Bible says: “He who eats the flesh of the Son of Man and drinks his blood abides in me, and I in him.”

…and do I have to mention between John 6, The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke- and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, the Bible says that Christ’s body and blood are present at the Supper over 10 times!

It would have made no difference to “ignorant and unstable people” were He to have said it 100 times.

 

[benedictus2]

It would have made no difference to “ignorant and unstable people” were He to have said it 100 times.

Let us not tire and try it again for the 101th time and then again and again. The Truth is bound to hit them one of these days when you least expect it.

We have all had moments when the penny finally dropped. It might be today for some of them, it might be tomorrow or the day after that and so on…

Once the Holy Spirit gets to work on them, there will be no going back.

 

[benedictus2]

Ah, that’s not why they refused to abide with Him…It was their choice to not abide with Jesus for a much different reason; it had nothing to do with them not wanting to think Jesus was a piece of bread on the communion plate. That’s an inference made mostly by Catholics, which is not yet proven.

You really have to do some serious reading of John 6. But please take of the blinkers when you do.

V52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”

V60 Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
V66As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
Are you even reading the Bible?

But; if I answer why I say that I might be accused of the horrendous crime of reading these posts too fast so I will wait for a bit before answering. Jesus said other things in the Scripture passages of John 6 which would strongly suggest that the ones who walked away had a much different reason for doing so than Catholics here at CAF are saying.

Honey, they walked away because they thought they were being asked to be cannibals. NO OTHER REASON.

But, I guess you people like to follow your famous apologists, like Hahn, or the Pope, rather than the Bible, and ALL that it says on a subject.

Wrong again. We follow Christ and believe His Words. HE SAID SO, remember. You on the other do not follow Christ. You are one of those who walked away because fo the hard teaching. So cut off from Him, you have no life in you.

The way you avoid and tippitoe around John 6 just so you can avoid His words is pathetic to say to the least.

 

[Protestant101]

Let us not tire it again for the 101th time and then again and again. The Truth is bound to hit them one of these days when you least expect it.

We have all had moments when the penny finally dropped. It might be today for some of them, it might be tomorrow or the day after that and so on…

Once the Holy Spirit gets to work on them, there will be no going back.

That “penny” will NEVER drop when names like"fool, unstable, ignorant, etc" are inflicted on those who dare not to be brainwashed on schedule

 

[Protestant101]

You really have to do some serious reading of John 6. But please take of the blinkers when you do.

V52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”

V60 Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
V66As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
Are you even reading the Bible?

Honey, they walked away because they thought they were being asked to be cannibals. NO OTHER REASON.

Wrong again. We follow Christ and believe His Words. HE SAID SO, remember. You on the other do not follow Christ. You are one of those who walked away because fo the hard teaching. So cut off from Him, you have no life in you.

The way you avoid and tippitoe around John 6 just so you can avoid His words is pathetic to say to the least.

I am not your “honey.” I am my wife’s honey.

 

[benedictus2]

That “penny” will NEVER drop when names like"fool, unstable, ignorant, etc" are inflicted on those who dare not to be brainwashed on schedule

Don’t tempt the Holy Spirit. Never say never. Tougher men than you have fallen hard. And wow! What wonderful converts they made.

Me thinks the gentleman does protest too much.

Don’t worry. God is patient. He will keep wooing and watching out for you until you come back home. He always looks out for the lost sheep.

 

[benedictus2]

I am not your “honey.” I am my wife’s honey.

My apologies to your wife, petal.

 

[Cinette]

That “penny” will NEVER drop when names like"fool, unstable, ignorant, etc" are inflicted on those who dare not to be brainwashed on schedule

Talking to St Peter? I was just quoting him you know.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

I am a Protestant who believes that Christ is truly present in the consecrated bread and wine every Sunday at my Anglican church. Do you believe this or do you feel that it is truly a symbolistic example of the Lord’s Supper?

I honestly don’t know.

It would make sense if He was, since the passover feast foreshaddowed it and made use of litteral flesh and blood.