C
chaos22120
Guest
What is the initial reason why we would want to consume the blood and body of our beloved
Christ?
Christ?
- Status
S
SuscipeMeDomine
Guest
Because he told us to:
I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?” Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true 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 have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” (John 6:48-58)
B
benedictgal
Guest
We need to look at the reason which came directly from Jesus, Himself, as recorded in John 6:31-35
Thus, the command comes no less than from Jesus, Himself. Furthermore, it is the fulfillment of what was foreshadowed in the Passover ritual. Part and parcel of the Passover ritual entailed that the people eat a portion of the lamb that was sacrificed. Jesus, as our True Paschal Sacrifice, the True Lamb of God, invites those who are properly disposed, to eat His Body and drink His Blood in Holy Communion.
N
NPC
Guest
As the previous posters have said, the very simple reason is because it is what Christ commanded. There are many posters on CAF who say that John 6 was central in their conversion to Catholicism - to me (a “cradle” Catholic) that chapter is the most compelling Scriptural reference to the truth in the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist.
I don’t know if you’ve asked your question merely on your own compulsion or if you were challenged on this Catholic belief by a non-Catholic. Either way, it’s a good idea to look further into the different arguments which surround John 6 - I find that Karl Keating’s famous Catholicism and Fundamentalism deals well with this. Many Protestants may try to convince you that Christ was merely speaking figuratively and that eating the flesh of Christ actually refers to us “consuming” or “devouring” Scripture - of course that argument implodes because if that were the case, Christ could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures as the the New Testament was some years off at that stage. An interesting point that Mr Keating makes is that in Jesus’ language, Aramaic, to refer to eating one’s flesh figuratively actually meant to disrespect or revile someone - so try substituting “disrespects me” or “reviles me” for “eats my flesh” and see how much sense the argument of metaphorical language makes! Indeed, another compelling point is that this is the only record we have in Scripture of disciples leaving Christ for doctrinal reasons - He clearly wasn’t speaking figuratively, otherwise He surely would have explained what He meant when the people asked Him. Instead, He repeated what he had said before - and He allowed them to depart and "walk no more in His ways. Surely this wouldn’t be the mark of the Good Shepherd, Who, according to Himself, would leave His ninety-nine sheep to go in search of the one who had gone astray…
You might also find it useful to read what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says about the Eucharist.
I don’t know if you’ve asked your question merely on your own compulsion or if you were challenged on this Catholic belief by a non-Catholic. Either way, it’s a good idea to look further into the different arguments which surround John 6 - I find that Karl Keating’s famous Catholicism and Fundamentalism deals well with this. Many Protestants may try to convince you that Christ was merely speaking figuratively and that eating the flesh of Christ actually refers to us “consuming” or “devouring” Scripture - of course that argument implodes because if that were the case, Christ could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures as the the New Testament was some years off at that stage. An interesting point that Mr Keating makes is that in Jesus’ language, Aramaic, to refer to eating one’s flesh figuratively actually meant to disrespect or revile someone - so try substituting “disrespects me” or “reviles me” for “eats my flesh” and see how much sense the argument of metaphorical language makes! Indeed, another compelling point is that this is the only record we have in Scripture of disciples leaving Christ for doctrinal reasons - He clearly wasn’t speaking figuratively, otherwise He surely would have explained what He meant when the people asked Him. Instead, He repeated what he had said before - and He allowed them to depart and "walk no more in His ways. Surely this wouldn’t be the mark of the Good Shepherd, Who, according to Himself, would leave His ninety-nine sheep to go in search of the one who had gone astray…
You might also find it useful to read what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says about the Eucharist.
T
thirdn6
Guest
Simplest reason…
“We become what we eat.”
Welcome!
Peace but Truth is more important.
J
japhy
Guest
Hmm… what is the initial reason? I would say because the Lord Himself commanded it. (cf. John 6:29-58; Matt 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-25)
Why did He command it? Or, more deeply, why was it under the signs of bread and wine that Jesus commanded us to receive His Body and Blood? Why would He have us consume His Body and Blood? Well, God knows… but He had been preparing Israel for it for centuries.
Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of the Most High God (long before Israel existed and had priests), offered God a thanksgiving offering of bread and wine, and he blessed Abram. (cf. Gen 14:18-20) And the letter to the Hebrews tells us that Melchizedek was a foreshadowing of Christ. (cf. Heb 7) Melchizedek’s name means “king of righteousness”, and Salem (shalom) means “peace”.
God later tested Abraham, asking him to offer his only beloved son as a holocaust on a mountain. As they went up the mountain – Isaac carrying the wood for his own sacrificial death on his back – he asked his father where the lamb for the sacrifice was, and Abraham replied that God would provide Himself the lamb. God did provide an animal for sacrifice in place of Isaac… but it was a ram, with its head caught in a thicket of thorns. (cf. Gen 22)
When God delivered Israel from captivity in Egypt, He instituted a ritual sacrificial meal for them, by which each family was to acquire a spotless, unblemished lamb, to kill it without breaking its bones and to spread its blood upon the doorposts of their homes; the angel of God’s wrath, seeing the blood, would pass over them. The family was also to eat the flesh of the lamb. But this was not God’s lamb… (cf. Exo 12-13)
In time, another ritual was instituted for Israel, the Yom Kippur (“day of atonement”) ritual. Two lambs or goats were chosen, one to be slaughtered in sacrifice, and the other to have the sins of all of Israel placed upon its head and to be sent out into the wilderness to die. This was the “scapegoat”, the one who receives the blame and punishment for the sins of others. (cf. Lev 16)
On the shores of the Jordan, John the Baptist called out to all who would hear him, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29) He was speaking of Jesus, the only beloved Son of God. (cf. Matt 3:17) Pilate found Jesus to be without fault or blemish. (cf. John 18:38) At His crucifixion, our Lord was crowned with thorns and carried the wood for his own sacrificial death on his back. (cf. John 19:2, 17) His bones were not broken. (cf. John 19:31-36)
St. Paul says that “Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.” (1 Cor 5:7)
St. Paul asks, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor 10:16)
St. Peter says that we “were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.” (1 Pet 1:18-19)
St. John saw in Heaven “a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain.” (Rev 5:6)
The angels in Heaven say “Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” (Rev 19:9)
(And why do we drink His blood? Israel was forbidden to consume blood, since the life is in the blood. (cf. Gen 9:4; Lev 17:10-14) That was to prepare them for the only blood they should consume, the Blood of Him Who has eternal life.)
J
Jean_Anthony
Guest
I will allow this thread to remain in the L&S forum for sharing information only. No debate, please over Church teachings. Such debate belongs in the Apologetics forum where it is welcome. Thank you all.
C
chaos22120
Guest
Thank you! I understand now
C
choy
Guest
our parish priest had an interesting homily regarding thisSimplest reason…
“We become what we eat.”
Welcome!
Peace but Truth is more important.
he said that the Eucharist is opposite of any ordinary food. when you eat food, you consume it, it becomes a part of you
when you receive the Eucharist, it consumes you, so that you may become part of Christ
N
NPC
Guest
I have an audio recording of a retreat which was given by the Servant of God Fulton Sheen where he talks on the Eucharist. This is one of the main points he makes - we consume Christ that He may live in us and us in Him. His central point was that “we live by what we have slain” - the plants consuming the nutrients from the ground, the animals consuming the plants, humans consuming the animals. They all give life - and consuming Christ gives us life. I suppose it also reminds us that we ourselves have to die to self to benefit fully from the gifts and graces that Christ’s Body gives us. That’s why we also become a central part of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - we offer ourselves with the gifts of bread and wine that we may also be, in some way, “transubstantiated”, as God wishes.
J
japhy
Guest
I agree.
Just as the bread and wine will be transubstantiated into Christ, what they represent – ourselves, the Church, the Body of Christ – is, in a sense, transubstantiated as well. By identifying ourselves with the bread and wine, as Archbishop Sheen wrote, we are anticipating the change which will occur in us at the end of time while conforming our lives to the change taking place now.
…]
This mystery of faith involves us, too, for the Body of Christ is at once the Eucharist on the altar and the Church: as St. Augustine said, the mystery taking place on the altar is our mystery as well. In the change of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, we recognize the change taking place in us as we “with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another.” (2 Cor. 3:18) This change culminates in the resurrection of our bodies to their eternal glorified state, when Christ “will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body.” (Phil. 3:21; cf. 1 Cor. 15:51-52)
Praying the Mass: The Prayers of the People, pp. 117, 126
A
amdannemiller
Guest
Why WOULDN’T we want to receive the Eucharist?! We receive Jesus so we can get as close as possible to our Lord! Also, the Eucharist give us Graces! And Jesus told us that if we do not receive Him through the Eucharist, we do not have His life in us.
Also, the Eucharist give us Graces! And Jesus told us that if we do not receive Him through the Eucharist, we do not have His life in us.- Status