The Eucharist is NOT the body of Christ

[Cling2Cross]

Augustine (Faustus 6.5): “while we consider it no longer a duty to offer sacrifices, we recognize sacrifices as part of the mysteries of Revelation, by which the things prophesied were foreshadowed. For they were our examples, and in many and various ways they all pointed to the one sacrifice which we now commemorate. Now that this sacrifice has been revealed, and has been offered in due time, sacrifice is no longer binding as an act of worship, while it retains its symbolical authority.”

 

[EphelDuath]

John 6 is not that basis for the eucharist.

He says “For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.” He’s never more clear about a single one of his teachings. As hard as it is for you to believe, he was more specific in the John 6 discourse than he was in any other chapter of the entire Bible.

 

[justasking4]

JMJ_coder;3102708]
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Now, does the eucharist have power that can be demonstrated?
JMJ_coder
Yes, it does. It has the power to fortify the soul in an indescribable manner. It has the power to bestow eternal life. It also has the power to completely destroy a soul if received unworthily (e.g., in a state of mortal sin).

Where in the last supper accounts did Jesus ever mention anything about eating the supper would lead to eternal life?

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Can it perform miracles for example?
JMJ_coder
Yes, there are numerous miracles associated with the Eucharist.

therealpresence.org/eucha…r/engl_mir.htm

Lets put this one on the back burner for now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Can it verbally communicate with you?
JMJ_coder
You mean like out loud oral communication? What does that have to do with anything?

If the eucharist is God then we should expect it to have this capacity. If not, then you have another serious problem that i would hate to bring up.

 

[edward_george]

That is complete bull****! "There are no non-catholics in heaven? You have a sad misunderstanding of Christianity and salvation if you honestly think that being a “catholic” will get anyone to heaven. I know, catholicism is the “fullness of truth” etc. Such statements are as bad as those made on the CARM boards. The only Truth that exists is that someone’s relationship with Christ will save them. period

Also, three different people posted three different answers regarding whether the Eucharist is actually God, so there appears to be as much division within Catholicism as exists in Protestantism; the only difference being catholics have the Pope to “unify” them.

Christ’s Bride is the Church. To be in the Church is to be in a relationship with Christ. Ergo, you’re right–it’s all about relationship with Christ. Of course, Christ only founded one Church; it wouldn’t make sense to say that he had a harem of competing brides who all believe different things.

As for your claim that there is disunity among Catholics about the Eucharist, please cite examples of this division as you’ve seen here–from what I’ve seen, they’re all saying the same thing.

-ACEGC

 

[EphelDuath]

If the eucharist is God then we should expect it to have this capacity. If not, then you have another serious problem that i would hate to bring up.

It certainly has that capacity. What’s your point?

Where in the last supper accounts did Jesus ever mention anything about eating the supper would lead to eternal life?

“This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.”

 

[edward_george]

Since Jesus is the God-man we believe He was God because of what He did i.e. miracles. He also had intelligence and power.
When a person spoke to Him, He responded.

Now, does the eucharist have power that can be demonstrated?
Can it perform miracles for example?
Can it verbally communicate with you?

Where exactly do your criteria for the Eucharist being God come from? Does it say in the Bible “If it looks like God, and talks like God, and walks like God, and performs miracles like God, then it is God?” Cite chapter and verse, please.

 

[porthos11]

That is complete bull****! "There are no non-catholics in heaven? You have a sad misunderstanding of Christianity and salvation if you honestly think that being a “catholic” will get anyone to heaven.

I have a surprise for you. Other than God and the angels, there are only Catholics in heaven.

That is NOT the same as saying that only Catholics go to heaven.

I know, catholicism is the “fullness of truth” etc. Such statements are as bad as those made on the CARM boards. The only Truth that exists is that someone’s relationship with Christ will save them. period

No I think the one who has the sad misunderstanding is you. You have the “Jesus and me” mentality. But someone’s relationship with Christ includes believing what he said, and accepting what he left. Fortunately for us, we take his words seriously, and we do not separate his words from what he left. Paul says, he is head of the Body, the Church, and that the Church is pillar and foundation of the truth. He identified himself with the least of his brethren to the point of saying that whatever is done to them is done to him. Read Matthew 25. He throws into hell those who ignore him by ignoring the poor, even those who call him “Lord”. Sure it’s relationship with Christ. But a true relationship with Christ means participating in everything he left us, not just one.

Also, three different people posted three different answers regarding whether the Eucharist is actually God, so there appears to be as much division within Catholicism as exists in Protestantism; the only difference being catholics have the Pope to “unify” them.

Yep. And only those who say the Eucharist is truly God hold on to the Catholic faith. The rest do not. As simple as that.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

We cannot fathom this, as has been proven here, and as has been the case for 2000 years.

This may be a good time to mention that the Eucharist is a Mystery of God. I know that jimmy has already mentioned it on this thread - but the Eucharist truly is a Mystery of God, like that of the Trinity. We shall never fully penetrate the infinite depths of this Mystery in this life.

 

[porthos11]

Where in the last supper accounts did Jesus ever mention anything about eating the supper would lead to eternal life?

Lets put this one on the back burner for now.

If the eucharist is God then we should expect it to have this capacity. If not, then you have another serious problem that i would hate to bring up.

Sez you. God never imposed this criteria on the Eucharist. He said it’s his body. That and with the warnings of Paul and the theology of John 6, that’s good enough for us.

The problem is only for you, who imposes conditions on God himself.

After all, if we are to follow the same logic, Jesus should also not be able to bleed and die, and people should drop dead upon seeing him, after all, he is God. But he took on a form in which these properties of God were not manifest. The Eucharist is no more ridiculous than the Incarnation itself.

 

[revelations]

Augustine (Faustus 6.5): “while we consider it no longer a duty to offer sacrifices, we recognize sacrifices as part of the mysteries of Revelation, by which the things prophesied were foreshadowed. For they were our examples, and in many and various ways they all pointed to the one sacrifice which we now commemorate. Now that this sacrifice has been revealed, and has been offered in due time, sacrifice is no longer binding as an act of worship, while it retains its symbolical authority.”

ST. AUGUSTINE (c. 354 - 430 A.D.)
“That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, IS THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. Through that bread and wine the Lord Christ willed to commend HIS BODY AND BLOOD, WHICH HE POURED OUT FOR US UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.” (Sermons 227)
“The Lord Jesus wanted those whose eyes were held lest they should recognize him, to recognize Him in the breaking of the bread [Luke 24:16,30-35]. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, BECOMES CHRIST’S BODY.” (Sermons 234:2)
“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that THE BREAD IS THE BODY OF CHRIST AND THE CHALICE [WINE] THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.” (Sermons 272)
“How this ‘And he was carried in his own hands’] should be understood literally of David, we cannot discover; but we can discover how it is meant of Christ. FOR CHRIST WAS CARRIED IN HIS OWN HANDS, WHEN, REFERRING TO HIS OWN BODY, HE SAID: ‘THIS IS MY BODY.’ FOR HE CARRIED THAT BODY IN HIS HANDS.” (Psalms 33:1:10)
“Was not Christ IMMOLATED only once in His very Person? In the Sacrament, nevertheless, He is IMMOLATED for the people not only on every Easter Solemnity but on every day; and a man would not be lying if, when asked, he were to reply that Christ is being IMMOLATED.” (Letters 98:9)
“Christ is both the Priest, OFFERING Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the SACRAMENTAL SIGN of this should be the daily Sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to OFFER herself through Him.” (City of God 10:20)
“By those sacrifices of the Old Law, this one Sacrifice is signified, in which there is a true remission of sins; but not only is no one forbidden to take as food the Blood of this Sacrifice, rather, all who wish to possess life are exhorted to drink thereof.” (Questions on the Heptateuch 3:57)

All from: bringyou.to/apologetics/num30.htm

 

[PatienceAndLove]

If this were the case in John 6 then why doesn’t Jesus make any reference to it that it would come later at the last supper?

You are reading into the text what is not there. Jesus never mentions the supper here.

Gospel According to Saint Matthew 26: 26-28
And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: **Drink ye all of this. For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins. **

Gospel According to Saint Mark 14: 22-24
And whilst they were eating, Jesus took bread; and blessing, broke, and gave to them, and said: Take ye. This is my body. And having taken the chalice, giving thanks, he gave it to them. And they all drank of it. And he said to them: **This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many. **

Gospel According to Saint Luke 22: 19-20
And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. n like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying:** This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood**, which shall be shed for you.

First Epistle Of Saint Paul To The Corinthians 11: 23-25
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

Gospel According to Saint John 6: 35, 48-58
And Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger: and he that believeth in me shall never thirst.

I am the bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so** he that eateth me**, the same also shall live by me.

I think the connections are pretty clear.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Where in the last supper accounts did Jesus ever mention anything about eating the supper would lead to eternal life?

Both from the Apostolic witness in Sacred Tradition and from John 6 (Catholics take the Bible in its proper context, as a whole and not cut up into individual verses as it suits us).

Lets put this one on the back burner for now.

If you insist.

If the eucharist is God then we should expect it to have this capacity. If not, then you have another serious problem that i would hate to bring up.

Why? Who says that God must communicate orally to us?

 

[PatienceAndLove]

Perhaps this would be a good place for you to give me your defintion of what “Real Presence” means? I want to be clear that i understand you.

Real Presence = Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ who is God from God, Light from Light,True God from True God; begotten, not made, one in being with the Father, through whom all things were made.

 

[PatienceAndLove]

This is starting to exhaust me.

 

[porthos11]

Its not that He had to but the catholic church is making a powerful claim and we need to see what is the basis for it. John 6 is not that basis for the eucharist.

Yes it is. He said that his flesh is true food, and his blood is true drink. John 6 gives us the theology of the Eucharist: eat my flesh, drink my blood. There does not need to be any mention of a particular meal in which this happens, the purpose here is to give us the truth that this must be done.

Nothing about John 6 was fulfilled at the supper. We know this becasue not even the NT letters make such claims.

Only to those to refuse to see. Jesus said, you must eat (phago, trogo) my flesh. At the last supper, he said, “Take, eat. This is my body.”

No parallel?

Jesus said, “Unless you drink the blood of the Son of Man”. At the Last Supper he said, “Take, drink. This is my blood of the new and everlasting covenant.”

No parallel?

Only to those who would not see.

The problem is understanding correctly what the scriptures teach. What helps tremendously is to see if other writings shed some light on this. Only Paul mentions the last supper and he says nothing in support of the catholic posiiton.

Do not forget Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

Where have you been over the past posts? Paul overwhelmingly supports the Catholic position, especially with his scary warnings.

 

[porthos11]

This is starting to exhaust me.

Persevere. Be true to your board handle.

I on the other hand, carry the name of a dog, so I’m under no such obligation.

 

[zerocrossing]

Its not that He had to but the catholic church is making a powerful claim and we need to see what is the basis for it. John 6 is not that basis for the eucharist.

Nothing about John 6 was fulfilled at the supper. We know this becasue not even the NT letters make such claims.

The problem is understanding correctly what the scriptures teach. What helps tremendously is to see if other writings shed some light on this. Only Paul mentions the last supper and he says nothing in support of the catholic posiiton.

Okay, so 2000 years worth of Christianity down the drain. The ancient Church got its understanding of the Eucharist as the Body and Blood of Christ all wrong. The martyr St. Ignatius, who was a disciple of John’s (the source of John 6), had no understanding of what John was talking about. The entire ancient Church was all in darkness because it understood the Eucharist to be the Body and Blood of the Lord. All we needed was the “light” of Protestant rationalism to set us all straight. Wow.

What I’ve always found bizarre is that this is the single aspect of scripture that Protestant “literal interpreters” decide absolutely MUST NOT be interpreted literally. And what’s funny is that we have a huge paper trail showing that the ancient Church DID interpret it quite literally.

 

[PatienceAndLove]

Persevere. Be true to your board handle.

I on the other hand, carry the name of a dog, so I’m under no such obligation.

Another Trekkie! wOOt!

Did my post with all of the Last Supper accounts and John 6 make sense?

 

[porthos11]

Another Trekkie! wOOt!

See? Even you can make an absolutely correct connection without explcitness.

And that’s just from a funny remark.

Did my post with all of the Last Supper accounts and John 6 make sense?

Absolutely.

 

[lak611]

What I’ve always found bizarre is that this is the single aspect of scripture that Protestant “literal interpreters” decide absolutely MUST NOT be interpreted literally. And what’s funny is that we have a huge paper trail showing that the ancient Church DID interpret it quite literally.

I posted the Greek translation of “eat” from a Protestant source, Strong’s Concordance, but did not get any response. The Greek word means “gnaw” or “chew”.

G5176
τρώγω
trōgō
tro’-go
Probably strengthened from a collateral form of the base of G5134 and G5147 through the idea of corrosion or wear; or perhaps rather of a base of G5167 and G5149 through the idea of a craunching sound; to gnaw or chew, that is, (genitive case) to eat: - eat.