The Eucharist: Real Presence or symbol?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RedDawgMCM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello, I mean no disrespect to your beliefs, but I stand behind the faith of the early Christians who stood under Paul and John and the others who had hands laid on them to recieve the Apostolic Authority to teach and act in Jesus’s name over any church teacher that had their teaching come down from five centuries or less any day. And , how could it represent Jesus instead of actually be him if eating or drinking the elements would bring condemnation on the recipient? This is the only point that fundamentalists are inconsistent. They believe every word in the bible is to be taken literally except John 6. Makes very little sense to me.
And yet Catholics take some things literally and not others. 🤷
 
Once again, this comes down to a VERY simple proposition.

Either you believe that Jesus meant EXACTLY what he said, or you do not. Jesus said, “This IS MY BODY”. He further instructed the Apostles to “Do this in memory of me.”

He did not say, “this represents my body”. He did not say, “Hold a ceremonial version of what I have done here, as a symbol of what I have done”.

We, as Catholics, believe that Jesus meant EXACTLY what he said.

I just love the “fundamentalists” who claim to believe that the Bible is the actual and inherent word of God, and that it is literal, but then reject the real presence in the Blessed Sacrament. They are literal with the Old Testament, but reject the very plain words of the New.

I find this to be the case in many of their arguments. Over and over again, they emphasize the Old Testament (especially its emphasis on punishment), but reject the message of the New Testament (especially the words of mercy and love).
 
Hello, I mean no disrespect to your beliefs, but I stand behind the faith of the early Christians who stood under Paul and John and the others who had hands laid on them to recieve the Apostolic Authority to teach and act in Jesus’s name over any church teacher that had their teaching come down from five centuries or less any day. And , how could it represent Jesus instead of actually be him if eating or drinking the elements would bring condemnation on the recipient? This is the only point that fundamentalists are inconsistent. They believe every word in the bible is to be taken literally except John 6. Makes very little sense to me.
It is interesting that Augustine uses the Bread of Life discourse as an example of where the interpretation is to be figurative rather than literal.
. If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.
Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, Book 3, Chapter 16, Paragraph 24)
newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm

Whatever his views on the Eucharist, Augustine does not take Jesus’ words here literally.
 
We, as Catholics, believe that Jesus meant EXACTLY what he said.
Not quite exactly everything in Jn 6. One example. Jn 6:37 “Everyone whom my Father gives me will come to me. I will never turn away anyone who comes to me.” (GNT)
 
It is interesting that Augustine uses the Bread of Life discourse as an example of where the interpretation is to be figurative rather than literal.

Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, Book 3, Chapter 16, Paragraph 24)
newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm

Whatever his views on the Eucharist, Augustine does not take Jesus’ words here literally.
Good point. How Protestants examine Augustine’s writings, whether someone believes the same or not, is one example of how it makes it easier to understand different beliefs.
 
Regarding the belief in the Real Presence as believed by St. Augustine, I found a website that does defend that St. Augustine believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist. It’s written by a Catholic convert named David Armstrong, who, when he was a Protestant, also would claim that St. Augustine believed in only a symbolic view of the Eucharist. Mr. Armstrong changed his view, of course, and he now provides information and quotes which show that St. Augustine did believe that the bread on the altar is changed to the Body of Christ, and that the chalice contains the Blood of Christ. Here are a few quotes from St. Augustine:

“The bread that you see on the altar is, sanctified by the word of God, the body of Christ; that chalice, or rather what is contained in the chalice, sanctified by the word of God, the blood of Christ.” (Sermo 227; on p. 377)

"Christ bore himself in his hands, when he offered his body, saying: “this is my body.” (Enarr. in Ps 33 Sermo 1, 10; on p. 377)

“Nobody eats this flesh without previously adoring it.” (Enarr in Ps. 98, 9; on p. 387)

“What you see is the bread and the chalice…But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the Body of Christ, and the chalice the Blood of Christ.” (ibid., 227; on p. 32)

Link to Mr. Armstrong’s website:

chnetwork.org/journals/eucharist/eucharist_7.htm
 
This one has always seemed obvious to me, but it seems our separated brethren obfuscate, evade, or flat-out say we Catholics just don’t understand what Jesus was saying. So let’s look at the evidence.

[BIBLEDRB]John 6:32-69[/BIBLEDRB]

Seems like if those that understood Jesus to be saying eat my flesh and didn’t like it walked away, why didn’t He say wait guys come back I am using a metaphor. Every time he is questioned he reiterates the same point. Eat My flesh. Drink My blood.

Discuss…
It’s as Jesus said it was, a reminder. I don’t remember reading any other reason for Holy Communion.
 
It is interesting that Augustine uses the Bread of Life discourse as an example of where the interpretation is to be figurative rather than literal.

Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, Book 3, Chapter 16, Paragraph 24)
newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm

Whatever his views on the Eucharist, Augustine does not take Jesus’ words here literally.
Code:
    True enough.   What is your belief?  Do you believe in the real presence or only in a symbolic interpretation.  What is the reason for your belief?
Tommy
 
No offence taken. I understand the reasons of your belief.
The condemnation isn’t in partaking of the elements, but doing so unworthily. Being unworthy has nothing to do with what is partaken of.
I cannot speak towards the actions of funamentalists, as I am not one, and I believe the bible uses metaphoric language extensively.
You say that you are not a fundamentalist— what exactly are you?
 
It’s as Jesus said it was, a reminder. I don’t remember reading any other reason for Holy Communion.
Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of theb covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Luther’s Small Catechism:
*What is the benefit of such eating and drinking?

That is shown us in these words: Given, and shed for you, for the remission of sins; namely, that in the Sacrament forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation are given us through these words. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.*

Jon
 
Let’s get a little Patristic here…First while not a church Father how about the Good Doctor’s take… (Aquinas Pange Lingua)
Code:
1. PANGE, lingua, gloriosi
Corporis mysterium,
Sanguinisque pretiosi,
quem in mundi pretiumfructus
ventris generosi
Rex effudit Gentium.

2. Nobis datus, nobis natus
ex intacta Virgine,
et in mundo conversatus,
sparso verbi semine,
sui moras incolatus
miro clausit ordine.

3. In supremae nocte cenae
recumbens cum fratribus
observata lege plene
cibis in legalibus,
cibum turbae duodenae
se dat suis manibus.

4. Verbum caro, panem verum
verbo carnem efficit:
fitque sanguis Christi merum,
et si sensus deficit,
ad firmandum cor sincerum
sola fides sufficit.

5. Tantum ergo Sacramentum
veneremur cernui:
et antiquum documentum
novo cedat ritui:
praestet fides supplementum
sensuum defectui.

6. Genitori, Genitoque
laus et iubilatio,
salus, honor, virtus quoque
sit et benedictio:
procedenti ab utroque
compar sit laudatio.

Amen. Alleluia.
And an English rhyming translation:
Code:
1. SING, my tongue, the Savior's glory,
of His flesh the mystery sing;
of the Blood, all price exceeding,
shed by our immortal King,
destined, for the world's redemption,
from a noble womb to spring.

2. Of a pure and spotless Virgin
born for us on earth below,
He, as Man, with man conversing,
stayed, the seeds of truth to sow;
then He closed in solemn order
wondrously His life of woe.

3. On the night of that Last Supper,
seated with His chosen band,
He the Pascal victim eating,
first fulfills the Law's command;
then as Food to His Apostles
gives Himself with His own hand.

4. Word-made-Flesh, the bread of nature
by His word to Flesh He turns;
wine into His Blood He changes;
-what though sense no change discerns?
Only be the heart in earnest,
faith her lesson quickly learns.

5. Down in adoration falling,
Lo! the sacred Host we hail;
Lo! o'er ancient forms departing,
newer rites of grace prevail;
faith for all defects supplying,
where the feeble sense fail.

6. To the everlasting Father,
and the Son who reigns on high,
with the Holy Ghost proceeding
forth from Each eternally,
be salvation, honor, blessing,
might and endless majesty.

Amen. Alleluia.
Cyril of Jerusalem catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=2430
On the night he was betrayed our Lord Jesus Christ took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples and said: “Take, eat: this is my body”. He took the cup, gave thanks and said: “Take, drink: this is my blood”. Since Christ himself has declared the bread to be his body, who can have any further doubt? Since he himself has said quite categorically, This is my blood, who would dare to question it and say that it is not his blood?

Therefore, it is with complete assurance that we receive the bread and wine as the body and blood of Christ. His body is given to us under the symbol of bread, and his blood is given to us under the symbol of wine, in order to make us by receiving them one body and blood with him. Having his body and blood in our members, we become bearers of Christ and sharers, as Saint Peter says, in the divine nature.
Do not, then, regard the eucharistic elements as ordinary bread and wine: they are in fact the body and blood of the Lord, as he himself has declared. Whatever your senses may tell you, be strong in faith.
You have been taught and you are firmly convinced that what looks and tastes like bread and wine is not bread and wine but the body and the blood of Christ. You know also how David referred to this long ago when he sang: Bread gives strength to man’s heart and makes his face shine with the oil of gladness. Strengthen your heart, then, by receiving this bread as spiritual bread, and bring joy to the face of your soul.
 
I believe it can be easy to understand different beliefs. Flyonthewall says “I understand the reasons of your belief”. What I don’t understand is why is it so difficult for some Catholics to charitably understand other beliefs.
Please forgive me for being so uncharitable, but I do believe that it is important to tell other people the truth. Is it wrong for people to believe in the real presence of Jesus, and why would it be?

Tommy
 
I cannot speak towards the actions of funamentalists, as I am not one, and I believe the bible uses metaphoric language extensively.
Indeed, Christ often used metaphoric language - “I am the door”, etc. But only in one instance that I know of, does He place His ands on something, bless it, and say, “This is my body”, “This is my blood”. He never said “this door is me”, but He does say that the bread and ware ARE Him - His body and blood. Quite literal.

Jon
 
Let’s get a little Patristic here…First while not a church Father how about the Good Doctor’s take… (Aquinas Pange Lingua)
Code:
1. PANGE, lingua, gloriosi
Corporis mysterium,
Sanguinisque pretiosi,
quem in mundi pretiumfructus
ventris generosi
Rex effudit Gentium.

2. Nobis datus, nobis natus
ex intacta Virgine,
et in mundo conversatus,
sparso verbi semine,
sui moras incolatus
miro clausit ordine.

3. In supremae nocte cenae
recumbens cum fratribus
observata lege plene
cibis in legalibus,
cibum turbae duodenae
se dat suis manibus.

4. Verbum caro, panem verum
verbo carnem efficit:
fitque sanguis Christi merum,
et si sensus deficit,
ad firmandum cor sincerum
sola fides sufficit.

5. Tantum ergo Sacramentum
veneremur cernui:
et antiquum documentum
novo cedat ritui:
praestet fides supplementum
sensuum defectui.

6. Genitori, Genitoque
laus et iubilatio,
salus, honor, virtus quoque
sit et benedictio:
procedenti ab utroque
compar sit laudatio.

Amen. Alleluia.
And an English rhyming translation:
Code:
1. SING, my tongue, the Savior's glory,
of His flesh the mystery sing;
of the Blood, all price exceeding,
shed by our immortal King,
destined, for the world's redemption,
from a noble womb to spring.

2. Of a pure and spotless Virgin
born for us on earth below,
He, as Man, with man conversing,
stayed, the seeds of truth to sow;
then He closed in solemn order
wondrously His life of woe.

3. On the night of that Last Supper,
seated with His chosen band,
He the Pascal victim eating,
first fulfills the Law's command;
then as Food to His Apostles
gives Himself with His own hand.

4. Word-made-Flesh, the bread of nature
by His word to Flesh He turns;
wine into His Blood He changes;
-what though sense no change discerns?
Only be the heart in earnest,
faith her lesson quickly learns.

5. Down in adoration falling,
Lo! the sacred Host we hail;
Lo! o'er ancient forms departing,
newer rites of grace prevail;
faith for all defects supplying,
where the feeble sense fail.

6. To the everlasting Father,
and the Son who reigns on high,
with the Holy Ghost proceeding
forth from Each eternally,
be salvation, honor, blessing,
might and endless majesty.

Amen. Alleluia.
Cyril of Jerusalem catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=2430
On the night he was betrayed our Lord Jesus Christ took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples and said: “Take, eat: this is my body”. He took the cup, gave thanks and said: “Take, drink: this is my blood”. Since Christ himself has declared the bread to be his body, who can have any further doubt? Since he himself has said quite categorically, This is my blood, who would dare to question it and say that it is not his blood?

Therefore, it is with complete assurance that we receive the bread and wine as the body and blood of Christ. His body is given to us under the symbol of bread, and his blood is given to us under the symbol of wine, in order to make us by receiving them one body and blood with him. Having his body and blood in our members, we become bearers of Christ and sharers, as Saint Peter says, in the divine nature.
Do not, then, regard the eucharistic elements as ordinary bread and wine: they are in fact the body and blood of the Lord, as he himself has declared. Whatever your senses may tell you, be strong in faith.
Code:
You have been taught and you are firmly convinced that what looks and tastes like bread and wine is not bread and wine but the body and the blood of Christ. You know also how David referred to this long ago when he sang: Bread gives strength to man’s heart and makes his face shine with the oil of gladness. Strengthen your heart, then, by receiving this bread as spiritual bread, and bring joy to the face of your soul.
Thank you so much for that quote. Who is Saint Cyril, and what time period did he live in?

Tommy
 
True enough. What is your belief? Do you believe in the real presence or only in a symbolic interpretation. What is the reason for your belief?

Tommy
I do believe in a Real Presence with what could probably be described as a receptionist view. I believe the nature of the Real Presence is best left a mystery. Christ directed us to eat and drink. If we do this I believe He will work what He will, whatever our belief or understanding as long we intend to do His will in it.
 
Lets keep the posts to a certain limit. It’s an internet forum, not a college term paper.😉
 
It is not good to treat the beliefs of others lightly. I believe in the real presence and I take the words of Christ literally in John 6. Other people don’t. That is their choice and is an exercise of their free will.

What is not understood is that to many Catholics the celebration of the Eucharist is the highest form of worship. Christ commanded us to remember Him by partaking of this meal… It was the only thing He asked us to do for Him.

I am a Catholic today because of the Eucharist. I could find no other place to receive the actual body of Christ. Where could I go, what church could I join that treated the elements with such reverence? When I was in RCIA and we toured the Church and I saw the tabernacle and realized that the body of Christ was there I was filled with emotion. When I was in the hospital before I was received into the Church, the Eucharistic ministers would come by and would ask if I wanted to receive communion I would have to tell them, “not today”. I would be upset for a while. After I was received into the Church I was overwhelmed when I could receive the body and blood of my Savior. MY SAVIOR. When I believed that the bread and wine was His Body and Blood I really *understood * the significance of the Eucharist. And the Holy Spirit bore witness to my spirit of the truth.

The early Church understood it this way.
“You will see the Levites bringing the loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers and invocations have not yet been made,it is mere bread and a mere cup. But when the great and wonderous prayers have been recited, then the bread becomes the body and the cup the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ…When the great prayers and holy supplications are sent up, the Word descends on the bread and the cup, and it becomes His body.” Athanasius,Sermon to the Newly Baptized,PG 26,1325(ante A.D. 373),in ECD,442

You may believe what you will. May you be blessed.
 
if we look at other times in the bible where eating flesh and drinking blood is used symbolically (Isaiah 10:18, Micah 3:3, Revelation 17:16, and many others…), it always means to persecute, assault, or otherwise destroy. Now why would Jesus use this kind of symbolism to describe how we should gain everlasting life?? In order to enter heaven we must attack and assault our Savior?? i dont think so…
I don’t know, but maybe because Jesus was going to endure the wrath of God?

22Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top