The Eucharist: Real Presence or symbol?

[Richard_Kastner]

Hi Richard,

Yes BUT… these same Jews were 1. Unbeleiving: COULD NOT ACCEPT that Christ was and IS God.

AND these same folks were the ones who abandoned Christ because they “saw” his humanity; BUT could not; and did not see His Divinity. THUS they [LIKE MOST PROTESTANTS] thought Christ was speaking of in Canrnal / mortal flesh; WHEN IN FACT IT WAS AND IS HIS GLORIFID, RISEN BODY, BLOOD, SOUL AND DIVINITY, THAT CHRIST WAS SPEAKING OF [VRS. 63-64], AND WHAT WE CATHOLIC RECEIVE IN HOLY COMMUNION.

GREAT question, THANKS!

Pat

So then in this exchange

Jn.6
26Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

27Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

30They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

31Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

32Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

33For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

34Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

35And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Jesus is taking the IDEA of bread or real hunger and thirst and transfering the meaning to the spiritual realm. In other words showing the people that followed Him, were following for the wrong reasons. That instead of following Him to satisfy their physical hunger, they should be following to satisfy a spiritual “hunger and thirst”. Do you think that this is a fair appraisal?

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Fly, I was just wondering: how do you reconcile the once for all sacrifice of Christ on the cross (which all catholics believe) - with the prophecy of Jeremiah 33:18, that says the levitical priests shall offer sacrifice forever? The Catholic Church teaching that Jesus’ sacrifice is made present (not repeated) in the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Church seems the only way to reconcile them.

Catholic priests are Levitical priests?

 

[rinnie]

So then in this exchange

Jn.6
26Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

27Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

30They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

31Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

32Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

33For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

34Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

35And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Jesus is taking the IDEA of bread or real hunger and thirst and transfering the meaning to the spiritual realm. In other words showing the people that followed Him, were following for the wrong reasons. That instead of following Him to satisfy their physical hunger, they should be following to satisfy a spiritual “hunger and thirst”. Do you think that this is a fair appraisal?

I can give you this Richard. But it is still the actual body and blood of Christ that the physical bread becomes. It is food for our soul. That is why it gives us eternal life in Christ.

But whatever way you want to see it, the point is, it is the Actual Body and Blood of Christ. The actual bread that you see and receive physically becomes the actual body and blood of Christ. It is actually the body receiving this bread. It is not a symbol it is actual bread and wine. It is that actual bread and wine they are transformed by Christ into his actual body and blood. Again it is not a symbol of his body and blood in the bread and wine, they turn into his actual body and blood.

When we receive this Eucharist we know that it is actual life in Christ and from Christ that we are becoming one with him. That is not a symbol. a symbol cannot give us eternal life in Christ, it must be his actual Body and Blood as he tells us. IF it were a mere symbol all bread and wine could give us actual life in Christ. But that is not what is told to us.

It is his Apostles that are told to Take this bread, and take this wine, it is not us that can do this. We do not have the power of the Holy Spirit to do this, Only a Priest can turn plain bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Christ.

 

[centurionguard]

Doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist in Union with the Saints and Fathers of the Church

catholic.com/library/Real_Presence.asp

therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html

 

[elvisman]

So then in this exchange

Jn.6
26Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

27Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

30They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

31Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

32Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

33For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

34Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

35And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Jesus is taking the IDEA of bread or real hunger and thirst and transfering the meaning to the spiritual realm. In other words showing the people that followed Him, were following for the wrong reasons. That instead of following Him to satisfy their physical hunger, they should be following to satisfy a spiritual “hunger and thirst”. Do you think that this is a fair appraisal?

AGAIN, you’re stopping at verse 35. Richard - you have to take ALL of what Jesus says in John 6 in CONTEXT.

READ my response to you in post 157.

 

[rbarcia]

Fly, I was just wondering: how do you reconcile the once for all sacrifice of Christ on the cross (which all catholics believe) - with the prophecy of Jeremiah 33:18, that says the levitical priests shall offer sacrifice forever? The Catholic Church teaching that Jesus’ sacrifice is made present (not repeated) in the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Church seems the only way to reconcile them.

This is talking of a future date, given that righteousness and justice on the earth is not being executed.

Jeremiah 33

14’Behold, days are coming,’ declares the LORD, 'when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah.

15’In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth.

16’In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will dwell in safety; and this is the name by which she will be called: the LORD is our righteousness.’

17"For thus says the LORD, 'David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel;

18and the Levitical priests shall never lack a man before Me to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to prepare sacrifices continually.’"

19The word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying,

20"Thus says the LORD, 'If you can break My covenant for the day and My covenant for the night, so that day and night will not be at their appointed time,

21then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant so that he will not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, My ministers.

And Jesus is in the Order of Melchizedek as per Hebrews 5 (not Lev)

and the daily sacrifice is not longer needed: (Hebrews 10)

9then He said, “BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

10By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11**Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;
**
12but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

13waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET.

14**For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. **

The sacrifice Christians offer now are worship and praise, not some reshowing or whatever you call it of Jesus dying on the cross outside of time.

Hebrews 13:

14For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come. 15 Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, **the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. **

 

[elvisman]

Catholic priests are Levitical priests?

They are the** FULFILLMENT**** of the Levitical or Ministerial Priesthood.**

---

In the Old Testament, there were three levels of Priests: Aaron, the High Priest, the Levitical Priesthood, and the rest of the people were a general priesthood of believers.

**In the New Testament, there are ****also three levels of Priests: Jesus, our High Priest (1 Tim. 2:5, Heb. 7:22-25), the Ministerial/Levitical Priests (James 5:14-15) and the general priesthood of all Christians (1 Peter 2:5-9).

Just as with all New Testament fulfillments, the fulfillment isalways*** ***more glorious and perfect than the Old Testament type.

---

In** 2 Cor. 2:10****, Paul tells speaks of the ministerial priesthood and the ministry of Reconciliation when he writes: “Whomever you forgive anything, so do I. For indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything,***** I have forgiven for you****** in the presence of Christ.”***

Three chapters later he further illustrates this priestly power in** 2 Cor. 5:18-20****:* “And all this is from God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ and given us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting their trespasses against them and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. So we* are ambassadors for Christ, as if God were appealing through us*. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”***

Finally, in the Epistle of** Jude****, we read the warning about those who would ****usurp **Church Authority by assuming the ministerial priesthood without the Church’s consent (Jude 1:11). In this passage he compares them to the rebellion of Korah and their subsequent punishment (Numbers 16:1-35; 31:16).

 

[BYUChemAlum]

They are the** FULFILLMENT**** of the Levitical or Ministerial** Priesthood.

So since Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, they are Levites/Levitical priests? Does the Catholic Church teach that her priests are Levites?

 

[elvisman]

So since Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, they are Levites/Levitical priests? Does the Catholic Church teach that her priests are Levites?

Wrong interpretation.
They are the FULFILLMENT of the Levitical Priesthood - NOT a replica.
Just as Jesus is the fulfillment of Adam, Moses, David, et al - the New Covenant Priest is a fulfillment of the OT Levitical Priest.

The Levitical Priesthood was Ministerial in nature - so is the Priesthood of the NEW Covenant. As I pointed out - there are three levels of Priesthood in the OT and the NT.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Wrong interpretation.
They are the FULFILLMENT of the Levitical Priesthood - NOT a replica.
Just as Jesus is the fulfillment of Adam, Moses, David, et al - the New Covenant Priest is a fulfillment of the OT Levitical Priest.

The Levitical Priesthood was Ministerial in nature - so is the Priesthood of the NEW Covenant. As I pointed out - there are three levels of Priesthood in the OT and the NT.

Right, so Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, however they themselves are not Levites/the Levitical Priesthood. The verse in question states that Levites ('priests of Levi" in the NAB) will offer burnt offerings and continuous sacrifices, so since Catholic priests are not priests of Levi/Levites, this verse could not be foreshadowing the Catholic priesthood.

 

[Nicea325]

Context, Richard . . . CONTEXT.

Jesus hadn’t spelled it out yet in verse 35.
It wasn’t until verse 50 that he begins to speak more explicitly.

The usual Greek word used for human eating is “phagon**”, however, this is not the word used in these later passages. St. John uses the word, “trogon”, which means, to munch or to gnaw - like an animal. Jesus was again using hyperbole as he often did to drive his point across so that the crowd would understand that he was not speaking metaphorically. He** meant** what he said.
Just as the Paschal Lamb was to be eaten, it is also true for the Lamb of God.

In verse 60, his disciples said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” *
Did Jesus explain what he "really" meant? NO - he said: “Does this shock you?” *He knew that some would not believe because they didn’t have true faith from the Father he spoke of in verse 65.

Vers 66 marks the only time in ALL of Scripture where Jesus followers left him for doctrinal reasons. Tell me - why didn’t Jesus explain this as a symbol - if it really WAS a symbol?

Exactly! If the Eucharist was merely a symbol,then why didn’t just say it from the beginning or clarify it after his teaching? Why would he deceive them into thinking something totally different? Just does not add up.

 

[Nicea325]

Right, so Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, however they themselves are not Levites/the Levitical Priesthood. The verse in question states that Levites ('priests of Levi" in the NAB) will offer burnt offerings and continuous sacrifices, so since Catholic priests are not priests of Levi/Levites, this verse could not be foreshadowing the Catholic priesthood.

U-huh? Come again? Is circumcision a foreshadowing of baptism?

 

[joe370]

Right, so Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, however they themselves are not Levites/the Levitical Priesthood. The verse in question states that Levites ('priests of Levi" in the NAB) will offer burnt offerings and continuous sacrifices, so since Catholic priests are not priests of Levi/Levites, this verse could not be foreshadowing the Catholic priesthood.

We all know that Jesus is the rightous branch:

“'In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David’s line; he will do what is just and right in the land. In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety. This is the name by which it will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness.”

We know that Jesus fulfills this by sitting on David’s throne forever as the one priest as the CCC teaches so where does Jesus’ priesthood via the new covenant ( promised by God) - stand before God continually presenting sacrifices - today?

*“For this is what the LORD says: 'David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, nor will the priests, who are Levites, ever fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices.”
*

Jesus is the Davidic King reigning on God’s throne under the new covenant established at Jesus’ last supper; God promised to make the descendants of David His servant and the Levites who minister before Him as countless as the stars of the sky and as measureless as the sand on the seashore; 'where is this new covenant priesthood ministering before God?

"If you can break my covenant with the day and my covenant with the night, so that day and night no longer come at their appointed time, then my covenant with David my servant – and my covenant with the Levites who are priests ministering before me – can be broken and David will no longer have a descendant to reign on his throne. I will make the descendants of David my servant and the Levites who minister before me as countless as the stars of the sky and as measureless as the sand on the seashore.’ "

If it’s not a foreshadowing of Jesus’ new covenant priesthood then of what is it a foreshadowing? Whatever you believe is meant surely a righteous Branch (Davidic King) - must first sprout from David’s line?

 

[elvisman]

Right, so Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, however they themselves are not Levites/the Levitical Priesthood. The verse in question states that Levites ('priests of Levi" in the NAB) will offer burnt offerings and continuous sacrifices, so since Catholic priests are not priests of Levi/Levites, this verse could not be foreshadowing the Catholic priesthood.

Christians do NOT offer burnt sacrifices and holocausts. The sacrifice of bulls, goats and lambs had been replaced by the ultimate and eternal sacrifice of the Lamb of God which is re-presented at every mass.**

Jeremiah is using poetic and symbolic language here - not to be taken in a wooden, literal sense.

 

[joe370]

Exactly! If the Eucharist was merely a symbol,then why didn’t just say it from the beginning or clarify it after his teaching? Why would he deceive them into thinking something totally different? Just does not add up.

If Jesus was speaking in metaphor, all Jesus had to do was clear things up like He did when discussing the leaven of the pharisees. What would that say about our Savior if our Savior was speaking symbolically in John 6and still let the grumblers walk away?

 

[joe370]

Christians do NOT** offer burnt sacrifices and holocausts. The sacrifice of bulls, goats and lambs had been replaced by the ultimate and eternal sacrifice of the Lamb of God which is re-presented at every mass.

**Jeremiah is using poetic and **symbolic language here - not to be taken in a wooden, literal sense.

Exactly!!! I believe that BYUChemAlum is assuming that this particular priesthood that will never fail to have a man stand before God - must be directly from the tribe of Levi, via a direct lineage from father to son, as per the old covenant, which ceased to exist so long ago.

"Consequently, when Christ came into the world, He said, 'Sacrifices and offerings thou hast not desired, but a body thou hast prepared for me. In burnt offerings and sin offerings thou hast taken no pleasure.’ Then I said, ‘Lo, I have come to do thy will, oh God, as it is written of me in the roll of the book.’"

 

[Nicea325]

If Jesus was speaking in metaphor, all Jesus had to do was clear things up like He did when discussing the leaven of the pharisees. What would that say about our Savior if our Savior was speaking symbolically in John 6and still let the grumblers walk away?

I agree Joe. Better yet, Jesus clearly says This IS my body…my blood. Never says this represents or is a symbol of my body/blood. More important, whenever God declares something it happens and He means what He means. Did not God say: Let there be light,so on and so on and so on? It ALL happened,so if Jesus said This IS My body,then it is His body, unless He second guessed Himself or simply is pulling our leg? Furthermore, people who deny the Real Presence in a sense are deny God’s omnipotent power. If they believe Jesus is God the creator and Almighty who incarnated,died and resurrected,then why He cant’ he be truly present 100% Body,Blood,Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist? hmmm?

 

[PJM]

=BYUChemAlum;7632965]Right, so Catholic priests are the fulfillment of the Levitical Priesthood, however they themselves are not Levites/the Levitical Priesthood. The verse in question states that Levites ('priests of Levi" in the NAB) will offer burnt offerings and continuous sacrifices, so since Catholic priests are not priests of Levi/Levites, this verse could not be foreshadowing the Catholic priesthood.

FOLKS this conversation is both off track and not revelent to the Eucharist

Under the **Old Covennat **the priest DID NOT cooperate in making God present; UNDERthe NEW Covenant; Gus uses His Priest to Make Himself Really and truly Present.

Heb. 8: 13 “ In speaking of a new covenant he treats the first as obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

**1 Cor. 11: 23 “**For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for * you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

**Heb. 8: 6 **“But as it is, Christ * has obtained a ministry which is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second.

2 Cor. 3:12-16 “Since we have such a hope, we are very bold, not like Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not see the end of the fading splendor. But their minds were hardened; for to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds; but when a man turns to the Lord the veil is removed. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.”

God Bless,
Patrick

 

[Dokimas]

Exactly! If the Eucharist was merely a symbol,then why didn’t just say it from the beginning or clarify it after his teaching? Why would he deceive them into thinking something totally different? Just does not add up.

Good day, Nicea. Hope all is well with you and yours. God bless.

The same question could be asked about ‘cutting off a hand’ and ‘plucking out an eye’.

Jesus did not deceive. He sure knew He’d be misunderstood.

His disciples misunderstood but they knew tha He have the Words of eternal life. They trusted Him even though they did not fully understand.

Those who were following for the wrong reasons thought Jesus meant it literally. They couldn’t handle it so they left. The wrong type of followers were ‘weeded’ out.

At least that’s how I see it.

 

[mississippiwild]

Hold on there, if the Jewish Synagogue was the first Church it would have the O.T and the N.T correct? The first Church was started by Christ because it is through Christ that gives the CC life. The CC is the living Church being led by the Holy Spirit and saving us by the gift of God’s grace through the sacraments. Now my question is how could the Jewish synagogue save you without the Sacraments? So I have to say that the honor of the First Church that was started by Christ being built on the faith of St Peter was for sure not a Jewish Synagogue but for sure the CC.

It is through the Jewish believers that we have the Old Testament…

It is also through the Jewish believers that we have the New Testament…

Jesus himself was a Jew…

A Jew I met in the hospital in Georgia convinced me that the Roman Catholic Church was the best Christian Church she had attended

The Jews met in the Temple in Jerusalem Centuries before Jesus was born

No, they don’t have the Sacraments, that statement is true enough. But they had the sacrifices that pointed to Jesus the Messiah to come that would form the Christian Church. And the Priests offered the Lambs in sacrifice for sins prepatory toward his coming and confessed all the sins of the children of Israel over them, and then sacrificed them. It was a lamb without spot or blemish, kind of like Jesus, eh And , It was the Lord God who blessed the Temple (Lord Jehovah-NT Jesus!) If it wasn’t for the Jews being called out to form their own nation based upon his law, we would still be waiting for the Messiah today. So, the Jews were God’s people way before the Christians were. Yes, thank God for the Catholic Church. I was simply pointing out that the Jews existed before the Christians!!!

Tommy