The idea of the Real Presence makes my Christian dad very uncomfortable

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
po18guy said:
The old “cannibalism” canard is a kneejerk reaction, and an immature if not childish one at that. Cannibalism is the killing and taking for one’s own pleasure. We neither kill not take. We are commanded by Christ to receive what was willingly given for us and it is God Who is pleased .
Click to expand...
Yes, the “cannibalism” charge is really silly. Do we claim to be eating the dead flesh of Christ? No, and to claim that would be heresy. Do we claim that Jesus is diminished or harmed in any way in the Eucharist? No, and to claim that would be heresy. Does it even make sense to speak of “cannibalism” in regards to risen, glorified bodies? No, it doesn’t. Is a baby engaged in “cannibalism” when its mother feeds it? That truly would make all of us infant cannibals. Or is that mother-child bond, strengthened through the mother offering of herself as food for her needy and helpless child, not one of the strongest and most beautiful bonds in all of the human condition?
 
That’s well said. It’s a foretaste of the communion the blessed will enjoy after the last resurrection, far above any kind of intimacy anyone can enjoy in our limited mortal lives (we are not naturally capable of it). As St. Paul wrote, we see only a shadow through a dim mirror. It’s foolish nonsense to anyone who does not have certain faith that Christ is, in fact, God, incarnate. For those who do believe, it’s the ultimate hope.
 
Last edited:
You and your dad are in good company, the people who actually walked with Jesus were SHOCKED when He revealed this to them. John chapter 6, many of them left Jesus and followed Him no more because they could not understand this teaching.

Notice, Jesus did not say “hey, come back, realize I am not speaking literally here, this is just figurative!!!”. No, Jesus let them leave if they could not accept the Real Presence.
 
Also, cannibalism is consuming dead human flesh. Christ is alive.
 
To me it goes back to the Passover. The lamb or goat, 1 year old without blemish, is roasted and put on the table. The blood was smeared on the doorpost and lentil. Finally the Jews had to take the lamb and eat it!

When Jesus said you have to eat my flesh and drink my blood, many could not accept it and turned away. Jesus did not say come back I was only speaking figuratively!

Jesus is the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

Now no one could be convicted of eating human flesh after communion. If the bread and wine are tested, the test wold show it is bread and wine.
But things are not always what the seem. Jesus said this I My body. Jesus doesn’t lie!

It takes faith to believe. Without faith it makes no sense!
 
That is a very helpful reminder. I think that’s part of what can make it so uncomfortable, the idea that we’re hurting Jesus (which ‘gnawing’ can imply). But the way you describe it, it’s much more of a peaceful, graceful process…Thanks so much for sharing 🙂
 
Your point makes a lot of sense, especially about the denial of the Real Presence basically beginning with the reformation. That is definitely a huge reason I feel drawn intellectually to the idea.

However, I have a question about the verse you quoted…I have trouble believing that verse is about the Real Presence because of the “unless” clause; I know so many people whose lives have been transformed by encounters with Christ. These people have new hearts, seemingly so full of life…they’ve repented and now love God and love people in a whole new way. However, they’re non-Catholic Christian.

So how could that verse be about the Real Presence, when these people aren’t Catholic yet so seemingly have new life? Or was Jesus just speaking hyperbolic-ly, since the Eucharist is the usual way of recieving life?

This question is actually a really big obstacle for me toward becoming Catholic. I’d greatly appreciate any insight you can offer. Thank you!
 
Hope7 said:
These people have new hearts, seemingly so full of life…they’ve repented and now love God and love people in a whole new way. However, they’re non-Catholic Christian.
Click to expand...
Have they come to the knowledge of the Eucharist and rejected it?

There are people who never even consider the Real Presence. One cannot reject what one has not considered.

ETA

Scripture talks about those who have known the truth and then rejected it being worse off than those who never knew the truth.
 
Last edited:
Thank so much for your advice! I have heard of the New Convenant idea, but I will have to look more into it.

Also, that’s an incredible testimony you shared about recognizing Jesus in the Eucharist! My dad has not attended mass with me (I don’t go regularly–at least yet–either), but hopefully someday he will.

Thanks again & God bless
 
That’s a really compelling idea, that the concept of God becoming man would probably be uncomfortable as well if we hadn’t heard it before.

The more I reflect on it the more I see the parallels; (before Christ) people viewed God as far above and beyond us and our realm, and then He came down to join us as a humble Jewish man from Galilee. Certainly the Eucharist is even more humble, and even more startling yet intimate, if it is true…which I’m really beginning to believe it is.

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. God bless 🙂
 
A few of them have, I think, but many of them haven’t.

For example, I befriend a lovely lady at my church to whom I mentioned my interest in Catholicism. She then told me that when she was my age, she felt called to be a nun, but then decided she felt God’s calling to my current church (which is a non-denominational church). She is still a Christian, and my current church really seems so Spirit-filled and Christ-centered…I just have an incredibly hard time believing that she’s in such a ‘damned’ position. What am I to make of this?
 
Here is one more thought for your dad. Jesus was born in the town of Bethlehem (“House of Bread”), in a manger, a feeding trough. On the very day he was born the symbolism was clear that he was to become food for the world.
 
Last edited:
Bible or Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christianity is a belief and emotion-based system. It is a system which preaches benefits and not sacrifice. From it comes the so-called “prosperity Gospel.” I view it like a hot-air balloon which needs constant feeding to stay aloft. For this reason, preachers shout, gesticulate, strut, and basically animate their words to maintain interest. The laity, their congregants, are waving their arms, singing and praising God.

All well and good. But when the “service” is over, it all fades and the pressures of life strip them of the emotion which they had built up. When they suffer, they may be confused, as suffering is not generally preached, since they perceive no benefit from it.

Such a thing as contemplative prayer, or Christian mysticism is either absolutely foreign to them, or is anathema to their theology. Their theology is a river which is a mile wide but only an inch deep.

If they all agreed, it would merit much more consideration than it does. As it is, they all disagree on many things and the biblical test for truth or falsity is whether or not witnesses agree or disagree.
 
Hope, did you say you became a believer in the “Real Presence”?
 
JimG said:
He is whole and entire in each particle of the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
If Jesus is whole and entire in the Precious Bread alone, which includes both Body and Blood, why is it necessary to have a separate Consecration of the Wine? Why did Jesus consecrate both the Bread and the Wine?
 
Last edited:
That occurred to me also-about cannibalism. It’s maybe one of two literal ways that Jesus meant , “This is my body…”. The other literal way is that Jesus transformed Himself to edible ways we could receive Him.
 
Each of the Sacraments as established by our Lord has both a spiritual as well as a physical aspect.
(incomplete examples)
1.Baptism: water and the Spirit.
2. Confirmation: the laying on of hands, prayer and the presence of the Holy Spirit.
3. Eucharist: receiving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ via transubstantiaion of bread and wine - which we consume.
4. Holy Orders in which the candidate/seminarian/transitional Deacons prostrate themselves, then place their hands between the Bishop’s hands, promising obedience and receive power to consecrate the Eucharist, over sin, and other graces.
5. Anointing of the sick: in which the infirmed is anointed with oil, hands are laid on in prayer, their soul is healed, and in some cases, physical or mental healing occur and sins are forgiven.
6. Matrimony: in which a spiritual as well as physical union is created.
7. Reconciliation: wherein sins are forgiven through the power of spoken confession and spoken absolution which spiritually clenses the soul, as well as occasional laying on of hands.

Many are convinced by modern arguments that it must be either strictly physical or strictly spiritual, but that has never been the case. It has always been both this as well as that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top