The Real Presence, Poetic or Literal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Everyman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Everyman

Guest
Another hang-up preventing me from being sure about Catholicsm:

When I look at the verses that are usually pointed to as proof for substantiation, I have a hard time seeing literal meaning there. For instance, when Christ says, “I am the Bread of Life, anyone who eats Me has eternal life” His first listeners thought he meant they had to eat Him. He then corrected them and repeated the phrase. This was clearly His use of poetic language.

When Christ says “This is my body, this is my blood” why should I think this is literal? It sounds so much like the statement above, with a deeper poetic meaning behind it.

I hope some one can prove me wrong because this scares me. I want so badly to become Catholic, yet if these passages are to be taken poetically, then true idolatry is taking place when the Host is adored.

The Church Fathers are not a great help either because their language sounds very similar to Scripture. This ambiguity leads me to wonder if they are understanding the issue poetically.

Well, any help will be appreciated.

-Everyman
 
Everyman,

Have you studied the way in which the mass completes Passover? That may help, too, so I thought I’d ask…
 
Probably not as in depth as I should. Any suggestions on how to do that?

-Everyman
 
You might try reading “The Lamb’s Supper” by Dr.Hahn, if you have acess to it. As far as other online stuff, I’ll have to look some up and get back to you :). I just didn’t want to go to allt he work if you had already looked into it!
 
40.png
Everyman:
Another hang-up preventing me from being sure about Catholicsm:

When I look at the verses that are usually pointed to as proof for substantiation, I have a hard time seeing literal meaning there. For instance, when Christ says, “I am the Bread of Life, anyone who eats Me has eternal life” His first listeners thought he meant they had to eat Him. He then corrected them and repeated the phrase. This was clearly His use of poetic language.

When Christ says “This is my body, this is my blood” why should I think this is literal? It sounds so much like the statement above, with a deeper poetic meaning behind it.

I hope some one can prove me wrong because this scares me. I want so badly to become Catholic, yet if these passages are to be taken poetically, then true idolatry is taking place when the Host is adored.

The Church Fathers are not a great help either because their language sounds very similar to Scripture. This ambiguity leads me to wonder if they are understanding the issue poetically.

Well, any help will be appreciated.

-Everyman
Click to expand...
We receive Jesus completely in the Sacrement of the Holy Eucharist. He is realy present there.Jesus’ listeners understood his meaning to be literal that is why they said it was a hard saying and left Jesus. If Jesus did not mean this literally why didn’t he call after his followers that were leaving him and say that he didn’t mean it, it was only a symbol?
Read all of John 6 and ask the Holy Spirit to help you understand that Jesus meant every thing he said literally.

JeanneH
 
Here is somewhere to start until someone who can explain better is able to respond :). This is over John specifically, it may nor may not be of help. This is more over the Mass, Communion, and the OT- it may really help understanding how we see this. And this one is along the same lines, but harder, imo, to read if you are new to the subject.
 
John 6:48 I am the bread of life.

6:49 Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead.

6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven.

6:52 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.

6:53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

6:54 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.

6:55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

6:56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

6:57 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him.

6:58 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.

6:59 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.

6:60 These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.

6:61 Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it?

6:62 But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?

Obviously those there took it literal, and Jesus never corrected His statement, like " hold on a minute you misunderstood me", so some walked away.​

dsanford.com/miraclehost/hostvideo.wmv
 
40.png
sententia:
Here is somewhere to start until someone who can explain better is able to respond :). This is over John specifically, it may nor may not be of help. This is more over the Mass, Communion, and the OT- it may really help understanding how we see this. And this one is along the same lines, but harder, imo, to read if you are new to the subject.
Click to expand...
Good links. 👍
 
He corrected them? Where? Chapter and verse, please.

As you see from the above posters, He was quite specific about His flesh being real food and His blood real drink. No corrections, no ifs, no ands, no buts.

This is very much a reformation doctrine. I still cannot understand how Jesus would have “let” His followers believe in the real presence for 1500 years, and then suddenly have them get this big “aha, silly us, it was symbolic all the time, what were we THINKING?” moment. It is not as though this were some itty bitty development, either. It is literally a matter of life and death–life to those who believe, and death to those who do not. Not that I am the one dealing out life or death either–it is JESUS who Himself tells us, “Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man and drink of His blood, YOU SHALL NOT HAVE LIFE WITHIN YOU”.
 
Thank you all who have responded so quickly and clearly.

You have all given me much to consider, some enlightening commentary on the Scripture as well as links to other sites I believe will be helpful.

I will keep you up-to-date on my search for the truth.

Thank you,
Everyman
 
When St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23ff warns the Corinthians against receiving the Eucharist unworthily, he does not seem to be taking the words of institution poetically.

Rather, he seems to be very serious about not receiving unworthily–even going so far as to say that unworthy receipt of communion is why some of them have gotten sick or died. “He who eats and drinks without recognizing the body, eats and drinks a jugdment on himself.” (1 Cor 11:29)

Essentially, I hold to this belief today because it has been the consistent and persistent belief of the Church from the time of the apostles to the present time.
 
40.png
Everyman:
When I look at the verses that are usually pointed to as proof for substantiation, I have a hard time seeing literal meaning there. For instance, when Christ says, “I am the Bread of Life, anyone who eats Me has eternal life” His first listeners thought he meant they had to eat Him. He then corrected them and repeated the phrase. This was clearly His use of poetic language.
Click to expand...
Ah, but “Bread of Life” *is *poetic, but it only makes the eat my flesh, drink my blood all the more real. Jesus is like real bread because Jesus’ flesh sustains us. Bread is the staple of your physical diet, Jesus is the staple of the diet of your soul. Jesus is *like *bread in that we eat him. I know this probably all sounds so weird, but let it sink in. Bread of Life is symbolic, *eat my flesh, drink my blood *is literal.
When Christ says “This is my body, this is my blood” why should I think this is literal? It sounds so much like the statement above, with a deeper poetic meaning behind it.
Click to expand...
As I explained above, Jesus is the Bread of Life, just as Jesus is the Lamb of God. Is Jesus really a lamb? No, but he is just like a lamb. Just like the lamb, Jesus was spotless and blameless. Just like that lamb, Jesus was sacrificed for our sins. And-- get ready for this-- just like the lamb at the passover meal, we are commanded to eat the lamb. At passover they ate the lamb. At the institution of the Eucharist as the seder meal, Jesus commanded us to eat the Lamb of God, himself. See how this all ties together so beautifully?
I hope some one can prove me wrong because this scares me. I want so badly to become Catholic, yet if these passages are to be taken poetically, then true idolatry is taking place when the Host is adored.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But the doctrine of the real presence really is quite well supported. Don’t worry, you’ll get it.

Here are my favorite links:

The Real Presence in Scripture.

The Early Christians Believed in the Real Presence.

By the way, the people here recommended to you Scott Hahn’s “the Lamb’s Supper.” Sounds delightful, but if you want, you can listen to shows he did on EWTN on these same subjects, for free, right over here. Just start listening to them in order. 😉

I also seem to have this link, which might be helpful.
 
You can’t hold up a piece of bread and say “this is my body” and be taken seriously…unless of course it’s true. Or “unless you eat my flesh”…believing and understanding are two different things. God woulden’t punish you for believing this if it weren’t true, but if it is true, if you are truly recieving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, how much greater will your depth of faith be?? Try it, and you will indeed see.
 
Actually, if Christ said it’s His Body, it can be poetic, but it also has to be true. Christ is God, and as such, he is incapable of telling a lie.

When, in Genesis, God said “Let there be light” there was light, for by his words, things happen.

But others have also shared the more common answers and I highly recommend reading Scott Hahn’s book. He’s an excellent author.

CARose
 
40.png
Everyman:
Another hang-up preventing me from being sure about Catholicsm:

When I look at the verses that are usually pointed to as proof for substantiation, I have a hard time seeing literal meaning there. For instance, when Christ says, “I am the Bread of Life, anyone who eats Me has eternal life” His first listeners thought he meant they had to eat Him. He then corrected them and repeated the phraseThis was clearly His use of poetic language.

-Everyman
Click to expand...
Aha! Ask yourself why the listeners thought Jesus meant they had to eat him, literally. Read again John 6:52-56. Did Jesus really correct them when he said, “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.” That to me sounds like “Yeah, you heard me. Eat my flesh and drink my blood.” Jesus only said over and over that his flesh is real food and his blood as real drink. Again, did Jesus really correct them, as you say?

Contrast this to Matthew 16:5-12, when Jesus warned his disciples about the leaven of the Pharisees. At first the disciples thought that He was taking about real bread but Jesus clarified that He was talking about the teachings of the Pharisees and Sadduccees.

At the “bread of life” discourse, the followers understood Jesus literally and Jesus only reaffirmed what He just said. It is a hard saying, but will you accept this truth or turn away from it? Peace 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top