cont…2
The Eucharist-SOURCE AND SUMMIT OF ECCLESIAL LIFE
The belief in the “Real Presence” is usually the focus of attack by Fundamentalists on the Catholic Faith.
- The opponents of Church recognize what Catholicism’s core devotional doctrine is.
- The attempts to show that Fundamentalists are not always literalists. (As seen in their interpretation of the 2nd half of John Chapter 6.
Jn 6:30-31It
begins with a discussion which took place in the synagogue at Caphanaum. The Jews ask Jesus what sign he could perform and as a challenge, said that their forefathers had manna in the desert. – Could he beat that?
Jn 6:32-34
Jesus explained to them that the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. So they ask Jesus to give them this bread instead.
Jn 6:35-42
Jesus replied, “I am the bread of life…” At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically
TAKING JESUS AT HIS WORD
Jn 6:43-51
Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: “ 51. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."
Jn 6:52
The Jews, with a “show-me” kind of attitude, asked, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” – His listeners were dazed because they now understood Jesus literally – and correctly.
Jn 6:53Jesus repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis.
Jn 6:54-57
Jesus then introduced the statement about drinking His blood.
NO CORRECTIONS NEEDED – THERE WERE NO “MISUNDERSTANDINGS”
Jn 6:58-59
Notice that Jesus did not make any attempt to soften what he said. He did not attempt to correct “misunderstandings”, for there were none. His listeners understood him perfectly well.
They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically. If they had, if they mistook what he said, why no correction?
On other occasions whenever there was confusion, Jesus explained just what he meant. (e.g. Nicodemus: about being born again ; The Samaritan woman at the well: about living waters; Lazarus: not ‘asleep’ but is ‘dead’.) Here, when misunderstanding would be fatal, there was no effort to correct. Instead, he repeated himself.
Jn 6:60
We read that many of his disciples cannot accept Jesus at His word!
Jn 6:61-63
Mind you, these were his disciples – the people who were used to his remarkable ways. He warned them not to think carnally, but spiritually
Jn 6:64-65
He knew that some did not believe, including the one who was to betray him. (It is here, in the rejection of the Eucharist, that Judas fell away.)
Jn 6:66
Resulting from their disbelief, even many of his disciples left, and they did not follow Jesus any longer.
Jn 6:67-71
This is the only record we have of any of Jesus’ followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in literal sense, why didn’t Jesus call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained had he told them that “eating his Body and drinking his Blood” meant no more than a figure or a token. But Jesus did not correct these first protesters – Jesus meant literally what he said.
Jesus said several times that he was the bread that came down from heaven; and specifically 4 times he said they would have “to eat my flesh and drink my blood (cf Jn 6:53-56)
John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper – and it was a promise that could not be more explicit. Or so it would seem to a Roman Catholic – But fundamentalists would interpret this differently.
cont…3
- out of nothing) (Humanity “Invents”, cannot “create”)