Catholics do not do any of this in the Eucharist. [The twisted apologist just defined the aspects of classic cannibalism, done in such a way as to exclude the catholic practice of same in their magic rite] Though Christ is substantially present—body, blood, soul and divinity—in the Eucharist, the accidents of bread and wine remain.
Christ is present, body, blood, soul and divinity, to be cannibalized! I mean, the magic priest brings the Christ down to the cannibalizing 'substantially present', BUT, and this is a corker, the 'accidents' of bread and wine remain.
Mumbo jumbo rickety racks, catholic magic is on their backs. This astonishing 'magic' is what is taught to sincere people who genuinely seek The Lord. Well some, anyway. The devout catholic is unable to see the absolute pagan magic the catholic church is trying to invoke!
And we have sincere catholics on these threads insisting that the circle of reasoning the catholic church has drummed into their confused heads is able to ingest the Life of God into them! I mean, if that is not the epitome of the magic mystery cults ... Ask them where is the blood and flesh at Pentecost or in the house of Cornelius and they scurry after anything else to excuse not thinking past the magic they have been indoctrinated with.
Jesus sat at Passover with His disciples, taking the cups of wine and the unleavened bread IN REMEBRANCE of the Passover of their History.
The first cup of wine was to remember the coming out of Egypt.
The second cup of wine was to remember to get Egypt out of them.
The third cup ... well, for the catholics who remain clueless, the third cup was to be mixed with warm water ... and what came from Jesus's side when the soldier pierced Him with the spear? Blood mixed with water! Still warm from His recent death. BUT the Passover cup was never filled with actual blood, for it was forbidden because the life of the animal is in the blood.
Had Jesus served blood at the Passover remembrance He would have violated the commandment of God begun all the way back in Genesis 9, even before the giving of the law, where it was re-emphasized with Leviticus 3:17.
Jesus had not yet sealed a new covenant with His own blood, so the lie that He could do this serving of His blood to the disciples is specious at best, demonic in the main.
The claim that one must literally eat the body and blood of Christ, that even a particle of the consecrated wafer is held to wholly contain Christ, (CCC #1377) and is "able to sanctify thousands of thousands and is sufficient to afford life to those who eat of it,” (St. Ephrem, Hymni et sermons, IV, 4) is a result of attempting to apply Jn. 6:53 to the Lord's Supper under a literal hermenuetic.
In both cases Caths boast of going by the plain literal meaning of the text, but which would mean that eating what the Lord said is "my body which is broken for you" (1Cor. 11:24) "my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world," (Jn. 6:51) actualy was that bloody body, not something that somehow had its essence changed so that it looked, tasted, behaved like bread/wine but really was flesh and blood under the appearence of bread and wine, with bread alone also being flesh and blood. And so that the Lord could digest like bread and wine while yet sitting before them.
Likewise, if Caths are to be consistent with Jn. 6:53 being literal, and with the absolute unequivocal imperitive nature of other "verily, verily" statement, then they must hold that none of those who deny the Cath "real presence" are born again, and can have eternal life.
But they cannot, unless they are one of the sects that constitutes Catholicism.