Replies

51 -- I am the living bread that came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. 52 -- The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 53 -- Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54 -- Whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 -- For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. . . . 60 -- Many therefore of his disciiples, when they heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can bear it?

In these passages, Jesus is speaking of doing something that is both necessary and sufficient for salvation, would you agree? Catholics claim it is the physical eating of His flesh and drinking His blood in the form of the Eucharist. The problem is, the Catholic church does not teach that taking the Eucharist is either necessary nor sufficient for salvation. For example, the Church clearly teaches that Protestants and other non-Catholics can be saved. How is this the case, when they have not taken the Eucharist?

The problem is, the Catholic church does not teach that taking the Eucharist is either necessary nor sufficient for salvation.

It's Christ's Sacrifice on Calvary that's "necessary and sufficient" for salvation. The Mass and Eucharist are the continuing offering of that eternal Sacrifice and the normal means (to a Catholic, the best means) of partaking in it. Beyond that, the very existence of the Eucharist is a means of grace for the good of the whole world.

To treat individual Scriptural verses in isolation can be fruitful, but it also can tend to a flat and clinical form of interpretation, devoid of depth and resonance and mystery. Surely, the inexhaustible richness of Scripture deserves better. I do recall from a grad school course in 17th century English that the "proof text" had run its course, its limitations having become only too apparent to all sides. You'd never know that on FR, though! ;-)