I never claimed it was.
I care far less about what man - or any group thereof - think than I do for what the Scriptures say.
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. (John 6:54)
From the article I posted a link to previously: http://www.the-highway.com/eucharist_Webster.html
When Jesus refers to himself as the bread of life and says that men must eat his flesh and drink his blood, he makes it clear that his words were to be interpreted spiritually and figuratively: The flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life (John 6:63). This discourse could not refer to the Lords Supper for Christ had not instituted that ordinance at the time he gave this teaching. He is not speaking here of the eucharist, but of his sacrifice on Calvary. The whole discourse of John 6 is a presentation of Jesus as the atoning sacrifice for the sin of the world in the giving of his flesh and blood, and how men are to appropriate the benefits of that sacrifice. It is those who believe who experience the benefits of his work, and so when he likens faith to eating his flesh and drinking his blood he is explaining the nature of saving faith as the appropriation of his person into the believers heart. The Son of God would have us understand that saving faith is much more than mere intellectual assent to truth. As John Calvin pointed out:
We are quickened by the true partaking of him; and he has therefore designated this partaking by the words eating and drinking, in order that no one should think that the life that we receive from him is received by mere knowledge. As it is not the seeing but the eating of bread that suffices to feed the body, so the soul must truly and deeply become partaker of Christ that it may be quickened to spiritual life by his power . . . In this way, the Lord intended, by calling himself the bread of life (John 6:51), to teach not only that salvation for us rests on faith in his death and resurrection, but also that, by true partaking of him, his life passes into us and is made ours just as bread when taken as food imparts vigour to the body.34
Christ often used very vivid language to impress spiritual truth upon mens minds. When speaking with Nicodemus he tells him that he must be born again. He refers to himself as a vine and believers as branches. These references are obviously not to be taken in a literal sense. Again, in Matthew 5:29-30 Jesus says:
And if your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out, and throw it from you; for it is better for you that one of the parts of your body perish, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off, and throw it from you; for it is better for you that one of the parts of your body perish, than for your whole body to go into hell.
Christ is obviously using starkly realistic language to convey an important spiritual truth: the necessity for radical repentance from sin. He speaks in physical terms but we are not meant to take his words in a literal, physical sense. Precisely the same is true with his teaching in John 6 and his words at the institution of the Lords Supper. To interpret all his words in those passages literally would adopt an interpretation which directly contradicts the teaching of Scripture.
You like that verse, eh??? Your entire religion is built on that one verse...You care to show us the verse that gives your priests the authority and ability to turn wafers and wine into Jesus' flesh and blood???