Did the bread and wine become the literal flesh and blood of Jesus at the Last Supper when Christ instituted it with His disciples and did they eat it as the actual literal flesh and blood as the Catholic church teaches?
Did Christ eat and drink His own body and blood in violation of the OT Law that forbade it?
The bread and wine became the consecrated host. Whether this is what you mean by “the literal flesh and blood of Jesus” I have no way of knowing. If it is the same, yes; if not, no.
I haven’t checked specifically whether Jesus also partook or only offered to His disciples; you may wish to do so, I don’t see it as more than a curiousity. And I haven’t pondered what it would mean if the Divine partook of Communion with the Divine. It’s like a square circle kind of question to me.
Underneath all your questions is a profound lack of understanding about the Holy Eucharist and the Divine in general. A very materialistic view reminiscent of the charges against early Christians who had to hide away in catacombs to celebrate the Eucharist. It helps me understand them better and I thank you for that. I’m also extremely grateful that here today for me the defense of the faith in Christ’s institution of the sacrament only requires answering verbal charges on the internet secure in my home.
You are the first I’ve seen level the same type of charge against Jesus Christ in regards to the Holy Eucharist though.
So while there is nothing new in today’s heresies and charges that the Church did not see in its early history, I recognize your creativity. I believe our Orthodox brothers would say “only in the West...”
:)