They’re talking out of both sides of their mouth.
It is and it isn’t at the same time and the reason we don’t understand it is because it’s a *mystery* of the faith, which is the excuse they use for everything that contradicts Scripture and common sense.
It's a trip, isn't it MM? I will tell you what a trip is. Two of my best friends, among others, are catholics. They know where I stand, and I know where they stand, but we stay friends, by not talking about it. If they want to know the truth, they can get it from Martin Luther (joke) or from me.
:-)
The only Christ is the one who has come in the flesh, (1 John 4:2) and yet has a body of flesh and bones, (Luke 24:39) and appears thusly (John 20:27), and i believe His resurrected body that He presented to Thomas for examination as proof would would taste and test as being physical, outside of visions and His Spirit.
Thus to claim to consume Christ, the "actual partaking of Christ" "with His bodily organs and limbs," "the true and proper and lifegiving flesh and blood of Jesus Christ," but who is not manifest as come in the flesh, as the incarnated Christ, but who appears to be something he is not, that "in all ways appears to be what it isn’t," that being inanimate objects, is essentially "another Jesus" in contrast to how He is defined in Scripture.
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. (2 Corinthians 11:3-4)
Moreover, in every other miracle which the Lord did that changed something material then there was a actual and often obvious change. Water really become wine (which only existed in that location), versus a change of substance while the appearances remained the same, and so the body of Christ could be sitting at a table before them while being in the stomachs of the disciples.
The closest thing to a tangible manifestation of Christ is His born again church, the household of faith, into which the Spirit baptizes every convert, (1Co. 12:13) thus Saul persecuted Christ by persecuting the church, which is the only material entity called the "body of Christ" in the church epistles,(1 Corinthians 12:27; Ephesians 4:12) which reveal how they understood the gospels, and only describe the Lord's supper in tow of them (1 Corinthians 10,11; Jude 1:12)
And which body is what the Corinthians were charged with not discerning in 1 Corinthians 11, by selfishly eating independently, even to the full (for in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken), while ignoring other blood-bought saints who thus went hungry, and which thus was to "shame them that have not." (1Cor. 11:20-22,26)
But like as God had mercy on Saul who was highly committed to God but did not recognize Christ "come in the flesh" (1Jn. 4:2) as being God manifest in the flesh, and thus in "good" but misinformed conscience thought he was obeying God by vigorously persecuting the "sect of the Nazarene," then God can have mercy on devout Catholics who in misinformed conscience imagine they are honoring God by consuming a wafer and wine as being "the true and proper and lifegiving flesh and blood of Jesus Christ" in a supernatural mode. Or even if they do not comprehend or believe that, but think they are .honoring God by taking part in this ceremony.
However, the larger problem is that many see this as salvific, and thus some invoke John 6:53 to use, though they are stymied when shown the logical conclusion of their argument is contrary to modern Catholic theology.