The Eucharist: The Body of Christ? ("Respectful Dialogue" thread)

Our Sunday Visitor (via Catholic Culture) ^ | 1/2005 | Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D.

[markomalley]

The Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharist, the communion wafer and the altar wine are transformed and really become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Have you ever met anyone who has found this Catholic doctrine to be a bit hard to take?

If so, you shouldn't be surprised. When Jesus spoke about eating his flesh and drinking his blood in John 6, his words met with less than an enthusiastic reception. "How can this man give us his flesh to eat? (V 52). "This is a hard saying who can listen to it?" (V60). In fact so many of his disciples abandoned him over this that Jesus had to ask the twelve if they also planned to quit. It is interesting that Jesus did not run after his disciples saying, "Don't go — I was just speaking metaphorically!"

How did the early Church interpret these challenging words of Jesus? Interesting fact. One charge the pagan Romans lodged against the Christians was cannibalism. Why? You guessed it. They heard that this sect regularly met to eat human flesh and drink human blood. Did the early Christians say: "wait a minute, it's only a symbol!"? Not at all. When trying to explain the Eucharist to the Roman Emperor around 155AD, St. Justin did not mince his words: "For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Sav­ior being incarnate by God's word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the word of prayer which comes from him . . . is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus."

Not many Christians questioned the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist till the Middle Ages. In trying to explain how bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ, several theologians went astray and needed to be corrected by Church authority. Then St. Thomas Aquinas came along and offered an explanation that became classic. In all change that we observe in this life, he teaches, appearances change, but deep down, the essence of a thing stays the same. Example: if, in a fit of mid-life crisis, I traded my mini-van for a Ferrari, abandoned my wife and 5 kids to be beach bum, got tanned, bleached my hair blonde, spiked it, buffed up at the gym, and took a trip to the plastic surgeon, I'd look a lot different on the surface. But for all my trouble, deep down I'd still substantially be the same ole guy as when I started.

St. Thomas said the Eucharist is the one instance of change we encounter in this world that is exactly the opposite. The appearances of bread and wine stay the same, but the very essence or substance of these realities, which can't be viewed by a microscope, is totally transformed. What was once bread and wine are now Christ's body and blood. A handy word was coined to describe this unique change. Transformation of the "sub-stance", what "stands-under" the surface, came to be called "transubstantiation."

What makes this happen? The power of God's Spirit and Word. After praying for the Spirit to come (epiklesis), the priest, who stands in the place of Christ, repeats the words of the God-man: "This is my Body, This is my Blood." Sounds to me like Genesis 1: the mighty wind (read "Spirit") whips over the surface of the water and God's Word resounds. "Let there be light" and there was light. It is no harder to believe in the Eucharist than to believe in Creation.

But why did Jesus arrange for this transformation of bread and wine? Because he intended another kind of transformation. The bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ which are, in turn, meant to transform us. Ever hear the phrase: "you are what you eat?" The Lord desires us to be transformed from a motley crew of imperfect individuals into the Body of Christ, come to full stature.

Our evangelical brethren speak often of an intimate, personal relationship with Jesus. But I ask you, how much more personal and intimate can you get? We receive the Lord's body into our physical body that we may become Him whom we receive!

Such an awesome gift deserves its own feast. And that's why, back in the days of Thomas Aquinas and St. Francis of Assisi, the Pope decided to institute the Feast of Corpus Christi.

[Petronski]

...so they have been taught hatred of the church throughout their lives.

A pitiful but undeniable state of affairs.

[OLD REGGIE]

The Bible was Maintained by the RC for many a Century... before the Reformation!

True. The Catholic Monks deserve unending praise for their work.

[Petronski]

If you want some fun ask one of the "experts" to describe when and how the theory of "substance" and "accidents" was developed. In order to keep it simple ask for a definition of 1,000 words or less.

That attitude strikes me as very strange. Where is the fault in erudition?

[1000 silverlings]

Quix can explain the phenomenon of “transference and projection” to you, Psychology 101.

[Petronski]

Quix can explain the phenomenon of “transference and projection” to you, Psychology 101.

He can, but he's more likely to vomit a technicolor blast of babble onto the thread, like an explosion at the html factory.

[1000 silverlings]

Well if he’s likely to vomit, there’s probably a reason

[Petronski]

Ether abuse?

[crusty old prospector]

Sorry, I don’t do Christianity “lite”. Christ is truly present in all the sacraments and each is much much more than mere symbol. They change who we are. Simply munching on mere bread and drinking grape juice to “remember” Christ’s sacrifice or getting wet to “remember” His saving grace (as if any Christian reading Holy Scripture would not notice those) is a waste of time that could be better spent delving into the fullness of Divine Revelation, which includes Holy Scripture. Those who participate in “symbolisms” of the real thing do what they do not understand.

Then, why do you do these sacraments once a week instead of daily or hourly? What happens if you are ill and cannot make it to mass? Are there any make-up eucharists to be taken? So, when we in the Baptist Church take the Lord's Supper every two or three months, is that not good enough because it isn't done weekly?

[OLD REGGIE]

I'm always dazzled by the fact that in that interval the meaning of "subjective" and "objective" seem to have changed places! I just mention that as an example of the not 'No-brainer" aspect of wrapping the cranium around the question. Fortunately it's not necessary to understand the Eucharist.

I agree with you but not in the way you might think.

Forget Aristotle. Forget Aquinas. Just say "It's a mystery".

[Petronski]

I’m sorry, Quix. I should not have posted that quip in 1327.

Something tells me, though, that you got a chuckle out of it.

[Alamo-Girl]

Of a truth, the exclusionary doctrines of the Catholic Church vis-à-vis the Eucharist are not Scriptural.

But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many [are] weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. - I Corinthians 11:28-30

Of course many beliefs are exclusive - "our way or the highway" - and thus the moniker of "club" or "pen" that hosepipe often uses. And, IMHO, it is tragic when anyone fears authority claimed by men, particularly religious men.

Then the same day at evening, being the first [day] of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace [be] unto you. - John 20:19

But Christ did not become enfleshed to start a religion. The religion was already there, Judaism. Therein He fulfilled the law and the prophets.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. - Matthew 5:17

Rather, Christ Jesus is gathering God's adopted children, to establish a family in the new heaven and new earth (Revelation).

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. – John 1:12-13

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together. – Romans 8:14-17

To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers. - John 10:3-5

That is the panorama of Scripture, Genesis to Revelation, and His Name Alpha and Omega:

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.

For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.– Colossians 1:15-20

The church is His body:

For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. - Ephesians 5:29-32

Obviously no mortal authority has the power to amputate parts of the body of Christ. So the exclusionary practices of so many assemblies are meaningless except when they cause submission by fear - whether like the disciples hunkering down in a closed room for fear of the Jews or the Jews who would not confess Christ out of fear.

Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue: - John 12:42

And still, I don't really have a problem with "clubs" or "pens" - as long as the sheep are loving God surpassingly above all else and therefore follow the Good Shepherd wherever He leads them - which may be "into" or "out of" one of those "clubs" or "pens."

Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.

I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. - John 10:7-11

To God be the glory!

[OLD REGGIE]

Good question. I’m just guessing. But Papa Ben does not strike me as the “Take over the world (or at least central Italy)” type. I know there are some serious Cahtolic Monarchists, but I don’t know of any who want the Pope to have seculklar power. Could be. That’d be weird.

By "WE" I meant thr RCC. Has Unam Sanctum been voided?

[OLD REGGIE]

Guess where I read Augustine on how Jesus was the Rock in the quote we always argue about...IN my Breviary. The second reading from the Office of Readings for Saint Pius V, whose memorial is today.

Not the compost pile.

In this we agree. You were not among those who tore the skin off my posterior when I claimed the RCC did not teach that the Church was built on Peter.

However, where are the many writings of Augustine where he clearly notes the supremecy of Scripture? In the "secret" archives?

[LordBridey]

BTW, is it my imagination or . . . has the bellowing of the gored “sacred” oxen been louder recently? Perhaps some of the spears have been striking more to the bone marrow? Hard to say.

It is your imagination. The only thing you tend to "strike" is the faint temptation to give creedence or value to anything you post.

[pgyanke]

Alamo-Girl, there is more that unites us than divides us. What you post here as a refutation of Catholicism is actually foundational. However, where we disagree, we disagree vehemently...

Your quote: "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many [are] weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. - I Corinthians 11:28-30

How can you post this and not see the Catholic understanding?

I would also point out to you something that Pope Benedict XVI has also pointed out (to much consternation among those who wish to think badly of everything emanating from him)... If you do not have a sacrifice, you do not have a church.

Much has been made of this statement of his but it is a statement of fact. You do not have an altar if you do not have a sacrifice and you do not have a church without an altar. So, Protestants who do not believe in the Real Presence may have a congregation, but on what authority do they call themselves a church?

I do not seek to belittle or make fun of my Protestant brethren, only to point out the obvious.

Mark 9:38 John answered him, saying: Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, who followeth not us: and we forbade him. 39 But Jesus said: Do not forbid him. For there is no man that doth a miracle in my name and can soon speak ill of me. 40 For he that is not against you is for you.

We Catholics believe we have the Apostolic succession from these men to us. However, no one who professes the Name of Jesus is our enemy.

[Quix]

I really DO

respect a great deal about you.

And, I really DO have a surprising amount of healthy affection toward you.

Besides, you can’t be all bad—cyborg still likes you.

And, yes, I often enjoy your assaults on me . . . hopefully without being masochistic.

It grieves me that you (& Mad Dawg, for that matter) understand me so little but that’s life and goes with the territory of being me interacting with personalities like yours. Not something I lose sleep over.

It would also be very hard to find such a magnificent foil or example spring-board as you tend to function as for so much that we Prottys find extremely horrific.

BTW, you might have used “laughing gas” to greater effect in the post referred to.

[OLD REGGIE]

I’m not sure where you got the idea that it was common practice for thousands of years. In formal churches which you are used to, in relatively civilized western societies it is more common for both to be offered, but that it has always been required or that way is not accurate.

Please let's stick with what I actually said. "More than one thousand years" is not "thousands of years" nor did I say "it has always been required".

Can you provide documentation concerning the form of communion in the Early Church and when it became (relatively) common to offer it in one kind?

[Quix]

Methinks your fantasies are . . . in need of a booster shot.

[Pyro7480]

Truly LOL at your #1325! My coworkers must be now puzzled at what I’m laughing at. ;-)

[Petronski]

#1324 was such a pure setup line, my inner Don Rickles took over and hit send before I could think.