Or Catholic fairy tales...
Actually it is ONLY the Catholic Church that is in line with Paul's theology.
1Co 10:15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 1Co 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ? 1Co 10:17 seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we are all partake of the one bread.
1Co 11:23 For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; 1Co 11:24 and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. 1Co 11:25 In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 1Co 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till he come.
Notice that Paul states he received it from the Lord.
Don't let the facts get in the way of prot errors.
And the context of the passage tells us what? What was the historical, literal approach to the passage.
Also if literally eating the flesh and blood of Christ was indeed the manner of obtaining Grace and thereby salvation, then why not in every epistle is this not commanded literally and exhorted?
Finally, in verse 26 Paul calls what the Corinthians are sharing “bread” and “cup”.
At what point did Paul instruct the proper handling of the unused left over bread and cup? Would not that be a most important piece of information given by your context the Corinthians were not performing communion correctly? But as Paul points out the subject is actually the Corinthians were not properly waiting for all to arrive to the Lord’s Supper, some were hungry and some were drunk?
Or Catholic fairy tales...