I think you mean body, blood, soul, and divinity. Yes, we commune with our physically present Lord, Jesus Christ, present under the accidents of bread and wine. He commanded us to take and eat. We do. From John 6
Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
And further:
60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? 62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! 63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit[e] and life. 64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
Non-Catholics may have a different interpretation of the scriptures, but that doesn’t, by definition, make Catholics wrong. Rather, it indicates honest people can disagree.
But these souls presumed that the Lord was speaking about giving them His body that He took upon in His incarnation, and that was to be crucified, which, contrary to Gnosticism, was a body of real manifest flesh and blood, that thus would chemically test as human flesh and blood, versus some sort of metaphysical idea of flesh and blood that by all appearances and scientific texts was not flesh and blood at all.
But which is said to be so by a church that also imagines that kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them, and giving glory and titles and ascribing attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers individually addressed to them, is not worship, or at least blasphemy. More word games.
However, the Catholic construing of John 6 and the gospel accounts is simply untenable in the light of the totality of Scripture, especially the writings of John (who hardly manifestly describes the Last Supper), in which metaphorical language abounds and spiritual life is never obtained by literally physically eating anything, but is obtained by believing/receiving the words of Christ crucified and risen. And then living by obeying His word, as the Lord lived by the Father, which He explained was how one who eat and drank Him did. (Jn. 6:57; cf. 4:34; Mt. 4:4) See here by God's grace.
When Jesus asked the remaining disciples if they wanted to leave what was their reply?