When Catholics say that Eucharist the wine turns to blood & the bread turns into the Lords Body when we eat...?

Certainly the Eucharist is food for the believer if one is to believe Jesus’ in His colloquy at Capernaum. It is food for endurance till eternal life. It provides the grace necessary to complete the race. Jesus compares it to the manna that was eaten in the desert to sustain the Israelites. But Jesus is speaking of the New Covenant requiring a new sustenance which is His Body and Blood. In making this comparison He says that real bread comes from the father just as He and then says that He is the bread of life. If one eats this bread they will live forever. The disciples listening to Him began to realize that Jesus was not speaking metaphorically but literally and then we come to the following verse:

(Joh 6:52 DRB) (6:53) The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat

Then Jesus said in unambiguous literal language:

(Joh 6:53 DRB) (6:54) Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.

The following verse indicates the purpose of eating His body and drinking His blood. It is so that we can “abidete” or in other words remains in Him by the Grace bestowed by the act of receiving His Body and His Blood. But the Eucharist benefits us even more in that it augments our union with Christ as the principal fruit of receiving the Eucharist is an intimate union with Christ.

(Joh 6:56 DRB) (6:57) He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him.

An additional benefit of the Eucharist is that it is impossible to unite to Christ without the cleansing of past sins and preserving us from future sins through His grace. This is part of the sanctification process where we grow in our faith in him which separates us further from the risk of mortal sin. Additionally, the Eucharist participation renews, strengthens and deepens ones incorporation into the Church which is achieved through Baptism. It joins us to the entire Church Militant, Suffering and Triumphant.

This is what St. Ignatius said about the Eucharist at the end of the first century, “ the one bread that provides the medicine of immortality, the antidote for death, and the food that makes live forever in Jesus Christ.”

One may ask the question does God’s spiritual work always require a physical channel. “Always” is a very dangerous position to take when speaking of God as God can as our sovereign creator do things however he wishes. So this is really not a matter of “always” but instead, did God use the physical channel of Jesus transforming simple bread and wine into His body and Blood to bestow the Grace of eternal life.

I was reading another apologist’s commentary some time ago and He related how some Protestants get an almost Docetist view when it comes to the Eucharist. They have no problem believing something to be spiritual but when it comes to mixing spirit and matter they seem to experience intellectual and theological mind block. This is the usual excuse for not believing in Sacraments because a spiritual reality is being conveyed by means of matter. They may even believe that this is a violation of the divine plan. Matter instead of being used is to be avoided which would explain why some have difficulties understanding the incarnation. Many believe that it would be much easier if God did not dirty himself with matter. The Eucharist proves that God loves matter because He comes to us under the appearance of bread and wine. In doing so there is no contradiction in Christ being physically and Sacramentally present.

One may question how can Christ be present in the Eucharist and be also in heaven and that is a fair question. First of all, in my explanation let me make it clear that how Christ performs this miracle is a great mystery that we accept on faith through our spirit to His. If we look at the account of the last supper we see Jesus present in two ways. He is present at the table in a natural way and is present also in a sacramental way which is no different than the Eucharistic experience today and through the history of the Church. How this is done while being a mystery is not impossibility just because it cannot be understood fully with our reason. We can all accept as Christians that God is everywhere and that He is present in a spiritual sense when we are gathered together. This is no greater a mystery than him reigning in heaven in His glorified body and on earth in His natural body. If he can create the universe from nothing can he not make bread and wine into His Body and Blood? These things may be beyond our understanding but certainly not beyond God’s abilities.

For those who do not believe in the real presence there are the difficulties of the following verses:

(1Co 11:26 DRB) For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.

(1Co 11:27 DRB) Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.

(1Co 11:28 DRB) But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice.

(1Co 11:29 DRB) For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

(1Co 11:30 DRB) Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you: and many sleep.

People who refuse to believe in the real presence believe that this represents a metaphor. But, if it is a mere metaphor, how can one be “guilty of the body and Blood” when one receives unworthily? As one scholar put it “Plain and simple reason seem to tell us that the presence of Christ’s body is necessary for an offense committed against it.” (Nicholas Cardinal Wiseman, Lectures on the Real Presence) It would seem reasonable that one cannot be guilty of Christ’s body and Blood if it is not present in the Sacrament. Other scholars said ” No one is guilty of homicide if he merely does damage to the statue or picture of a man without touching the man in person.” (Rumble and Carty, Eucharist Quizzes to a Street Preacher) The question might be asked in light of St. Paul’s teaching, can one be theologically satisfied in the meaningless belief in a Real Absence than the fuller meaning of a Real Presence.

In Christ

Fr. Joseph

NOTE:

I assume you are a Protestant, at least I pray that you are for if you are receiving the blessed Sacrament without discerning the real, actual and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord you are committing a most egregious sin. If you are receiving in a Protestant church you are being disrespectful to our Lord by refusing His great feast for a man made desecration then you are also sinning against our Lord. http://fiatvolvntastua.blogspot.com/2009/06/why-do... Jesus said that it is the Spirit that gives the life through faith in Jesus’ words at Capernaum. Communion is being obedient to God but to create a symbolic man-made presentation to replace His great feast is idolatry in the worst sense and shows a lack of indwelling of the Holy Spirit to not recognize that such is a man-made desecration of Christ’s commandment in place of obedience. Such actions are not communion with one another but a mocking of Christ’s commandment. So yes, it is bigger than being His Body and Blood because of the eternal consequences of the sin and of refusing the grace that our Lord offers. The Body of Christ, meaning the invisible Church are not those disobedient to our Lord but instead those outside His will and His grace.

http://fiatvolvntastua.blogspot.com/2009/06/church...

NOTE:

"It has to be symbolic as when Jesus first gave this example He was still alive and His blood still flowed in His veins. So when He said,"This is my blood" it was a symbol of what His sacrifice for sin would do."

Good try but denying the possibility of Jesus performing a miracle is bringing into question His divinity. The fact is that the Bible answers this delimma you are attempting to make. Jesus said to, "Do this in "Anamnesis" of me in the Greek, "remembrance" as usually interpreted in English. "Anamnesis" is a word that denotes a miracle that transcends time and place. It does not mean to recall a past event as remembrance describes but instead by a miracle of our Lord we are place present at the one sacrifice for all. While the miracle to us brings present the past to the disciples Christ's miracle brought the future present.

<<When Catholics say that Eucharist the wine turns to blood & the bread turns into the Lords Body when we eat...? Are they right?>>

Yes!

<<This has been a squabble between denominations. Catholics think it turns to Christ blood & body after we take Eucharist. While other Christians think it is only symbolic of Jesus Christ blood & body.>>

Once the Bread and Wine are consecrated by the priest, they become the Body and Blood of Christ. This is BEFORE the congregation receives the Eucharist. It is already the Body and Blood of Christ when the congregation receives the Eucharist.

<<In reality, The Holy Spirit is in this Communion; and so the fruit of the vine does get into our blood system and the bread does go into our body. And we are the body of Christ if we are redeemed.>>

No. Jesus did not teach the Holy Spirit was in the Bread and Wine. Jesus said, "This is MY Body. This is MY Blood". The Holy Eucharist is the Body and Blood of JESUS.

<<So are both ideas correct then?>>

No.

Catholics claim the Real Presence of the Eucharist.

Protestants claim symoblic meaning.

You can't have contradictory claims and both be right. One has to be right and one has to be wrong.

The bread and wine are transformed, by the power of the Holy Spirit, into the Real Body and Real Blood of Jesus Christ. They still maintain the physical characteristics, however, of bread and wine.

However, Protestants reject transubstantiation and consumption of the Body and Blood. Their "communion" is merely a symbolic remembrance of the Last Supper and is not Eucharist. Catholic Christians, however, get the privilege of consuming Christ each and every Sunday. By this, Jesus shares with us His Grace. The Eucharist is the heart of Catholic worship. Our relationship with Christ is deepened by the Eucharist in ways Protestants cannot even fathom.

Luke 22: 19-20 and John 6: 48-58 both go to prove this point.

For more scriptural evidence on transubstantiation, see this link:

http://scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html#eu...

Protesants will refute this, citing their own interpretations of the bible, but Catholics, like myself, believe it. The Real Presence is a doctrine that was taught by the Church since her beginning with Christ. Its in all of her traditions and history, as well as the writings of the Church Fathers, before the New Testament was even written. The change, called transubstantiation, is caused by the Holy Spirit, through the priest. Jesus Christ becomes present for us - body, blood, soul and divinity - in the bread and wine, so that we are no longer looking at ordinary food, but our Lord and Savior. It's the reason why I converted to the Catholic Faith. God bless.

As a Roman Catholic for over half a century, I just HAD to answer your question because I remember as a child in Catholic elementary and junior high classes, I often struggled with that same conflict, and found it hard, as a young boy, to understand the Divine depth of the Eucharist. And, as I tried to summon up the right words to answer you, I read the answers you've already been given, just to get some ideas on how to describe it to you, and I read "cristoiglesia" 's (aka:Fr. Joseph's) answer, and in his answer I found every word I was looking for, and in the right order. Father Joseph, I thank you immensely. You truly know the Divine depth of The Eucharist, just like a priest in the Roman Catholic Church would. I thank God for you and your answer. His answer truly deserves the 10 points for Best Answer. God, as in Jesus our Christ, Bless you.

Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist

Jn 6:35-71 - Eucharist promised

Mt 26:26ff (Mk 14:22ff., Lk 22:17ff.) - Eucharist instituted

1Cor 10:16 - Eucharist = participation in Christ's body & blood

1 Cor 11:23-29 - receiving unworthily his body & blood

Ex 12:8, 46 - Paschal lamb had to be eaten

Jn 1:29 - Jesus called "Lamb of God"

1 Cor 5:7 - Jesus called "paschal lamb who has been sacrificed

Jn 4:31-34; Mt 16;5-12 - Jesus talking symbolically about food

1Cor 2:14-3:4 - explains what "the flesh" means in Jn 6:63

Ps 14:4; Is 9:18-20; Is 49:26; Mic 3:3; 2Sm 23:15-17; Rv 17:6, 16 -

to symbolically eat & drink one's body & blood = assault

By ST.Ignatius a disciple of St.John in 107AD to the Symrnaeans..Chapter 7. Let us stand aloof from such heretics

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.

.

Both views are right. Jesus said he was the bread that came down from heaven and we are to eat of the words he spoke and take them into our life and live by them.

Jesus said the bread was his body and the wine his blood so it is not wrong to take him at his word. If we take communion and believe it is Jesus coming into us and live by his words. That is good, Catholic and Protestants are to repent of sin before taking communion. It is very holy. Either way we are taking Jesus into us and that is important. The Bible says some die because they take communion and live in unrepentant sin. Communion can condemn us if we are not right before the Lord.

When instituting this meal, Jesus did not perform a miracle, changing the emblems into his literal flesh and blood. Eating human flesh and drinking blood would be cannibalism, a violation of God’s law. (Genesis 9:3, 4; Leviticus 17:10) The Lord Jesus Christ would never instruct others to violate God’s law. (Compare Mt 5:19.)

Jesus still had his entire fleshly body and all his blood. His body was offered as a perfect sacrifice, and his blood was poured out the next afternoon of the same Jewish day, Nisan 14. Therefore, the Memorial bread and wine are emblematic in nature, representing Christ’s flesh and blood.

Jesus gave us this very answer in John 6:

61 Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it?

62 But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?

63 If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

*65 But there are some of you that believe not.

For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him.

66 And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father.

*67 After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him.

68 Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away?

69 And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

70 And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.

Ask yourself, Why Jesus let them leave. Why He did'nt say, "Hey, Not Literaly".

God Bless.

Hi, It has to be symbolic as when Jesus first gave this example He was still alive and His blood still flowed in His veins. So when He said,"This is my blood" it was a symbol of what His sacrifice for sin would do. The later NT instruction had to follow His teaching. Also taking "communion" as it is commonly called is to remember His death until he comes. It does not take away sin. We are to come to him in repentance(not penance) for salvation before we ever come to Him to remember His death. Alot of Roman catholic teaching is not in the Bible and is often contrary to Christian teaching. Many were burned on stakes because they would not agree to transubstanciation. nev