Why do Catholics believe bread & wine actually change to become the body & blood of Christ?

Question

...then they eat it in ritual ceremony but deny they are a cannibalistic cult.

Catholic Crusader: you accuse me of making an insulting comment when I ask a perfectly reasonable question about transubstantiation and then you insult me personally by calling me dumb.

The Catholic church says there is an actual change in the bread and wine during the ceremony and it becomes the body and blood of Christ, they say it is not a symbolic change.

Answer 1

Well, looks like a bunch of them say it's real and a bunch of them say it's symbolism. I should point out to the people who tried the clever games with the word "cannibal" that this word means one who eats the flesh of his/her own kind. Cannibalism has nothing to do with the body being dead before the flesh is eaten.

So we have ritualistic cannibalism of a living being which may or may not be only symbolism. Charming.

I remember when i was a very young child (2-3 years) and my parents explained the tenets of catholicism to me. I thought they were friggin' crazy. I seem to better understand why i felt that way all the time.

Answer 2

Eating people is cannibalistic. Eating God, at God's command, is not.

At the Last Supper, Jesus said, “Take this bread. It is my body.” Then he said, “Take this and drink. This is my blood. Do this in memory of me.”

Catholics believe this was the First Eucharist, that through a miracle the bread and wine actually became the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Catholics reenact the Last Supper during every Mass, where God, acting through the priest, changes the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

This is a great sacrament of thanksgiving and unity of Catholics.

By the way, the Orthodox, Lutheran and many Anglican Churches also believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

For more information, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 1322 and following: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt1art3.htm

With love in Christ.

Answer 3

Catholic dogma is quite clear in insisting that consecration of the host and wine transforms them into the ACTUAL flesh and blood of Christ. Look up 'transubstantiation' in the on-line 'catholic encyclopedia'. My criticism of this comes in the form of a "Yeah... but..." Specifically: "Yeah... but... why do they have to do it in the form of sushi? Wouldn't a little barbeque be nice?"

Anyway... the Catholic Encyclopedia gives lengthy 'proofs' that the physical and spiritual essence of Christ, in its entirety, is present in each and every crumb of the Eucharist.

I find it amusing, looking ath the answers from Catholics... insisting that all of this is just 'symbolic'... that they really have no idea just how absolutely whacky their religion is... not that they're any more whacky that OTHER Christians, though.

Commentary on Richard Dawkins...

"But just what is the core of Dawkins' radical message?

Well, it goes something like this: 'If you claim that something is true, I will examine the evidence which supports your claim; if you have no evidence, I will not accept that what you say is true and I will think you a foolish and gullible person for believing it so.'

That's it. That's the whole, crazy, fanatical package.

When the Pope says that a few words and some hand-waving causes a cracker to transform into the flesh of a 2,000-year-old man, Dawkins and his fellow travellers say, well, prove it. It should be simple. Swab the Host and do a DNA analysis. If you don't, we will give your claim no more respect than we give to those who say they see the future in crystal balls or bend spoons with their minds or become werewolves at each full moon.

And for this, it is Dawkins, not the Pope, who is labelled the unreasonable fanatic on par with faith-saturated madmen who sacrifice children to an invisible spirit." ~ Dan Gardiner, "Those Fanatical Atheists", The Ottawa Citizen, May 5, 2007

Answer 4

yes- they do believe it is the actual blood and body of Christ. Insane yes.

I had to do an assignment once, and I was talking about transubstantiation, attempting to use scientific language. I wanted to write something like, 'catholics belielev all the jesus molecules move into the bread through osmosis' or something like that.

Answer 5

I'll ignore the insult and answer the question:

At the Last Supper it was Jesus who said "This is my Body" when he broke the bread. When you read that in the light of John 6 "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life in you" you understand the sacramental nature of the Eucharist. It is not symbolism: It is REAL. (Do a Google search of the word "Transubstantiation".)

In the Old Testament, the Passover lamb had to be eaten whole. In the New Testamtent, John the Baptist says "Behold the Lamb of God" when he sees Jesus.

Also, early Christian writing reveal that the first Christians believed the same thing. That is why the Romans accused them of cannibalism; they wrongly understood what they had heard about Christian rites.

Ironically, the Romans made the same dumb remarks that you are making.

EDIT: To Everybody: It is NOT symbolism - it is real. Do a Google search of the word "Transubstantiation".
LINK:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm#3

To "SeraMcKay": Great answer. Hey everybody, read SeraMcKay's answer.

Answer 6

In the bible (I don't have one in front of me at the moment), everyone was shocked when Jesus said "Unless you eat the body and blood of the Son of man, you shalt not have eternal life." People were thinking, "How can this be?" It did seem canabolistic, but fortunately we receive the body and blood of Christ under the appearance of bread and wine. There have been hundreds of Eucharistic Miracles to attest to the fact that when a priest consecrates the bread and wine, it in fact becomes the body of Christ. If this is how we can have eternal life, then I will eat the Body of Christ and drink his blood and thankfully he has given us a more appetizing way of doing that! (Do a google search or a yahoo search with the words : eucharistic miracle . You wil find loads of photographs.

Answer 7

I'm surprised that there are Catholics saying it is symbolism. It isn't (nor is it cannibalism). These Catholics need to learn our faith.

I don't have references in front of me, but I believe the actual Aramaic (well - the language depends on the specific Book, but the one it was originally written in) is more similar to 'gnaw' than 'eat'.

My question is why do fundamentalists who believe the Bible to be the literal word of God interpret this symbolically? I know ... ask my own question...

Answer 8

Jesus said it in John 6 and it's the biblical teaching and as such also affirmed by Lutherans,Orthodox and many Anglicans.

We are not cannibals we digest the "outer sign"( the chemistry of bread and wine or the species et accidens)but we partake of the real and actual Jesus ,present body,blood,)human) soul and divinity.

Answer 9

Yes, it acually becomes doctrine according to the Catholic Church. Some individual people take it as symbolic.

Answer 10

The Bread & Wine are Symbolic for what Jesus Christ did for all mankind. His body was broken And his blood was shed for all man's sins,reconciling us with God.
We are washed clean by the Blood of Christ.
We partake in this with praise,worship,acknowledgement,respect, and eternal grattitude.