English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

The Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran and many Anglican Churches believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

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.

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.

2007-09-14 16:59:31 · answer #1 · answered by imacatholic2 7 · 0 0

It is a central point of the Catholic faith that the priest has the power to change bread and wine into meat and blood by saying a few magic words over them.
It is not symbolic in any way, Catholics really have to believe that they are changed into real meat and blood.
To deny this is to be a heretic and many people have been tortured and killed over the centuries for opposing this claim.

2007-09-13 19:24:06 · answer #2 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0 0

Yes, Catholics believe the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ.

2007-09-13 18:08:24 · answer #3 · answered by keri gee 6 · 1 0

Greetings,
1 Corinthians 11:17-34.
The Eucharist and the Wine is symbolic,and when the priest raise the Eucharist and The Wine,to give thanks to God,The Eucharist and The Wine are transformed into Body and Blood of Lord Jesus.The Body and blood of Lord Jesus are the real thing.
Read the Bible everyday.
Peace Be With you.

2007-09-13 18:26:05 · answer #4 · answered by Nick Carter 4 · 0 0

I think traditional Catholicism says the bread turns into Jesus flesh and the wine turns into Jesus' blood. Being Lutheran, I know that we believe Jesus is present in the bread, just as He is present everywhere, but its not Jesus' actual skin and muscle we eat. Other denominations think its 100% symbolic. But Catholicism, I'm pretty sure, says meat and blood.

2007-09-13 18:09:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Did Christ say 'symbolic' or did he say 'this is MY Body' ?

1 Cor 10:16: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

2007-09-13 19:31:38 · answer #6 · answered by Victor 2 · 0 0

Jesus said: "I am the bread of life.".....meaning... Jesus words are eternal, a word from the Gods. If you believe and trust His words...you will have eternal life. (1st death is physical body, then the spirit left. When your spirit is blessed by God in believing in Him and doing His commandments in your lifetime before physical death, then your spirit will unite with your glorified body and live with God for eternity.

Jesus said in the last supper:
1. Jesus broke the bread, share it with others and said: "This is my body which is given for you". "Do this in memory of me"
2. In same way, Jesus gave them the cup of wine and said "This cup is God`s new covenant sealed with my blood, which is poured out for you."

It is symbolically said to seal a covenant with His ardent apostle and believers, for them to start a new covenant with God and His people, with Jesus establishing churches for the whole world to unite, establish good relationships among other people and building new bridges and connections between God and man...until the end of the world (2nd judgement, or the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ as The Peoples` Judge.)

...That Jesus Christ martyrdom for the Almighty Father who sent Him for a mission..."to save all God`s citizen from condemnations, thus saving the whole world from evilness".....will not be wasted.
...Jesus said: Please "do this in memory of me"
...by so doing daily in masses or in the synagogue/pulpit(taking bread/hostia and wine/blood), we will be refresh and reminded always to obey His covenant/commandments, to live daily by this Jesus words and principles in preparation for a happy, joyous, peaceful, harmonious eternal life living with the Gods in Heaven/Promised Land/The New Jerusalem.

So, instead of dissecting every word/sentences in The Holy Book to prove and disprove (because you are vulnerable to satan`s challenging influences to divert your attention, belief and focus and count you in, in his underground kingdom of lake of fire...
... so, why not just read & listen to God`s words, live with it and you`ll be inching your way to heaven smoothly. Always reject satan insinuation of going against The Almighty Father.

Good luck in your journey!

2007-09-13 19:00:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Let's hope they don't think they are the brains

2007-09-13 18:34:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Jesus Promises His Real Presence in the Eucharist
John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old Testament (e.g., 2 Kings4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread which is Him.

Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 - these passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to the Eucharist.

Matt. 16:12 - in this verse, Jesus explains His metaphorical use of the term "bread." In John 6, He eliminates any metaphorical possibilities.

John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover, and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says.

John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven.

John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread which must be consumed.

John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat?

John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact, Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically.

John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word "phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus does what?

John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch. He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52).

John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not "soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh. It is always literal.

John 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food and "real" drink use the word "alethes." "Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink.

John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque.

John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.

John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh."

John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us.

John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly.

Mark 4:34 - Jesus always explained to His disciples the real meanings of His teachings. He never would have let them go away with a false impression, most especially in regard to a question about eternal salvation.

John 6:37 - Jesus says He would not drive those away from Him. They understood Him correctly but would not believe.

John 3:5,11; Matt. 16:11-12 - here are some examples of Jesus correcting wrong impressions of His teaching. In the Eucharistic discourse, Jesus does not correct the scandalized disciples.

John 6:64,70 - Jesus ties the disbelief in the Real Presence of His Body and Blood in the Eucharist to Judas' betrayal. Those who don't believe in this miracle betray Him.

Psalm 27:2; Isa. 9:20; 49:26; Mic. 3:3; 2 Sam. 23:17; Rev. 16:6; 17:6, 16 - to further dispense with the Protestant claim that Jesus was only speaking symbolically, these verses demonstrate that symbolically eating body and blood is always used in a negative context of a physical assault. It always means “destroying an enemy,” not becoming intimately close with him. Thus, if Jesus were speaking symbolically in John 6:51-58, He would be saying to us, "He who reviles or assaults me has eternal life." This, of course, is absurd.

John 10:7 - Protestants point out that Jesus did speak metaphorically about Himself in other places in Scripture. For example, here Jesus says, "I am the door." But in this case, no one asked Jesus if He was literally made of wood. They understood him metaphorically.

John 15:1,5 - here is another example, where Jesus says, "I am the vine." Again, no one asked Jesus if He was literally a vine. In John 6, Jesus' disciples did ask about His literal speech (that this bread was His flesh which must be eaten). He confirmed that His flesh and blood were food and drink indeed. Many disciples understood Him and left Him.

Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18 – Jesus says He will not drink of the “fruit of the vine” until He drinks it new in the kingdom. Some Protestants try to use this verse (because Jesus said “fruit of the vine”) to prove the wine cannot be His blood. But the Greek word for fruit is “genneema” which literally means “that which is generated from the vine.” In John 15:1,5 Jesus says “I am the vine.” So “fruit of the vine” can also mean Jesus’ blood. In 1 Cor. 11:26-27, Paul also used “bread” and “the body of the Lord” interchangeably in the same sentence. Also, see Matt. 3:7;12:34;23:33 for examples were “genneema” means “birth” or “generation.”

Rom. 14:14-18; 1 Cor. 8:1-13; 1 Tim. 4:3 – Protestants often argue that drinking blood and eating certain sacrificed meats were prohibited in the New Testament, so Jesus would have never commanded us to consume His body and blood. But these verses prove them wrong, showing that Paul taught all foods, even meat offered to idols, strangled, or with blood, could be consumed by the Christian if it didn’t bother the brother’s conscience and were consumed with thanksgiving to God.

Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says we must become like children, or we will not enter the kingdom of God. We must believe Jesus' words with child-like faith. Because Jesus says this bread is His flesh, we believe by faith, even though it surpasses our understanding.

Luke 1:37 - with God, nothing is impossible. If we can believe in the incredible reality of the Incarnation, we can certainly believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. God coming to us in elements He created is an extension of the awesome mystery of the Incarnation.

2007-09-14 01:20:05 · answer #9 · answered by Daver 7 · 0 0

it's real

2007-09-13 18:10:01 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers