Question about the Eucharist


#1

I have never really thought about this until I received opposition. So let’s say my Protestant friend says, “fine, the bread at the Last Supper actually was His Body, but you can’t say that when a Priest does this today that it becomes the Body. Jesus never told us to recreate this.”

What should I say?


#2

“Do this in memory of Me?” :confused:

Jesus said that He is the Bread of Life. What would the point be of making the bread at the Last Supper His Body, if it would only happen that once? How else can the rest of us eat his Body and drink His Blood, like He told us to, if not in the Eucharist?:confused: :rolleyes:


#3

John 6
51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. 53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 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. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

Obviously Christ wasn’t talking only about the Apostles at the Last Supper!

Not only Protestants, but even some of Christ’s disciples could not believe what Christ had just said! Christ did not just give a metaphor; He was totally explicit when He said “Except you **eat the flesh **of the Son of man, and drink His blood you will not have life in you”.

But Simon Peter and the other Apostles had true faith:

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.

I believe in Holy Communion (partaking of Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity) because this is what the Catholic Church teaches. But I think the Church is doing just what Simon Peter did: accepting Christ at His word, for He is God.


#4

The way it was described to me in about the 6th grade I think, was that at Mass we are actually in one time frame.with the Crucifixtion and the Last Supper. Somehow, someway in a mystical fashion, we transcend time and space and become joined not only in the present Mass, but with every Mass ever offered and with both the Crucifixtion and the Last Supper. It is NOT a new sacrifice NOT a new meal and it is NOT re-done, it is re-presented by the Priest acting in the place of Christ. In essence, we are actually somehow present at both of these events and joined in communion with every Catholic throughout history.

Pretty amazing huh? :thumbsup: I’ve never understood it:confused: and I really don’t think anyone truly does…

That incidentally is why I along with others detest the experimentation and games that people play with the Mass to make it relevant to our time. You see, it’s timeless. Its priceless and unique.

The closest thing to Heaven on earth.


#5

In making your arguement you could also point out that the apostles continued to celebrate the Eucharist regularly (over and over…) from the time Jusus acsended, all through the NT. The apostles were either following his command correctly or they all misunderstood him. :slight_smile:


#6

The way it was described to me in about the 6th grade I think, was that at Mass we are actually in one time frame.with the Crucifixtion and the Last Supper. Somehow, someway in a mystical fashion, we transcend time and space and become joined not only in the present Mass, but with every Mass ever offered and with both the Crucifixtion and the Last Supper. It is NOT a new sacrifice NOT a new meal and it is NOT re-done, it is re-presented by the Priest acting in the place of Christ. In essence, we are actually somehow present at both of these events and joined in communion with every Catholic throughout history.

That is how I was taught, as well. This is called the anamnesis, which is actually the Greek text of the word that Our Lord used, which, alas, has typically been translated into English as memory, commemoration or *remembrance. *None of these quite capture the essence of time contained in anamnesis.


#7

I recently read something on this point which made things much clearer to me. In John 6:52 "The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?"
Instead of Jesus saying “Sorry, you misunderstood me”, He goes on to say that His flesh is true food, and His blood is true drink.
He re-emphasizes the point.
I found it really interesting to read that after this, many were still grumbling to the point in verse 66 “…many of his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him”.

The author (I can’t remember who it was) said that these were perhaps the very first Protestants…:slight_smile:


#8

The objection I receive is “Okay, you want to recreate it, but Jesus never told you to do that. You guys just made up the Mass, Jesus never told you to turn the bread into His Body during your celebration.”

NOTE: I know “recreate” is not a very good term, but I am trying to pretend that I am a Protestant for a second so I can present their argument.


#9

We must eat His Body and drink His Blood, like He told us we must. How can we do this, if not in the Eucharist?


#10

Your pretend protestant says “Jesus never told you to turn the bread into His Body during your celebration”. Maybe you should ask him "Then HOW ON EARTH do YOU explain how Jesus made it possible for men to carry out His command: 'Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.’? "

Maybe he’ll say, “Jesus was just speaking figuratively (or metaphorically or spiritually)”. Then ask Him “who do you think YOU are to make such a judgement as that - when Christ’s word’s HERE are completely EXPLICIT”

Protestants seem to assume that EVERYTHING that Jesus wanted us to do or believe was written in the Bible. But Jesus did (and said!) many other things - as St. John says (see quote below)! He most certainly could have said other things at the Last Supper. And His Apostles would have UNDERSTOOD what He MEANT when He said “do this in memory of Me”. His Apostles not only understood His words as “intelligent men”; He enlightened their minds to see far more than we do when we read the Gospel.

*John 25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written. *


#11

OK, thanks. It seems that many Protestants reject the Mass itself, and thus it is difficult to defend certain aspects of the Mass.

Protestants seem to assume that EVERYTHING that Jesus wanted us to do or believe was written in the Bible.

I think this is very important. It is hard to get anywhere with Protestants with this mindset. There are many times in the Bible where it says something like “There are many other things,” like the one you quoted from James.


#12

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.