The Eucharist necessary for salvation


#1

“The Eucharist necessary for salvation.”

I recently heard a Catholic priest say this. He didn’t qualify, nuance, or further explain his statement.

Was he correct?


#2

Yes.

John 6: 53-54 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.


#3

:thumbsup:


#4

Yes, eating the flesh of the Son of Man is necessary for salvation. In our time, that eating is achieved through the Eucharist when we participate in the Holy Communion. For those who have no access to participate in the Eucharist, God alone has his way to save them.


#5

Im sorry…big mistake!

What he actually said is:

“The Eucharist is NOT necessary for salvation.”

That changes it quite a bit! That’s what happens when I type too fast.


#6

Then he’s not in line with either the Bible of Catholic teaching.


#7

My simple and stupid question that has never been answered, if this were the case and Christ was being literal when He explained it at that point to those people then Christ departed went on with His journeys to other towns and those people that heard and believed but then never had the sacraments, what happens with them? eternal damnation? If thats what they understood Him to mean then 2 questions why didn’t they all keep following Him and why didn’t any of them gnaw on our Lords bicep?


#8

Do you have anything anywhere that indicates that this might have occurred?

If thats what they understood Him to mean then 2 questions why didn’t they all keep following Him

Come on now Simon…why do you think they continued to follow Him when they understood that?

Because they believed that what He said He could deliver.

and why didn’t any of them gnaw on our Lords bicep?

I’ve seen that before and I think it’s one of the most specious and unworthy of “questions”, (the kind that rude unbelievers sometimes ask).

Simon, put yourself there in that scriptural event as a believer and tell me if that would have even crossed your mind???


#9

If Jesus was speaking literally it would only be necessary for me to go to a Catholic Church and receive communion. After all, He not only said unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood, you have no life in you, He also said Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood as eternal life.

His statement using whoever has no qualifications attached to it. So if the first is literal, why isn’t the second, whether you believe or not or eat worthily or not?


#10

eats my flesh and drinks my blood as eternal life.

His statement using whoever has no qualifications attached to it. So if the first is literal, why isn’t the second, whether you believe or not or eat worthily or not?That doesn’t wash Carl. Even in the early church they would not allow someone who did not share the fullness of the faith to receive the Eucharist. That same practice is maintained today and is why you cannot receive.

According to 1st Corinthians 11:23-30 it would not be safe spiritually or physically for you.


#11

Unanswerable also! Sorry Michael if this offends…

Fact is truth is simple, if a child can’t understand it it isn’t truth…


#12

also! Sorry Michael if this offends…

**Fact is truth is simple, if a child can’t understand it it isn’t truth…**Didn’t offend Bro, but I am wondering what your answer is?

I guess what I’m saying is, based on the context of the passage, does that seem like a question (or thinking) that any of the believers who remained with the Lord would have entertained?

Are you telling me that you can’t answer that?

To me it’s simple. I read the passage and respond. And that idea never even crosses my mind.

Do you consider it a valid argument?:ehh:


#13

I do most certainly! Here is why, catholics say those whom didn’t leave stayed because they understood CHRIST and that Christ was being literal…literal Michael…People have looked for fountains of youth and answers for eternal life since the beginning of time, and this Prophet whom speaks the truth and I am understanding HIM literally and believe His truth says drink my blood and/or eat my flesh and have eternal life…whether its 50 500 or 5000 people at least one is gonna say I’m getting a piece of eternity…Think about it Michael!


#14

At least you admit it is a dumb question. Thats progress.

:stuck_out_tongue:


#15

Jesus converted the bread into his flesh or his flesh into bread so that his followers would be able to eat him without those eating becoming
man-eaters. The record says, "And while they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed and broke, and gave it to his disciples, and said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” (Mathew 26:26) Jesus was holding the bread and said that it was his body. The disciples believed him. They did not think Jesus was talking figuratively. This belief is confirmed in 1Cor 11:27, "Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord."


#16

And unanswerable from the catholic pov!


#17

Uh… do you have any scriptural (or even historical traditional) evidence that any of the believers then or since ever expressed such an idea?

I think it’s a weak argument that cannot be supported by scripture, history, or even tradition, when, in fact, even pagan Romans were at least intelligent enough to allege that the early church “drowned their children and ate their god”.

So, again, I ask…do you have any evidence whatever that any believers at that time or since expressed such a thought?

If not, why do you suppose that is? :smiley:


#18

No… it’s not.


#19

Here is the answer to your simple and stupid question.

There isn’t any indication that those who left believed Jesus. In fact, he asked the twelve if they would leave him too. After Peter makes his profession of faith, Jesus immediately states one of them is the devil, Judas.

If you want to know why his apostles didn’t start biting him, they believed that Jesus would give them his flesh to eat. He specifically says: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” John 6:51. You see, Jesus is the one that will give His flesh, which of course he did at the last supper just as he promised. He also told them he would give them his body - not a bit a of bicep or ear or some other body part.

In summary. Jesus told His disciples that He would give them His flesh to eat, not to come bite off a piece of His flesh. That’s why they didn’t. Now you have an answer.


#20

This, plus the other testimonies from the other two Gospels, qualifies and makes valid what Christ was saying in John 6.

Not that Christ really had to explain himself, but he he knew of man’s limitations.


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.