True Food and True Drink

CatholicExchange.com ^ | 12-14-04 | Grace MacKinnon

[Salvation]

	by Grace MacKinnon Other Articles by Grace MacKinnon Contact this Author

True Food and True Drink

12/14/04

Dear Grace, Some of my friends have questioned me about why and how I can believe that Jesus Christ is truly present in the Host which we receive at Communion in Mass. Sometimes I am not sure exactly how to explain it well enough so that it will be understood. Can you help?

It is true that some people consider the Catholic Church’s belief about the Eucharist to be totally unbelievable and almost outrageous. Catholics actually believe that when a priest, during the Eucharistic Sacrifice of the Mass, repeats the words of Jesus at the Last Supper over the bread and wine, they really do become the Body and Blood of the Lord Himself. How can this be? Where did the Church get this idea? The simple answer would be that we believe it because Jesus said it, and this Word of His is transmitted to us in various ways.

One of these ways is precisely the one that many Catholics are challenged on today — the Bible. In addition to the testimony of the Sacred Scriptures, however, we also have Sacred Tradition, that which the Apostles handed down to us and which they learned from Christ. We also have the teaching of the Church, given the authority to teach by Jesus in His name. Let us look first, then, at the Bible to see how exactly the Church can so confidently teach what she does.

The primary Scripture text we have that clearly demonstrates the reason for the Church’s belief in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist is that part of the Gospel referred to as the “institution narrative” — the words used by Christ when He gave instructions to His Apostles on how they were to commemorate His Passion. At the Last Supper, Jesus “took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is My body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of Me’” (Lk 22:19, see also Mt 26:26, Mk 14:22). It was the beginning of something — He was telling them to do this, and every time they did it, to remember Him.

It is also evident in the sixth chapter of the Gospel of John that, very early in His ministry, Jesus had already given the first promise of the Eucharist. A crowd of five thousand had just witnessed one of Christ’s greatest miracles (the multiplication of the loaves) and they were in great awe at what they had experienced. So they follow Him to Capernaum, wanting Him to perform more signs. When they begin to speak about the manna that God gave to their ancestors to eat in the desert, Jesus uses this opportunity to give a discourse that every Christian should read and reread very carefully.

“I am the bread of life,” he said (Jn 6: 35). “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world” (Jn 6: 51). The Scripture then says that this shocked the Jews. How could he give them His flesh to eat? He answered by saying, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For My flesh is true food and My blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me and I in him” (Jn 6: 53-59). These were very powerful words, and they are the words of Jesus Christ! He was telling them that the bread that He would give for the life of the world was His flesh!

At this point, many of them left His company, but we notice that Jesus did not call them back saying, “I didn’t mean it the way you think I did.” This is because He did mean it! If Jesus had meant His words to be taken symbolically only, then He would have had to explain this to His disciples, but He does not. This is very important. Now, He thought the rest of them would leave also, but then Peter responds by giving one of the most moving answers in all human history. “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (Jn 6: 68). At that moment, Peter may not have even realized the full import of what he was declaring, but later it would become clear to him.

In verse 47 of John 6, Jesus states, “He who believes has eternal life.” What was He talking about? It must have been the teaching that He was giving them. Over and over in these passages He repeats and reaffirms that He is the Bread of Life and that “if anyone eats this bread, he will live forever” and the bread He will give for the life of the world “is My flesh.” It takes great faith to accept and believe these words of our Lord, but we should never allow our predispositions or traditions to restrict us from recognizing the truth that Jesus wished to teach us. Our Lord said, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (Jn 20: 29).

© Copyright 2004 Grace D. MacKinnon
For permission to reprint this article, or to have Grace speak at your event, contact Grace MacKinnon at grace@deargrace.com.


Grace MacKinnon holds an MA in theology and is a syndicated columnist and public speaker on Catholic doctrine. Her new book Dear Grace: Answers to Questions About the Faith is available in our online store. If you enjoy reading Grace’s column, you will certainly want to have this book, which is a collection of the first two years of “Dear Grace.” Faith questions may be sent to Grace via e-mail at: grace@deargrace.com. You may also visit her online at www.DearGrace.com.

[B Knotts]

Karl Keating often points out that this is the only place in the Gospels where any disciples leave Him over a doctrinal issue.

[onedoug]

Personally, I believe Jesus was a great rabbi.

Merry Christmas.

[Dominick]

The confusion here, and why the Pope has called for a "Year of the Eucharist," is the hideous heresies which have sunk in since Vatican II. The confusion lies with dissidents such as McBrien of ND and others who refuse to believe in Transubstantiation. The place to find these heresies is within the cathechetical books now circulating in many CCD and Catholic schools.

Sunk in where? The Church continues to teach Transubstantiation, dissenting members of the Church are not an authority. I have seen the texts used for CCD, and while I have seen a few books that fall short, not contradict this doctrine. I guess posting a list of these books and where they are used (many doesn't cut it) would prove me wrong.

A fad is not what the Church teaches, and alarmism doesn't further the goals of the Faithful.

[Arguss]

Eucharist: From the Greek word, eucharistein (yoo kar is TAIN), "to give thanks": to the Heavenly Father for giving us the Divine Son, Jesus, for salvation and for the Eucharist Itself, in which we meet Jesus again.

[Salvation]

It is a great image and no, I don't know how to make it larger. But you might check HTML Sandbox ( a thread here)

[Salvation]

More at OSV.com about the Eucharist

For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord 
until he comes. -- 1 Cor 11:26

The Year of the Eucharist

What is the Year of the Eucharist?

From time to time the Vatican designates a particular year for the Church to devote herself especially to celebrating some important aspect of the Catholic faith. Following in this tradition, Pope John Paul II announced a Year of the Eucharist on the feast of Corpus Christi (the Body of Christ) in June 2004.

The year begins with the World Eucharistic Congress, October 10–17, 2004, in Guadalajara, Mexico. It ends with the ordinary assembly of the Synod of Bishops held in the Vatican October 2–29, 2005. The theme of the synod is “The Eucharist: Source and Summit of the Life and Mission of the Church.”

In this extended celebration, all Catholics are called to honor God’s gift of the Eucharist, to receive it more faithfully, and to reflect more deeply on its meaning in their lives and in the life of the Church.

-- from How to Celebrate the Year of the Eucharist (pamphlet) by Paul Thigpen.

 

[Salvation]

 

Excerpt from Why is That in Tradition?  
by Patrick Madrid

14. The Eucharistic Liturgy

The Catholic term "Liturgy" derives from the Greek word leitourgia, which means "a public duty" or "a public action?" This meaning took on a religious connotation in regard to the public ministrations of the Old Testament priests in the Temple (cf. Exodus 38:27, 39:12; Joel 1:9, 2:17; where the term leitourgeo is used in the Greek, Septuagint, version). The ancient Tradition of the Liturgy has been taught and believed by Christians since the days of Christ. Latin Rite Catholics are accustomed to referring to it as the "Mass," while Eastern Catholics call it the "Divine Liturgy." Both refer to the same doctrine.

Since the night Christ was betrayed, the Catholic Church has been celebrating the Liturgy of the Eucharist. This is part of Sacred Tradition, a revealed doctrine of the Faith that came from Christ himself and was preached and taught by the Apostles and their successors from the earliest days of the Church. About the year 56, St. Paul wrote about this Tradition and of how important it was to the life of the Church:

"I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions,⁶³ just as I handed them on to you. . . ."

For the first few centuries, the Eucharistic Liturgy was not a formally codified ritual as we know it today, though it was universally celebrated in the East and West with its essential elements and according to the particular meaning the Catholic Church has always understood it to contain: the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross, re-presented in time and space.

The Catechism explains the Church’s meaning when it refers to the Church’s Tradition of the Eucharistic Liturgy, defining it to mean:

An action of thanksgiving to God (CCC 1328);

The Lord’s Supper (CCC 1329; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:20; Revelation 19:9);

The Breaking of Bread (CCC 1329; cf. Matthew 14:19,15:36,26:26; Mark 8:6, 19.);

The Eucharistic assembly (CCC 1329; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:17-34);

The memorial of the Lord’s Passion and Resurrection (CCC 1330);

A Holy Sacrifice (CCC 1330; cf. Hebrews 13:15; cf. 1 Peter 2:5; Psalm116:13, 17; Malachi 1:11);

The Holy and Divine Liturgy;

Holy Communion (CCC 1331; cf. 1 Corinthians 10: 16-17);

Holy Mass (CCC 1332).

From these explanatory sections from the Catechism, we can see the essential elements of the Tradition of the Eucharistic Liturgy. This has been an ever-present, ubiquitous Tradition in the Church since the time of Christ and the Apostles. What makes this Tradition so powerful when a Catholic dialogues with Protestants is that it is undeniable that the early Christians did not gather for a "Sunday service," as Protestants typically understand the term. Rather, the early Christians gathered together to celebrate the Eucharistic sacrifice, complete with the essential prayers and gestures we use today in the Catholic Church (as well as in the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches).

---

Excerpted from Why is That in Tradition?  
by Patrick Madrid, copyright © Patrick Madrid,

[Coleus]

 

It becomes more distorted when you make it bigger.

[VermiciousKnid]

Oh, Coleus...

Thanks for trying. I liked the image so much I was hoping to get a clear picture of it so I could try to recreate it in order to embroider it on my youngest kid's Communion banner for next year.

I'll have to wing it now....hope my inner artiste is up to the challenge!

Regards,

[Arguss]

It became distorted because yu made it wider instead of taller.

[no more apples]

I hope you have a merry and blessed Christmas as well! Thank you!

[undirish01]

"dissenting members of the Church are not an authority".

Well, no kidding.

But......BUT their views are being rehashed over and over again in catechetical texts! Sure, the press companies and their wares have the conformity with the catechism monicker on the cover, or the press copyright page, by the USCCB. As if we can totally trust the USCCB??? Uh, I don't think so.

If you want examples you need go no further than any "Catholic Update" (St. Anthony Messenger Press) which focuses on the Holy Eucharist. Over and over again the focus of "The Real Presence" is the people (to refute that idea see CCC 1373 and Sacrosanctum Concilium 7).

These "Catholic Updates" are used not only in religious ed., but also RCIA. They are nothing more than the "New Age" movement revisited.

Even Archbishop Hughes said, after reviewing 25 catechetical texts they were "lacking doctrinally":

• The U.S. bishops’ Committee on Catechesis has begun work on four projects to benefit the American church, said its chairman, Archbishop Daniel M. Buechlein of Indianapolis. Areas to be covered in the committee’s work are education in human sexuality, the education and formation of catechists and catechetical leadership, the development of doctrinal guidelines for high school-level catechetical instruction and a project to outline key doctrinal elements in the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults. Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes of New Orleans said the ad hoc committee had reviewed 25 high school catechetical texts since mid-2001 and found most of them lacking in key doctrinal areas."

http://www.americamagazine.org/catholicnews.cfm?articleTypeID=29&textID=3295&issueID=461

(uh, fond this on a Google search in America magazine.......not exactly "in conformity" with the bishops is this magazine).

I suggest a search for these findings more thoroughly and get an opinion from a different website.

The PRE-DOMINANT way the "Real Presence" is being presented today is "in the assembly". Many "powers-that-be" DO NOT want to "go back" to the days of "coookie worship". After all, the will say, "The Eucharist is not confected to display in some baroque monstrance." Uh-huh. I guess this is why JPII is hammering Eucharistic Adoration so hard these days (see Ecclesia de Eucharistia #10, and The Year of the Eucharist #18).

Suggested reading to research bad catechesis which is still going on in religious ed. circles in the Church:

"Catechisms and Controversies" by Msgr Michael Wrenn and "Flawed Expectations" by the same author with Kenneth Whitehead (both printed by Ignatius Press). Also "In the Presence of Our Lord" by Fr. Groeschel.

My thoughts, FWIW.

Peace

[undirish01]

Other authors to be very wary of when it comes to Transubstantiation and the proper meaning of the sacraments:

Karl Rahner
Edward Schilebeeckx
Nathan Mitchell
Thomas Groome
Thomas Richstatter
Jeffrey VonLehmen
William Shannon
Joseph Martos

For an excellent article about the "dumbing down" (if not out right heresy) of the sacraments, please see this article by Fr. Edward O'Connor, C.S.C.:

http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Homiletic/June97/mcbrien.html

[power2]

bump for later read

[Dominick]

If you want examples you need go no further than any "Catholic Update" (St. Anthony Messenger Press) which focuses on the Holy Eucharist. Over and over again the focus of "The Real Presence" is the people (to refute that idea see CCC 1373 and Sacrosanctum Concilium 7).

Looking at the Catholic Update feature online:
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0901.asp

On that Sunday, he had visualized the body and blood of Jesus, consumed in the form of bread and wine, breaking down into smaller and smaller pieces, all the way down to the tiniest element, being carried to every part of his own body by his beating heart. He felt literally "nourished by Jesus" throughout.

He also felt deeply connected to those around him, he said. He felt the Eucharist, the presence of Jesus, at the very center of his being and at that point, he felt connected to that same central point in everyone else who had just received Communion. He experienced, in a mysterious way, the real presence of Jesus, an experience of both transcendence with God and of communion with the the Body of Christ, the Church, indeed the whole world. His experience points to an authentically Catholic understanding of the Eucharist.

Three themes, The Real Presence, the Mystical Body of Christ as the Church, and God as he claims the Universe. On this topic I don't see a problem.

Other topics, are not unacceptable, but doesn't resound with me personally. For example, the AIDS piece, without diving into the detail, do point to personal Sin as a cause for AIDS, but correctly, not the only one.

I don't see a new age influence as I have seen with Fox, Merton, or other new age people who purport to be Catholic. I don't doubt there are abuses. For example:
http://www.centeringprayer.com/intimacy/intimacy01b.htm

Quote:
At Lama they were pleased with my respect for Eastern religions, as most of them had not previously met a priest who was sympathetic with their experience. Catholics also found me sympathetic to the problems they had encountered with their early upbringing. During the first couple of years in my new home in Colorado, I visited several Eastern communities, where I continued to find the same percentages of Catholics.

No comment...

[undirish01]

Clarification:

Not ALL of the "Catholic Updates" are bad. They are a hodge-podge and mish-mash of good theology on certain topics mixed with BAD theology. They present differing "theologies" of theologians as if they were Catholic Truth from the Magisterium. This is a major problem. Theologians are NOT the Magisterium (like you said). I said "New Age" because some of these "Catholic Updates" focus on the Christ's Real Presence as being JUST AS PRESENT in the assembly as He is in the Eucharist. Not so.

Here are the dates of some examples:

Eucharist: Understanding Christ's Body--1998

The Sacrament of the Eucharist: What Has Happened to My Devotion?--1992

Real Presence In The Eucharist--1996

These are all presented in a "Come and See" big three-ring binder for an RCIA program. Mucho goofy stuff in there.

[undirish01]

In a recent issue of "This Rock" (Dec '04), they did a whole issue of book reviews. There was a book published by St. Anthony Messenger Press called "Catholic Traditions: Treasures New and Old" by a Joanne Turpin which was reviewed by Michelle Arnold of Catholic Answers(p. 40, left-hand column). Arnold gave the book two out of five stars by-the-way.

Turpin says of Transubstantiation: "A devout manner of reception affirms the deeply held belief shared by Catholics that Christ is truly, fully present in the consecrated bread and wine."

To which Miss Arnold correctly says, "No, this is the deeply held belief of those non-Catholic Christians who subscribe to consubstantiation. Catholics have 'the deeply held belief' that the bread and wine are truly and fully changed into Christ, who is 'truly, fully present' under the appearance of bread and wine."

Thus, to Turpin, the bread and wine do NOT change. Jesus somehow attaches Himself to the bread and wine, or manifests Himself THROUGH them to make His "Real Presence" there. The latter "theology" is something called transfinalization or transignification. Both of which were promoted by Schilebeeckx and Rahner (and now, sadly, by many of their disciples).