Well then, “this is my body” means what it says because it is a straight forward statement of fact by Christ Himself.
Christ wasn't being figurative when He was describing what He was doing as He did it, it's that simple. So what's this about not denying Jesus Christ? Does that mean someone who doesn't deny Him is free to essentially call Him a liar by trying to find a different meaning for whatever Jesus Christ says that they don't like? How can someone completely ignore, deny, or try to alter the meaning of what Jesus Christ Himself said, things that refute Once Saved Always Saved, that refute Scripture Alone, and that refute Faith Alone, but say they don't deny Him? Approve the Apocrypha? The Scripture Alone crowd bear the burden of showing where Christ or the Apostles ever even implied there were portions of Scripture in use that were not the inspired Word of God. There are three possibilities. One, that there's a list of what should be in the canon that the Holy Spirit did not protect and did not have passed along (which would make Jesus Christ a liar), there were books included in the Scriptures in common use that were not inspired but Scripture isn't important enough for Christ to point that out, or, Scripture Alone is a joke and a very poor joke at that.
Without the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church Jesus Christ Himself founded to establish the canon based on what the Apostles passed down orally there wouldn't be the Bible as we know it. There would be tens of thousands of Bibles just like there are tens of thousands of denominations. Scripture Alone dissolves into Self Alone in very, very, short order. Usually as soon as there's something someone wants the Scripture to condone like infanticide by abortafacient contraceptive or premarital chastity not being any big deal.
So, if one were consistent, if they insist on throwing out the Apocrypha because the Jews did after Jerusalem was destroyed, they'd throw out the New Testament that the Jews don't accept as well. Either the Jews retained authority over the Scripture or they didn't. If they did, there goes the New Testament, and if they didn't there isn't even a shadow of an reason to throw out the Apocrypha that Christ never criticized but did quote. Lack of consistency is actually one of the many huge beams in the eyes of the Self Alone folks, not in the eye of the Catholic Church.
As believers through faith, Christians accept what Scripture says when it says to obey your prelates. They accept what Scripture says about each one having a role and no one being the entire body. They accept the hierarchy of authority clearly created by the Apostles in the New Testament and they accept that just like Moses had a chair, Peter had a chair and like the chair of Moses, that authority is passed down through future generations. They accept that they are not the head of the body free to determine all things with no direction from the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church Jesus Christ Himself founded to provide His sheep with shepherds and instruction. That's faith in Christ and His Word. Anything else is part of the strong delusion of SELF ALONE because it imitates Eve, not Christ.
I haven’t found any evidence that our Lord Christ Jesus endorsed the books of the Apocrypha during the First Incarnation.
Prior to the First Incarnation, the Word of God was formally communicated ONLY through one office established by God. The office of the Prophet. Since the books in the Apocrypha were not written or communicated from God to man by His Prophet, I don’t see them as being Divinely inspired as the Word of God. They weren’t even authored in Hebrew.
I agree they may indeed contain useful historical information, but not as the Canon of Scripture.
Where in Scripture does our Lord Christ Jesus quote from the books of the Apocrypha or where does He recognize their authors as having been Divinely inspired?
If not our Lord, where do any Prophets acknowledge the Apocryphal writings as Scripture prior to the First Incarnation?
I suspect this would be much more powerful evidence to support their veracity. If found, then we can discuss the many contradictory positions found within them, even the authors contradicting their own writings, but that is simply a secondary issue, which is moot when their veracity hasn’t been established.
Again, I don’t find study of historical writings to be inappropriate, but I don’t mistake them as the Word, just as I wouldn’t mistake Homer’s Odyssey to be mistaken as the Word of God.
Besides, the power of the Cross was the handling of sin once and forever. Forgiveness of the individual may now occur instantly through faith in Him, not the Crucifix. Every other book in Scripture traces the Crimson thread of Redemption back to our Lord Christ Jesus. That Crimson thread of Redemption is strangely missing in the Apocrypha.