Is Holy Communion Real or Symbolic?

Catholic in the Ozarks ^ | June 2, 2014 | Shane Schaetzel

[NYer]

Ping!

[sigzero]

“There is nothing in Christian antiquity that suggests the early Christians believed Holy Communion (the Eucharistic “body” and “blood”) was merely symbolic. Indeed, the burden of proof falls on the Protestants when they say otherwise. “

The wording in the Bible is clear. It is a remembrance until He comes again. It doesn’t turn into anything. It doesn’t bestow any “extra” grace.

[JT Hatter]

Nutcake.

[svcw]

symbolic

[Dutchboy88]

So, “do this in remembrance of Me” actually means, “Hire a guy in a bathrobe to say some hocus pocus words and then it will become my actual body and blood.” Can you give us the passage that makes this important connection?

[Ouchthatonehurt]

HOC EST CORPUS MEUM
Actually

[Salvation]

Great chart, except am I missing the Orthodox split?

[miss marmelstein]

Real.

[miss marmelstein]

Bathrobe, really? You sound foolish.

[cuban leaf]

“There is nothing in Christian antiquity that suggests the early Christians believed Holy Communion (the Eucharistic “body” and “blood”) was merely symbolic. Indeed, the burden of proof falls on the Protestants when they say otherwise. “

The wording in the Bible is clear. It is a remembrance until He comes again. It doesn’t turn into anything. It doesn’t bestow any “extra” grace.

---

Yep. I strongly support YOPIOS on my part because my relationship is with Jesus. I don’t interpret it in a vacuum. In fact, as I read the perspective of others on the Word of God, I sometimes change my position as I more thoroughly study a subject. e.g. I went from pre-trib to “mid trib”, or believing the bible teaches, regarding the lost in eternity, annihilation over eternal suffering.

[FourtySeven]

Good point. That chart is only illustrating the splits after the “Reformation” though. So I imagine the Orthodox split is kind of assumed there. Or one could perhaps view them as still part of the Catholic Church for the purposes of this discussion (the body and blood of Jesus as the Eucharist).

[The Grammarian]

Following their Anglican forefathers, Methodists also believe in the Real Presence, though they reject transubstantiation and prefer to leave the manner or to state that it is spiritual.

[The Grammarian]

That should read “and prefer to leave the manner undefined or to state that it is spiritual.”

[BunnySlippers]

REAL

[ifinnegan]

John 6:63, it’s quoted in the long passage.

Jesus says he is speaking spiritually.

They ask, how can we eat you etc...

Jesus says in answer, “the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.”

Jesus Himself says he is speaking spiritually.

[ifinnegan]

All Christians know the Real Presence.

Transubstantiation is not Biblical and simply odd as often presented as literal.

Given the increases in understanding of chemistry and physiology it just sounds odd and goes way beyond anything the early believers would have thought or been able to consider.

What is strange is the adherence to this literal interpretation that somehow the wafer or bread, a food, becomes actual literal human flesh contrasted with rather non-literal interpretations of other Biblical passages, eg being fine with evolution or other things.

Odd double standards.

[Keli Kilohana]

He said this is my body and my blood—the night BEFORE He died. Was it the real body and blood BEFORE He even died? Or, wasn’t he speaking symbolically?

[miss marmelstein]

When will I stop coming on “Holy Communion” threads only to find out that the majority of posters are Protestants with a real hate-on towards Catholicism? It's like constantly opening a box of chocolates only to have it explode in my face!

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

John 6 "51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” 52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum."

It cannot get any clearer than this. The Holy Eucharist is indeed Jesus's actual flesh. Nothing symbolic. And it doesn't bestow "extra grace," but rather it bestows life itself.