Is Jesus Present in the Eucharist (Bread)

Those who think the Eucharist is a pagan "sun god" may want to read this first.

Catholics think they have the most kickin' altar call around - Holy Communion. Talk about getting up and coming down the aisle for the Lord. Catholics believe we actually meet Him in the flesh when we hit the front of the Church. I've had some awesome experiences after communion, where I could just feel the Lord pulsing through my veins.

It wasn't always that way for me. Honestly, it took me 8 years of being a Catholic before I "got it". Before that I thought the "real presence of Jesus in the bread" was the most ridiculous thing I'd ever heard of. What changed my mind? I simply prayed about it. I "got it" as a result of prayer, I simply asked Jesus to reveal the truth to me. I asked, "Lord please show me the truth about the Eucharist. If you are present in it, please make your presence known" - and He did, Praise God! 

Martin Luther, the founder of the reform believed in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. In 1529, he engaged the question of transubstantiation in the famous conference at Marburg with Zwingli and other Swiss theologians; he maintained his view that Christ is present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist.

Bethlehem means "House of Bread"

Jesus was born in Bethlehem. The old Hebrew name bêth lehem, means "house of bread." It is interesting that Jesus was born in a city that was called the "house of bread" and Mary laid Jesus in a manger, which is not just a stable, but rather a trough where animals would eat. Jesus said later said, "I am the bread of life...unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you will have no life within you." (Jn 6)

Why Can't Evangelicals and Protestants join Catholic Communion (Eucharist)?

Many people have asked me this. They feel that the Catholic Church is being snobby for not allowing non-Catholics to join Communion on those rare occations when they are at a Catholic event. There are a bunch of reasons for this. Most Evangelicals don't actually believe the Eucharist is truly the body and blood of Christ. I think anyone can imagine that if someone believes that the Bread has become the flesh of Jesus that they would be hesitant to share that with someone who thinks its just bread. Saint Paul says:

"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself." (1 Cor 11:27-29)

So we think it is quite serious to consume it without believing ("discerning") that it is the Body of Jesus. We don't want to see people hurt themselves.

Also, it is sad to say that we are not yet in full unity. The Eucharist is the core of Catholicism. We are totally into praying together and playing music together. We also like it when someone comes up for a blessing during communion. However, there is nothing closer to the heart of the Church than the Body and Blood of our Lord. It's been this way for 2000 years since the apostles. All of the Early Church Fathers talk about cherishing our Lord in the Eucharist. So naturally, we would preserve it for the deepest sign of unity which would be to become one of us.

The Eucharist is the most intimate expression of our faith. Sharing it with a visitor like saying to someone who knocks on the door, "come into my home and don't even worry about hanging out in the living room, come into the bedroom." The deepest intimacy is saved for those who are part of our family. We feel that our Lord has made himself very vulnerable by coming in the form of bread and we feel an obligation to protect the integrity of the Eucharist, just like Joseph protected Jesus when he was a baby and most vulnerable. So until there is unity, we cannot pretend that there is unity by compromising what we believe is the Body of our Lord, the source and summit of our faith.

I know that I was welcome to take communion when I was playing music in an Evangelical Church. But I did not do it because I felt it would be wrong for me to pretend that I believed, as the rest of this Evangelical congregation believed, that Communion is just a symbol. I think that the Eucharist is the Body of Christ and I think that the Lord has preserved the preparation of the Eucharist for those who are the direct successors of those present at the last supper. That is the lineage of bishops and priests that has been handed on to us through succession by the laying on of hands.

What if the Eucharist fell on the ground and a mouse ate it?

In jokingly trying to belittle the Eucharist, an Evangelical friend said to me "if it is really the body of Christ, what happens if a bit falls on the floor and a mouse comes along and eats it?" An image appeared in my mind of Jesus on the Cross. Jesus' blood fell to the ground for the rats to eat. What a tragedy. I hope we never waste a crumb of his precious body or a drop of his precious blood. In the Mel Gibson Movie, "The Passion," Mary mopped up the blood of Jesus. His body and blood are very precious.

There is another way to respond to this joke about a piece of the Eucharist falling to the ground. Consider that Jesus' body is the Word of God made flesh (Jn 1). In places like Capernaum Jesus' words often fell on "deaf" ears and hard hearts. It was a tragedy but it does not make his words any less real. Sometimes the Eucharist is wasted on people with hard hearts but devout Catholics don't think that makes this miracle any less real. In 1 Sam 3:19 we read "As Samuel grew up, the Lord was with him and let none of his words fall to the ground." I pray the word of God made flesh in the Eucharist never falls to the ground.

Isn't it too hard to understand

The Catholic Church considers the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist to be a mystery. The Church is totally cool with it being a mystery. We humans only have 3.5 pound brains. We can't understand everything, nor does God expect us to. To those who say "it's impossible for Jesus to change the substance of the bread into his body", we answer "could He do it if He wanted to?" Catholics think He could, because He can do anything. He certainly had no problem changing water into wine. Catholics believe He wanted to do it, He promised it, He predicted it, and He followed through. "Take eat, this is my body." (Mat. 26:26, Mk. 14:22, Lk 22:19) After talking about the bread (manna) from heaven he says "I am the Bread of Life" (Jn 6:35). "For the bread that I will give...is my flesh" (Jn 6:51). Many of his followers had trouble with that back then (Jn 6:60) and many have trouble with it now. I understand people who have a problem with the idea. I did before I experienced it.

Early Christians "devoted themselves to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers" (Acts 2:42)  They "met to break bread" (Acts 20:7). This wording makes it appear that the breaking of bread was the purpose of the meeting and central to their discussions together and unity. The "Bread of Life" (Jn 6:23) was a central part of Christian Sunday worship.

". . . Whoever eats (Greek: trogon) me will live because of me. . . Also the one who feeds (trogon) on my flesh will have life . . ." (Jn 6 :48-58) 

The normal word in Greek for "eat" is Phagon but in this passage the author uses Trogon which literally means to crunch or gnaw. It is not just a metaphor. The verb tense of Trogon implies continuous consumption of the body & blood of Christ. Death was introduced to humanity through eating the forbidden fruit. (The act of actually eating a food) and now life is restored by actually eating the "bread of life", that is Christ's flesh.(1)

What did they eat at the last supper? Wasn't Jesus still alive then?

I got an email that said:

If we receive Jesus' glorified body in the Eucharist, then what did the apostles receive in the upper room since His body hadn't been glorified yet? (Last Supper)

My question back to him was: "Who was the 'rock' in the dessert? (Exo 17:6, 1 Cor 10:4) Who was the "Word" in the beginning of time (Jn 1:2-3)", "Before Abraham was, I AM" (Jn 8:58) Jesus hadn't been born yet. Nevertheless, Scripture makes it clear that it was Jesus.

John Pacheco and Art Sippo say:

There is no "yet" with Jesus. He is not subject to time. That would be a heresy for both Protestants and Catholics. So the answer is that it was the SAME Eucharist as the one you receive today. The Eucharist transcends time and space. In it we receive Christ whole and entire: body, blood, soul, and divinity. The glorified body of Christ was the revelation of his true nature as the Incarnate God that is what we receive.

Simple Scripture on the Eucharist

We Catholics sometimes get accused of making complicated analogies when reading scriptures. Let us look at some simple Scripture passages that Catholics feel are hard to ignore when considering "the bread" of communion

• Jesus said "Your ancestors ate manna in the wilderness and died...I am the living bread that came down from heaven...unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you will not have life within you."
• Jesus was born in "Bethlehem" which, in Hebrew, literally means "house of Bread"
• A manger was not a place where animals stayed. It was a trough where food was put to feed the animals. Mary laid Jesus in a place where food was placed
• At the last supper, which was a passover meal, Jesus said "take this and eat it, this is my body."

Was Jesus being literal when he said "I am the bread of Life"

Some Evangelicals believe that Jesus intended his phrase "I am the bread of life" to be understood in a symbolic way. Catholics believe that Jesus clearly spells it out "Very truly unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." (Jn 6:53) Many followers left him saying "who can follow this teaching." Christ let them leave. He did not say "Hey, you have it all wrong, come back, its just a metaphor - a symbol- its not really my flesh" (2)  Here is a further discussion on why Catholics believe the desciples  fully understood "I am the bread" to be Jesus' actual body before they abandoned him.

Some Evangelicals believe that when Jesus said "It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless,"(Jn 6:63)he was saying that his teaching "I am the bread of life" was just a metaphor. Catholics believe that Jesus was explaining to them that the limitations of their faith is their flesh so they could not see the spiritual truth in what he is saying. We must remember this was Jesus' response to them saying "This teaching is difficult, who can accept it."

Catholics are clear that the Eucharist is not just a spiritual warm fuzzy like when we get hit with the Holy Spirit at a prayer meeting. It is the only body Jesus has had since the ascension. We share in this body during communion and become his body (the Church).

Catholics believe this is a great mystery of the Christian faith. But we believe Jesus set it up very well before dropping this truth "bomb" on the disciples in the book of John 6. John 6:3 begins with the miracle of the loaves, he then talks about the miracle of the manna in the dessert (Jn 6:49). These both foreshadow his most powerful statement "I am the Bread of Life" and help him set the people up for what he knew would be the most difficult statement to understand that he ever spoke. He knew many would leave at that point and so after setting it up with the foreshadowing, after explaining it four times, and clarifying himself in Jn 6:63 he let them go (Jn 6:66). He did not chase after them to assure them he was just talking "symbolically" because they understood his words correctly and they could not accept it. Thank God the apostles stayed with him.

This belief that the Eucharist becomes the glorified body of Christ is not "consubstantiation." Catholics believe the Eucharist is fully Him (Transubstantiation). Catholics believe the miracle of the Eucharist is that it has the taste, smell, and shape of the wafer but that during the mass, the substance actually becomes Christ's glorified body which can only been seen through the eyes of Faith. Some might say "how is that possible?" My question would be "could Jesus do it if He wanted to?" Catholics believe the answer is "yes." They believe he wanted to, that He said he would do it and that He delivered on his promise.

Catholics believe the act of "disobedience" in Eden was to eat of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil." (Gen 2:17) This introduced death into the world. Catholics believe that the act of "obedience" that introduces life into the world is to follow Jesus' command when he says "whoever eats me will live because of me" Catholics believe Jesus is the new life.

Scripture says "For indeed Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us. Therefore, let us keep this feast." (1 Cor 5:7-8)  This relates to Exodus 12:1-42. The Passover meal saved from the angel of death who was striking the first born children in Egypt. At a traditional Passover supper, the Jews ate the sacrificial lamb. Catholics believe Paul is saying that this feast should continue.  They don't think that he was "re-sacrificing" Christ when he kept this feast.

We see the Eucharistic formula throughout Scripture.  At table, Jesus takes . . . blesses . . . breaks . . . and gives the bread. He also took a cup of wine; after giving thanks to God, He gave it to His disciples saying, "This is My blood . . . of the [new] covenant." Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:15-20. This is the same formula Jesus uses during the first Eucharistic celebration after the resurrection when He encountered two disciples on the road to Emmaus (see Luke 24:13-35). When the Corinthians drift from the proper Eucharistic formula, Paul corrects them.(1 Corinthians 11:23-29)

Scott Hahn says:

Though Paul was not there at the Last Supper, he tells them he received this teaching from the churches founded by the Apostles; they, in turn, received this teaching directly from the Lord: "I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you" The Greek words Paul uses - translated as "received" and "handed on" - are technical terms the rabbis of his day used to describe the keeping and teaching of sacred traditions. Paul uses these same words when he talks about his teaching on Christ's death and Resurrection (see 1 Corinthians 15:2-3). These two sacred traditions - the truth about Christ's death and Resurrection and the truth about the Eucharist, the memorial of His death - were received from the Lord and and handed on by the Apostles. These traditions were inseparable and crucial to the message of salvation they preached.

Through Christ's death and Resurrection, Paul said, "we are being saved." In the Eucharist, that saving event is "remembered" in a way that communicates that salvation to us: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup," Paul said, "you proclaim the death of the Lord until He comes" (see 1 Corinthians 11:26).

In John's Gospel we read "I am the Bread of Life" (see John 6:34, 51). In the other, delivered at the Last Supper (see John 13:2,4), Jesus again says two times: "I am the Vine" [referring to wine] (see John 15:1,5).

From: http://www.salvationhistory.com/online/beginner/course2_lesson1a.cfm

Is the Eucharist Cannibalistic?

Some Evangelicals feel that the idea of eating Jesus is Cannibalistic. Catholics don't think so. When Catholics say that the bread becomes the body of Christ, they are talking about the glorified body of Christ. Immediately after Jesus said "whoever eats me will live because of me" (Jn 6:58) He says "what if you saw the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?" (Jn 6:62) Catholics feel he is explaining that his body will be changed into a glorified body (such as is described in 1 Cor 15:40) his body became glorified at the ascension. This passage of John foreshadows the ascension. And this is how Jesus clarified himself and made the distinction between his mortal body (Cannibalistic concept) and his Glorified body (Eucharistic concept). The glorified body of Christ was the revelation of his true nature as the Incarnate God. That is what we receive.

I was recently on a bus traveling to Toronto when I saw a university student with his history book "The Romans, from Village to Empire." (Oxford Press 2004). I flipped it open to the section on Christianity in ancient Rome. It discussed the Roman's impression of the early Christians.

...Their 'eating the body and drinking the blood of their savior' was called cannibalism...

So Evangelicals are not the first to think this insistence that Jesus is present in the Eucharist is odd. The bad news is that they share this opinion with Pagan Romans long before Constantine. Yup, the early Christians believed what we Catholics still believe about the Eucharist.

Jesus is the Lamb of God

In the New Testament Jesus is called the "Lamb of God" 34 times (i.e., Jn 1:36). Scripture refers to the Last Supper as the Passover Lamb (Mk 14:11). At the original Passover (Exodus 12:1-42) the Lamb of God had to be eaten. At the last supper Jesus said "take this and eat it, this is my body." Catholics don't think this is a coincidence.

Is the Eucharist a re-sacrifice of Jesus?

No its not. He died once for our sins and his presence remains forever. In Catholic terms we say it is a "Sacramental Expression of a Paschal Mystery." (Paschal means "having to do with the Passover".)

When Evangelicals say "I am washed in the blood of Jesus" (which I love) are they re-sacrificing Jesus who died 2000 years ago? No, they are experiencing the perpetual nature of his sacrifice for our sins.

Breaking of bread happened every time apostles met. It appears to be a very sacred thing they did together rather than just some fellowship. (Acts 2:42, 1 Cor 11:20-21). Failing to discern the body & blood brings condemnation, "That is why many of you are ill and infirm and a considerable number are dying", (1 Cor 11:27-32). Jesus said "This is my body" ("Esti" in Greek).(1 Co 11:24) There are a dozen Greek words that could have been used to describe it as a "symbol". But those words were not used. The word used is "body."

When the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ, why do they still look and taste like bread and wine?

Ok, I'm going to get heady here. Here's a theological explanation of what Catholics believe happens in Transubstantiation. It introduces two important medieval theological words "accidents" and "substance". (note: "accident" is not like a car accident)

In the Church's traditional theological language, in the act of consecration during the Eucharist the "substance" of the bread and wine is changed by the power of the Holy Spirit into the "substance" of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. At the same time, the "accidents" or appearances of bread and wine remain. "Substance" and "accident" are here used as philosophical terms that have been adapted by great medieval theologians such as St. Thomas Aquinas in their efforts to understand and explain the faith. Such terms are used to convey the fact that what appears to be bread and wine in every way (at the level of "accidents" or physical attributes - that is, what can be seen, touched, tasted, or measured) in fact is now the Body and Blood of Christ (at the level of "substance" or deepest reality). This change at the level of substance from bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is called "transubstantiation." According to Catholic faith, we can speak of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because this transubstantiation has occurred (cf. Catechism, no. 1376) ... Christ's presence in the Eucharist is unique in that, even though the consecrated bread and wine truly are in substance the Body and Blood of Christ, they have none of the accidents or characteristics of a human body, but only those of bread and wine.

How come people can get drunk if they drink a bunch of consecrated wine?

I got an email that said:

When the wine in transubstantiated into the blood of Christ, does the alcoholic content cease to exist? ... why were some of the Corinthians (ICor.) becoming drunk from the wine at the Lord's Supper?

Saying that people getting drunk on consecrated wine is proof of non transubstantiation indicates confusion over the concept of accidents versus substance. I'm allergic to bread and yes the Eucharist also. That is the accidents (physical attributes). I'm still totally into the Eucharist even though I'm allergic, and take a tiny corner of it at Mass. The physical characteristics remain in tact. The substance however, is totally Jesus. And yup, this is hard to understand. Even the Bible says its hard to understand (Jn 6:56) and lots of desciples quit over it.

In Ezekiel 47:12 We read "...because the water for them flows from the sanctuary. Their fruit will be for food and their leaves for healing."

The early Church celebrated the Eucharist - it's not a medieval invention

There are numerous letters from early Christians that recognize and document this belief in the real presence of Jesus. In 2000 years there have been no letters discovered from early Christians that indicate they thought it was just a symbol.

A well meaning Evangelical emailed me and said Church Fathers Theordoret of Cyrus, Iraneus and Augustine did not think the Eucharist was fully the Body and Blood of Jesus. I went back to the original documents of the quotes he provided. They were out of context and the Theodoret and Irenaeus explicitly declared the Eucharist to be the Body and Blood of Christ. More here.

Let's go back to 110 A.D. to the time of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch where Jesus' followers were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). Ignatius had heard the Good News from John himself who wrote a Eucharist passage himself. (Jn 6:48-58) He wrote to the Churches while he was on the way to Rome to be thrown to lions. His letters were highly regarded in the early Church. He said "...They (the heretics) even absent themselves from the Eucharist and the public prayers (c.f. Acts 2:42) because they will not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ." (3)

Writing to the church at Philadelphia, states, "Take care, then, to partake of one Eucharist; for, one is the Flesh of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and one the cup to unite us with His Blood, and one altar, just as there is one bishop assisted by the presbytery and the deacons, my fellow servants. Thus you will conform in all your actions to the will of God" (Letter to the Philadelphians, par. 4).

To the Church in Ephesus, Ignatius wrote that they were to "obey bishop and clergy with undivided minds and to share in the one common breaking of bread - the medicine of immortality and the sovereign remedy by which we escape death and live in Jesus Christ for ever more." (Eph 20:3)

It appears that early Christians were teaching we "live in Jesus Christ for evermore" in the Eucharist. (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2). No early writings of the church view the Lord's Supper as a mere symbol that failed to do what it symbolized.

Comparison Chart - The Fall and Redemption

The following table shows the Biblical comparison of Adam and Eve's fall in the garden by eating the forbidden fruit to Mary's "yes" and Jesus' presence in the Eucharist. It highlights why Catholics call Mary the "new Eve," why we believe the Eucharist is the Body of Christ, and the reasons we must eat it.

The Fall	The Redemption
The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." (Gen. 2:18)	"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. (Luke 1:38)
The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called 'Woman', because she was taken out of Man...(Gen. 2:23)	And Jesus said to her, "Woman, what does that have to do with us? My hour has not yet come." (John 2:4)
Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. (Gen. 2:22)	But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. (Galatians 4:4-5)
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" (Gen.3:1)	his mother said to the servants, "Whatever He says to you, do it." (John 2:5)
"...but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." (Gen. 2:17)	"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day." (John 6:54)
"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (Gen. 3:4)	When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. (Luke 24:30-31)
When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate...(Gen. 3:6)	Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, "I am the bread that came down out of heaven." They were saying, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, 'I have come down out of heaven'?" (John 6:41-42)
"Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" (Gen. 3:11)	So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves." (John 6:53)
The man said, "The woman you put here with me-she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it." (Gen. 3:12)	And she cried out with a loud voice and said, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! (Luke 1:42)
Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." (Gen. 3:13)	And Mary said, "Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; may it be done to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her. (Luke 1:38)
Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living. (Gen. 3:20)	When Jesus then saw his mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother!" (John 19:26-27)
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." (Gen. 3:22)	I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh." (John 6:51)

This chart was developed by my friend John Pacheco. www.Catholic-Legate.com

Let us Pray:
Lord Jesus, let Your prayer of unity for Christians
become a reality, in Your way
we have absolute confidence
that you can bring your people together
we give you absolute permission to move
Amen

Footnotes: (1)"Rome Sweet Home" by Scott & Kimberly Hahn (2)"The Usual Suspects" pg 171 by Karl Keating (3) Pg. 196 "Surprised by Truth" by Patrick Madrid

| Copyright notice |

David's Music CD