Msgr. Peter J. Vaghi
Title of Series: "Holy Mass: An Up Close and Personal Look"

Part 5: "Is the Eucharist Really the Body and Blood of Christ?"

February 2nd, 2006
First Thursday

A number of years ago, there was a rather broadly disseminated Gallup poll regarding the attitudes of Roman Catholics towards the Blessed Sacrament. The results of this poll evidence rather serious confusion among Catholics about this core belief of our faith, what the Vatican Council has repeatedly called the “source and summit” of our lives as Catholics, that which actually “defines” us as Catholics in the words of the late Pope John Paul II.

In summary form, only 30 percent of those surveyed believed that they were actually receiving the Body and Blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine. 29 percent believed they were receiving bread and wine which symbolize the spirit and teachings of Jesus and, in so doing, were expressing their attachment to His person and words. 10 percent understood their action to be receiving bread and wine in which Jesus is present. Finally, 23 percent held that they were receiving what has become the Body and Blood of Christ because of their own personal belief. 

It is the first option, chosen by a mere 30 percent of Catholics polled, which represents the clear and traditional teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, i.e. that we actually receive the Body and Blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine. The other options represent various forms of Protestant belief.

Now you know why I have entitled this fifth meditation: “Is the Eucharist really the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?” Regrettably there is much confusion regarding the real presence of the Eucharist and what it means even among Catholics. During this series of meditations, I am seeking to clear up that confusion and to break open the great beauty of the Eucharist for all to understand more deeply -- beginning with ourselves.

In answer to my title question, then, you and I must answer a resounding “yes.” The Eucharist is “truly, really and substantially” the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. It is the Risen Jesus, the person of Jesus. At its heart, our answer comes from faith, a faith that we must pray for each and every day, each and every time we receive the Eucharist, each and every time we pray in adoration before the Blessed Sacrament. But our faith is supported for sure by a proper understanding of the very words of Jesus, words spoken at the Last Supper (which I spoke about in a previous talk), the words of Jesus in John 6, texts on the Eucharist from the early Fathers of the Church and from the Council of Trent which defined the real presence of the Eucharist. Today, we will look at John 6, the Fathers, and Trent.

l.) The Actual Words of Jesus

As a starting point, we must never forget the actual words pronounced by Jesus. In addition to the words used at the Last Supper itself (the institution narrative), John 6, the “bread of life” discourse, is replete with language of the Eucharist. Jesus made the astonishing revelation when He stated: “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 He states further: “Amen, amen I say to you, 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 up 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: 53-56 This is not language of metaphor or symbol. In His semitic manner of speech, Jesus was using “my flesh” to mean His whole person. Christ’s person becomes food, and this implies on His part the gift of His entire self. John 6 was and extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper, a promise that could not have been more explicit.

In his book “Catholicism and Fundamentalism,” Karl Keating devotes two chapters refuting -- in a rather convincing way -- the fundamentalist challenge the language in scripture regarding the “real presence” is simply symbolic or metaphorical.

Twelve times in John 6, for example, the “bread of life” discourse, Jesus says that He is the bread come down from heaven.  Four times He says that they would have to “eat my flesh and drink my blood.”

Keating writes:

"Anyone turning to the text would find these words: 'Then he took bread, and blessed and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, This is my body, given for you; do this for a commemoration of me' (Lk 22:19). The Greek here and in the parallel Gospel passages (Mt 26:26; Mk 14:22) reads: Tuoto estin to soma mou. It is given slightly differently by Paul: Tuoto mou estin to soma (I Cor 11:24). They all translate as 'This is my body.' The verb estin is the equivalent of the English 'is' and can mean 'is really' or 'is figuratively.' The usual meaning of estin is the former, just as, in English, the verb is usually taken in the real or literal sense.

Fundamentalists, of course, insist Christ, in saying, 'This is my body', spoke only a trope. This interpretation is precluded by the whole tenor of John 6, the chapter where the Eucharist is promised. The Greek word for 'body' in John 6 is sarx, which can only mean physical flesh, and the word for 'eat' translates as 'gnaws' or 'chews'. This is not the language of metaphor.

The literal meaning cannot be avoided except through violence to the text -- and through the rejection of the universal understanding of the early Christian centuries. The writings of Paul and John reflect belief in a Presence that is Real. There is no basis for forcing anything else out of the lines, and no writer tried to do so until the early Middle Ages. In short, Christ did not institute a Figurative Presence."

(Catholicism and Fundamentalism,247)

Quoting Paul VI, John Paul II writes that the "Mass involves a most special presence which…. ‘is called ‘real’ not as a way of excluding all other types of presence as if they were ‘not real’, but because it is a presence in the fullest sense: a substantial presence whereby Christ, the God-Man, is wholly and entirely present.’” (Ecclesia de Eucharistia 15)

This is a hard teaching -- then and now.

Recently, Benedict XVI answered this challenge at Bari at the closing of the Eucharistic Congress when he said quoting John 6: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:56). How can we not rejoice over such a promise? However, we heard that, in the face of that first proclamation, instead of rejoicing, the people began to argue and protest: "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" (John 6:52).

To tell the truth, that attitude has been repeated many times in the course of history. It would seem that, deep down, people do not want to have God so close, so available, so present in their affairs. People want him to be great and, in a word, rather distant. Then they ask themselves questions to demonstrate that in fact such closeness is impossible.

However, the words Christ pronounced specifically in that circumstance retain all their graphic clarity: "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 you" (John 6:53). Facing the murmur of protest, Jesus could have backed down with tranquilizing words. "Friends, he could have said, don't worry! I spoke of flesh, but it is only a symbol. What I wish to say is only a profound communion of sentiments."

But Jesus did not take recourse to such sweeteners. He maintained his affirmation with firmness, even in face of the defection of his own apostles, and did not change at all the concrete character of his discourse: "Will you also go away?" (John 6:67), he asked. Thank God, Peter gave an answer that we also assume today with full awareness: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life" (John 6:68).”

Thus, even in Jesus’ day, this was a hard teaching to accept -- eating His physical flesh, the same Word who became flesh, is now the bread of life. Yet, the very words of Jesus help us understand that the Eucharist truly is His body and blood.

II.) Church Fathers

Belief in the Real Presence dates from the earliest days of the Christian era. In fact, for the first 1500 years of the Church’s existence, there was firm belief in the dogma of the Real Presence. It has been abundantly asserted and commented on in the teachings of the early Fathers of the Church. 

The Fathers of the Church, each of whom lived before 1000 A.D., and each of whom was acknowledged by the Church to be learned and in possession of a high level of sanctity, were the first line of authentic interpreters of what the gospel writings meant in the life of the Church. It was they who made that essential synthesis between the gospel and western thought and philosophy. In sum, there were about 250 Fathers. Most were bishops.

These Fathers of the Church had additional credibility since they lived in the early centuries of the church, a  time close to Jesus and the early Christian communities. 

Now we base our belief in the Real Presence, i.e. that the Eucharist is truly the body and blood of Jesus, above all, on the actual words of Jesus Himself. But the Church has consistently recommended a study of the Fathers of the Church as a tool in helping to understand the words of Jesus in scripture and the scripture in general. The Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation states that the Church “duly fosters the study of the Fathers -- both Eastern and Western...in order to provide her children with food from the divine words.” DV 23 The ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church excelled, after all, in the subtle language of scripture, motivated as they were exclusively by love of the Church and the salvation of souls.

Listen to some examples:

One of the earliest to write was St. Ignatius of Antioch, successor to St. Peter at Antioch, who died in 117 A.D. He wrote that “the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ.”

St. Justin Martyr, writing around 150 A.D., was one of the earliest church fathers to give a detailed description of the liturgy of the Eucharist. He had this to say: “We do not receive this food as ordinary bread and as ordinary drink; but just as Jesus Christ, our Savior, became flesh through the word of God and assumed flesh and blood for our salvation, so too we are taught that the food over which the Eucharistic prayer is said, the food which nourishes our flesh and blood by assimilation, is the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ.”

Three of the staunchest defenders of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist are St. Irenaeus, died in 202, St. Cyprian, died in 258 and St. Cyril of Jerusalem, died in 386. Irenaeus wrote: “Wine and bread are by the word of God changed into the Eucharist, which is the Body and Blood of Christ.” For St. Cyril of Jerusalem, his explicit teaching on the Real Presence, formed part of the normal instructions given to converts. Listen to him: “And so we consume these [consecrated species] with perfect certainty that they are the body and blood of Christ, since under the appearance of bread the body is given to us, and the blood under the appearance of wine, so that when you have taken the body and blood of Christ, you become participators in his very body and blood.”

St. Hippolytus of Rome, died in 235, wrote: “He hath given us His own divine Flesh and his own precious Blood to eat and to drink.”

Origen, in a homily written about 244 A.D., stated: “I wish to admonish you with examples from your religion. You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received the body of the Lord, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish. You account yourselves, guilty, and rightly do you so believe, if any of it be lost through negligence.”

In a fifth century homily, Theodore of Mopsuestia wrote: “When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood’, but, ‘This is my blood,’ for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements] after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but to receive them as they are, the body and blood our Lord.”

These witnesses of the early Church thus certainly affirm the Real Presence as based on John 6, taken literally, and the other texts that Jesus used in the institution of the Blessed Sacrament. This has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church since the beginning. 

III.)  Council of Trent (1545-63)

Since the patristic period, the doctrine of the Real Presence has developed as a result of certain controversies, with the definitive voice being that of the Council of Trent after the Protestant Reformation. Trent declares the Real Presence a truth of the faith.

But what does the Council teach?

Two definitive statements: “After the consecration of the bread and wine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is truly, really and substantially contained under the perceptible species of bread and wine.” And “If anyone denies that the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore, the whole Christ, is truly, really and substantially contained present in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, but says that Christ is present in the Sacrament only as in a sign or figure, or by his power, let him be anathema.” This is a truth of faith taught by the Council of Trent and not a mere philosophical opinion.

In other words, the substance of bread and wine is completely annihilated; only the appearance of bread and wine remain. This change is called transubstantiation -- that which happens at the moment of the consecration of the bread and wine. In the Eucharist, a change occurs such that the reality of the bread gives place to the reality of the body of Christ. It is a matter of a conversion from one substance into another, with only the “species” of bread and wine remaining intact. Nothing subsists of the substance of the bread and wine, since only the substance of the body and blood of Christ is present. “The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique.” CCC 1374 “Christ is thus really and mysteriously made present.” CCC 1356 The Council teaches also that “the whole Christ is contained under each species, and if these are divided, under each part of each species.” DS 1653 Where the body of Christ is found, there also will His blood be present. Important also: the body given as Eucharistic food is the body in its glorious state, a state that reunited His body and soul at the moment of the Resurrection and that makes any separation in the future impossible. We thus receive the Risen Lord in holy communion.

What a contrast to Luther who believed the real presence but only during the celebration of Holy Communion! In contrast to the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation, Luther held a co-existence of the true Body and Blood of Christ with the substance of the bread and wine (consubstantiation). Zwingli denied the real presence and declared the bread and wine to be mere symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ. Calvin rejected the substantial presence of the body and blood of Christ but accepted a kind of presence of power conferred by the transfigured Body of Christ in heaven.

I wish to end both with the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Ambrose -- two Fathers of the Church. First Cyril -- “What seems bread, is not bread, even if it seems such to the taste, but the body of Christ, and what seems wine is not wine, even though it has its taste, but the blood of Christ.” Ambrose -- “Before the sacramental words, this bread is bread. Once the consecration occurs, the bread becomes the body of Christ.”

They took literally the words of Jesus and the Council of Trent affirmed their teaching. The Eucharist “truly, really and substantially” is the body and blood of Jesus Christ. That is our beloved Catholic faith.