The central doctrine of Catholicism is that of the Eucharist. As Catholics we believe that Jesus is truly and completely present in the Blessed Sacrament - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. All Catholic worship thus stems from, and revolves around, the Eucharist. Non-Catholics have considerable difficulty with this doctrine, so it is important for Catholics to be able to explain it to them using the Bible as that is the only authority they accept. When asked why they believe that the Blessed Sacrament is the Body of Christ, most Catholics would probably shrug and say that that was what they had been taught. If they were feeling adventurous they might venture that Christ had instituted this Sacrament at the Last Supper on the night before His Passion and Death when He uttered the words “This is My Body”. However that is not necessarily the best place to start. We really need to cover relevant parts of both the Old and the New Testaments and also to outline some aspects of Jewish culture.

We believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because the Catholic Church teaches it and has done so for 2000 years; and each time we receive Holy Communion we signify our complete assent to that teaching by saying ‘Amen’ which means ‘so be it’. Jesus promised that the Church could not teach error when He said “...the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Mt 16:18) so we can trust this teaching. After all, if the Church could teach something which was erroneous, it would mean that the gates of hell had prevailed. Jesus also said “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20) so we know that He is guiding His Church. Non-Catholics, though, do not accept the authority of the Church and they ask whether there is any evidence in the Bible for this doctrine. The answer is a most definite “Yes”. The three synoptic Gospels record the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper; however when explaining the meaning of the Eucharist we first need to consider where Jesus initially indicated His intention to give Himself to us as spiritual nourishment. And we find this in St John’s Gospel, Chapter 6.

John 6:1–21

The narrative starts with Jesus on the other side of the Sea of Galilee surrounded by a large crowd who had witnessed Jesus curing many sick people. St John adds that the Passover is coming up (v4). Now this information is something that we’d probably skip straight over but there is nothing in Scripture that is superfluous so we should ask ourselves why it’s there. Keep it in mind because we’ll come back to the Passover later.

Seeing that the people were hungry, Jesus asks Philip “How are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?”(v5) Why did Jesus ask this question when He knew what He was going to do? And, just as importantly, why did John record it in his gospel? Philip’s answer that “Two hundred denarii would not buy enough bread for each of them to get a little” illustrates the apostles helplessness. A denarius was a day’s wage; and so the better part of a year’s salary would not provide sufficient food. Andrew, adds that “There is a lad here who has five barley loaves and two fish; but what are they among so many?”(v9) Clearly then, Jesus’ question and the answers He receives illustrate that there was nothing humanly possible that could be done to feed the large crowd. It is only through Divine intervention that their hunger can be satisfied here.

Jesus tells the Apostles to make the people sit and then does the things that He will do again at the Last Supper. He takes the bread and gives thanks, blesses it, breaks it and gives it to the Apostles who distribute it to the people. This miracle is recorded in all four Gospels (Matt 14:14-21, Mk 6:34-44, Lk 9:11-17) and it is the other 3 evangelists who mention the details St John omits. When the loaves and fish are distributed there is such an abundance of food that 12 baskets of scraps are collected. This teaches us two things: (1) not to waste anything and (2) whenever God gives, He does so in superabundance.

The people are so impressed with this sign that they acclaim Him as the Messiah. Seeing that they are thinking of the Messiah as simply a temporal ruler, Jesus withdraws to pray and the disciples get into the boat to go over to Capernaum. Matthew and Mark give a little more detail (Matt 14:22-33, Mk 6:45-51) by saying that Jesus told the apostles to go to Capernaum while He remained behind to dismiss the people and to pray. Later that night He joins them – walking on the water to meet them.

So in this lead-up to what’s commonly referred to as the Bread of Life discourse, we see Jesus performing a number of miracles – healing the sick, feeding the 5,000 and walking on water – all of which are intended to prepare the people and the disciples for what is to follow.

John 6:22-24

The next day the people are surprised to find that Jesus is not there as they know He was not in the boat that left with the apostles the previous day. They have an idea where He may have gone and so they follow Him to Capernaum. As an aside, it’s interesting to note that St John says: “However, boats from Tiberias came near the place where they ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks” (v23). He specifically notes that it was where the people ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks. The word Eucharist comes from the Greek word meaning thanksgiving.

John 6:25–59

When the people find Jesus, He knows what’s on their minds and tells them they are not looking for Him because of the signs He has worked, but because they want another free feed. The next verse is where Jesus begins to tell them about the real Bread:

“Do not labour for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the Father set his seal.”(v 27)

By telling them not to labour for the food which perishes and then saying that He will give them food which is useful for eternal life, Jesus is speaking of Himself in a way which makes Him seem greater than Moses. After all, Moses never said he would give food which would not perish.

So they said to him, "Then what sign do you do, that we may see, and believe you? What work do you perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'"(vv30,31)

The Jews asked for some sign to justify His comparison with Moses and point out that Moses fed the people with manna. They had obviously forgotten or chosen to ignore the fact that just the previous day Jesus had given them a sign by feeding over 5,000 of them. Jesus reminds them of the real source of the manna and draws a distinction between it and the true Bread from heaven:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven; my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world." (Vv32,33) (cf Ps78:24, Ps105:40)

One thing to note here and in the subsequent passages is the use of the phrase “Amen, Amen” or, as it is translated, here: “Truly, truly”. Whenever Jesus says something which He wants His listeners to pay particular attention to, He starts it with “Amen, Amen.” In verse 33 Jesus contrasts the manna and the true Bread of Life. Whereas the manna was for one people, the Bread of Life is for the whole world. The reaction of the people is similar to that of the Samaritan woman earlier in John’s Gospel (Jn 4:11-15): “Lord, give us this bread always!”

Jesus is trying to get the people to make an act of faith in Him so that He can then reveal to them the mystery of the Eucharist which He does in v35 and following.

John 6:35-40

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of Him who sent me. (vv35-38)

Now Jesus starts to raise the stakes. Here He says, for the first time, that He is the bread of life and adds that even though the Jews have seen Him (and the signs He has worked) they still do not believe.

John 6:41-46

The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, “I am the bread which came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” (V41-42)

Naturally the Jews were a little unhappy at Jesus’ statement, firstly because of His claim to divine origin (coming down from heaven) and then because He said He was the bread. After all, they reasoned, they knew His parents so how could He have come down from heaven. The murmurs indicate disbelief and a rejection of this gift from God.

John 6:47-59

Prefacing His remarks with “Amen, Amen” Jesus states for the second time that He is the Bread of Life:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is My flesh.” (vv47-51)

Until now, He has not used the verb to eat; only His listeners have spoken of eating the manna. Now Jesus distinguishes between the manna which people ate and died, and the bread from heaven which man may eat and not die. Then He repeats it using a positive phrasing by saying that He is the living bread and if anyone eats of this bread he will live forever. Lest there be any doubt, Jesus adds that it is His flesh which is the bread He will give for the life of the world.

To say that the Jews were in an uproar after hearing this, would be an understatement. They understand perfectly well what Jesus is saying and they ask how He can give them His flesh to eat (v52). Bear in mind too that, in the Gospels, whenever Jesus says something which His hearers don’t understand, He explains the meaning of it to them, e.g., when He talks about the sower and the seed (Mt 13:1-9). Although Jesus is well aware of their reaction here, rather than toning down what He is saying, He says something even more shocking:

“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; he who eats My flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me will live because of Me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” (V53-58)

In these 5 verses, Jesus states 4 times that they must eat His flesh and the word which is translated as eat in verse 54 has a much stronger meaning – more along the lines of gnaw, chew or munch. Also the word “indeed” is better translated as “very” or “true” so that what Jesus says in v55 is “My flesh is true food and My blood is true drink”. To the Jews it is cannibalism which Jesus seems to be promoting. Also, what He was advocating violated the Levitical law which proscribed the drinking of blood (Lv 7:26-27). Some scripture scholars have suggested that this was to emphasise the end of the old law and to signify that Christ’s death and resurrection were the start of the new law.

Despite some rather flimsy arguments advanced over the last 400 years that Jesus was speaking figuratively, it is obvious from the words Jesus used, the number of times He reiterated His message, and from the Jews reaction that they understood Jesus to be speaking literally. If Jesus had mentioned eating His flesh only once, there might conceivably be room to argue; however He said it not once but 5 times and each time prefaced with the very solemn “Amen, amen.” We should also note that everywhere else in the Gospels when Jesus speaks about food in a symbolic manner as, for example, in Mt 16:5-12 (the leaven of the Pharisees) and the apostles misinterpret Him to mean real food, Jesus in very plain language corrects their misunderstanding. Here, however, He does no such thing and in fact, it is not just the crowd’s reaction but, later on, His disciples’ reaction also that show they understand Him to be speaking literally.

Yet another reason why Jesus could not have been speaking figuratively here is that the phrase “to eat someone’s flesh” already had a figurative meaning among the Jews. It meant to persecute or assault, to calumniate or accuse falsely. An example of this can be seen in Ps 27(26) v2 which is translated in the RSV as:

When evil doers assail me,
uttering slanders against me...

What is translated here as “uttering slanders against me” is, literally, in Hebrew “to eat up my flesh.” So, if Christ was speaking figuratively, He would effectively be saying “He who reviles me or slanders me has everlasting life.” Obviously this is nonsense. (Some other examples of this phrase and variations on it may be found in Ps 14[13]:4, Ps 53[52]:4, Job 19:22, Mic 3:3, Hab 3:14, Jer 30:16)

John 6:60-71

In verse 60 we learn that, like the crowds, many of His disciples were scandalised at Our Lord’s words: “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” And that is the same question non-Catholics repeat today. They find it too difficult to believe. Notice what Jesus did here – or rather what He didn’t do. He didn’t say “Wait a minute, fellows, you misunderstand me. Come back and I’ll explain.” Rather He challenges their faith and asks them:

“Do you take offense at this? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”(vv61-63)

In these three verses, though, Jesus is not talking about the Eucharist but about faith – specifically their lack of it. He “...knows the scandal caused by His words, but He neither revokes nor dilutes anything of what He has said. The elliptic question: What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? is intended not ... to increase the scandal but to rectify what was simply a cannibalistic interpretation. The Ascension will ... eliminate their chief difficulty about eating the flesh of One who in celestial glory takes His place where He was from eternity.”ⁱ

In verse 63 when Jesus says that “the flesh is of no avail” He is not talking about His flesh. Rather He is contrasting the carnal or materialistic understanding (by which man will not believe anything beyond his senses and reason) with the spiritual or faith-filled view which gives life. No-one would suggest that Jesus is saying that His flesh is of no avail because it was His flesh which was the means of our redemption. “What He is asking, however, is not that we should devour His dead flesh, but that we should take into ourselves His living Self. In the same way, to drink His blood means to take His true Life into ourselves.”ⁱⁱ Also it is worth noting that the word spirit is not used anywhere in the Bible to mean “symbolic”.

We read in verse 66 that: “After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him”. Obviously, they would not have left Him had they understood Him to be speaking figuratively.

The Paschal Lamb

Before moving on to the Last Supper where the Eucharist was instituted, we should look briefly at its foreshadowing in the Old Testament. Recall that the Last Supper was a Passover meal – one of the major Jewish religious observances. In the 12th chapter of Exodus we read how God, through Moses, commanded the Jews to celebrate the Passover before they were freed from the bondage of Egypt. God gave the Jews very specific instructions regarding how they were to observe the Passover. They were to take a lamb and:

Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year-old; …You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month, when the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill their lambs in the evening. Then they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and the lintel of the houses in which they eat them. They shall eat the flesh that night, roasted; with unleavened bread and bitter herbs they shall eat it.… It is the LORD’s Passover. For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast;… The blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague shall fall upon you to destroy you when I smite the land of Egypt. (Ex 12:5-13 RSV)

In this passage we see that the sacrificial lamb had to be male and without blemish. Also we see that two things gad to happen. If the Jews wished to avoid the tenth plague when the Lord passed through Egypt destroying the firstborn, the blood had to be put on the doorposts and lintels and the lamb had to be eaten. As Scott Hahn puts it: if someone said “I don’t like lamb I’ll make lamb-shaped cookies and eat them instead” in the morning that person would wake up to find his firstborn dead. The Passover “... by freeing the Israelites from slavery in Egypt and saving their firstborn from temporal death was a type of our liberation from the slavery of sin and salvation from eternal death. The Pasch as a sacrifice was a type of Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary and His Eucharistic sacrifice.”ⁱⁱⁱ Note that both the manna and the Passover lamb were types of Christ and both were eaten to preserve the life of God’s chosen people.

The Last Supper

It wasn’t until probably about a year after the Bread of Life discourse that, at the Last Supper, Jesus finally revealed how He was to have us eat His body and drink His blood. The three synoptic Gospels (Mt 26, Mk 14, Lk 22) describe the institution of the Eucharist. In all of them Jesus says: This is My body. He does not say: This is a symbol of My body, or, This represents My body. His words are quite clear. “Take; eat; This is My Body” (Mt 26:26). Over the wine He says: “Drink of it all of you; for this is My Blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Mt 26:28) In the Old Testament and even in Christ’s time, most covenants were ratified with blood which symbolised the life of the covenanting parties. If it was not Christ’s Blood at the Last Supper then His statement that “...this is My blood of the covenant...” loses its meaning. This new covenant was ratified the next day when Jesus shed His blood for us on the cross.

At the beginning of Jesus’ public life, St John the Baptist said: “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” (Jn 1:29b) At that time it must have seemed a strange thing to say about someone. Yet here, at the Last Supper, it becomes clearer. Jesus is telling the apostles that the old covenant of animal sacrifice is finished so they no longer have to celebrate the Passover. Instead of sprinkling blood on the doorposts and eating a lamb, they would be eating the Lamb (of God) and drinking His Blood under the appearance of bread and wine. Instead of being freed from the slavery of Egypt, Jesus, by His death and resurrection is freeing the whole world from the slavery of sin.

Occasionally someone may object that, according to the Catholic understanding, at the Last Supper when Jesus changed the bread into His body, He was there before the Apostles and at the same time holding His body in His hands. How could this be? Well, time and space were created for us; God is not bound by them and, surely, to the One who created the universe out of nothing, everything is possible. Just because we cannot understand something doesn’t make it any less real. We also cannot understand how He fed the five thousand with a few loaves and a couple of fish, or how He walked on water, but it is undeniable that these things happened.

A non-Catholic might also say: “Well that is just your interpretation of it. Why should I believe it? Is there any evidence in the Bible that the Apostles believed it?” Well, yes, there is. As well, there is evidence from the writings of the Church Fathers. We’ll look first at what St Paul had to say.

St Paul and the Real Presence

St Paul, in his first letter to the Corinthians, contrasts the Eucharist with the pagan sacrifices.

Therefore, my beloved, shun the worship of idols. I speak as to sensible men; judge for yourselves what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the practice of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar? What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. (1 Cor 10:14-20)

Here it is quite clear that he understands that the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ and by partaking of it we unite ourselves to Christ and hence to each other. He also highlights the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist by the comparison of the pagan and Christian worship. But lest there be any uncertainty about St Paul’s understanding, let’s move on to the next chapter of 1^st Corinthians.

For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. 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. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. (1 Cor 11:23-30)

This passage should remove all doubts. St Paul relates for his readers the events at the Last Supper – an event at which he was not present. Then he goes on to say that anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup in an unworthy manner is guilty of profaning the body and blood of our Lord. That is a serious accusation and is almost like a legal charge. Surely if the bread and wine were only that: bread and wine, then the accusation is just a tad excessive. St Paul exhorts everyone to examine themselves before partaking of the Eucharist and then, in no uncertain terms, says that anyone who eats and drinks without recognising the body (ie, Christ’s body) eats and drinks judgement upon himself. From that it is quite clear that St Paul understands the Eucharist to be the body and blood of Christ and anyone who studies these passages will see that, from the beginning, the Apostles believed in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. And, after all, they would be the ones to know as they lived for three years with Him – not 2000 years later.

Early Church Fathers

The evidence from the Church Fathers is just as strong in their support for the Catholic position. While their writings are not Scripture, they do indicate what the early Church believed and taught. If the early Church thought that Christ was not truly present in the Eucharist then these writings would reflect that belief. On the contrary, St Ignatius of Antioch writes in his letter to the Philadelphians:

“Take great care to keep one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup to unite us by His blood...”^iv (Letter to Phil. iv)

In another letter to the Smyrnaeans, writing about the Docetists, he says:

“They abstain from the Eucharist because they do not believe that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again.”^v

Recall that St Ignatius was a disciple of St John so he obtained his beliefs from someone who knew Jesus very well. He wrote this around 110AD.

A little later (around 150AD) St Justin Martyr writing in his First Apology said:

“We call this food Eucharist; and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true...For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Saviour was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the Flesh and the Blood of that incarnated Jesus.”^vi

There are other writings of the Church Fathers but it should be clear that the Apostles and the early Church understood Our Lord to give us His Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

Some Other Observations

As was noted earlier, everything that God has revealed to us has been done so for a reason even if we do not immediately perceive what the reason is. Is it just coincidence that the town of David where Jesus was born was Bethlehem – which means House of Bread; that when He was born He was laid in a manger; that His first recorded miracle was changing water into wine?

As mentioned at the start of this paper, Jesus said “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). In Exodus after the Passover, while the Jews were wandering in the desert, they were accompanied by the Presence of God:

And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light that they might travel by day and by night; the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart from before the people. (Ex 13:21-22)

Following the establishment of the old covenant God remained with His people after the Passover in a very real manner in the Shekinah glory cloud; and following the establishment of the new covenant He remains with us today in a very real manner in the Blessed Eucharist fulfilling what He said in Mt 28:20.

It wasn’t until the Protestant Reformation that people began to seriously question the doctrine of the Real Presence although even Martin Luther, the founder of the Reformation, believed it - at least initially. Maybe a question we could ask those who doubt is: “Doesn’t it seem strange that it took 1500 years to finally work out what Jesus meant at the Last Supper?”

Well, for 2000 years the Catholic Church has taught the same thing: that Christ is truly present in the Blessed Eucharist. And for 1500 years all Christians believed it. Christ said “I am the way, the Truth and the Life” (Jn 14:6) and Truth cannot lie. So when He says He is giving us His flesh to eat and His blood to drink, who would dare to doubt it?

References