Why Bread and Wine?

[zunshynn]

My mormon friend doesn't understand why it has to be bread and wine that is consecrated... because if it's so important, what if there is no bread available or something. I explained that we had to follow the form Jesus gave us, but then she was like, well then why do say baptism does not have to be by immersion? She was saying how they believe that it's the blessing that's important, and if like, there is no wine or bread, then people should be able to use something else. And I explained that if circumstances made it impossible to recieve the Eucharist, God would still bless their desire to recieve it. And I said, well if it doesn't matter, than why does it have to be something that you eat? Or what if there's no priest, why then would Mormons not let someone else. But that didn't seem sufficient for her... help?

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
10/18 - St. Luke

zunshynn,

We're just following what Jesus told us to do in the Paul/Luke accounts of the Last Supper - "Do this in remembrance of Me." It's the bread and the wine that's important, as well as the words. This used to be called the "matter" and "form" of the sacraments. We can't use pizza and beer because Jesus didn't use pizza and beer, He used bread and wine. With regards to baptism, it's not the immersion that matters, but the use of water (the matter) and the Trinitarian baptismal formula (the form). Though it may seem more "merciful" or seem to "make more sense" to use whatever we happen to have lying about if we don't have bread and wine, the fact of the matter remains that we would not be "do[ing] this in remembrance of [Him]" and thus would not be following the Master's call. Instead, we would be following the call of a false master (ourselves) and thus would not be one of the sheep to enter the fold. Hope this helps.

Yours,
Pio Nono