Fixxxer Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 What if he sneezes and messed up a word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCid Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 [quote name='Fixxxer' post='1216776' date='Mar 20 2007, 11:39 PM']What if he sneezes and messed up a word [/quote] Budge's post actually answers that What's Needed for a Valid Consecration? Q: I know of a priest who, during the consecration at Mass, used to say "This is our bread of life" instead of "This is my body." Was this valid? If not, did the people receive the body and blood of Christ? What if the priest makes only minor variations in the words? How much must be there for the consecration to be valid? A: What this priest said was definitely illicit and far removed from the proper words used to confect the Eucharist. He engaged in a grievous liturgical abuse of the kind which should be immediately reported to his bishop. Because the priest used not just improper words, but words that didn't even mean "This is my body," the consecration did not take place at all. The result was that the people at that Mass were led into material idolatry. They adored something that was not really Christ, but just bread. They were worshiping as God something that really wasn't, even though they were unaware of the import of the priest's actions. This means they did not incur the guilt of the sin of idolatry. While it is always gravely illicit for a priest intentionally to change the words of consecration from what is in the Church's liturgical texts, it is possible for there to be some variation in wording without rendering the Mass invalid. [b]Slight slips of the tongue, for example, don't make for invalidity.[/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 the situation I described OBVIOUSLY indicated the intention of the priest to do as the Church does. I don't think any priest walking into a bakery and doing that could really be considered to have the proper intention to do as the Church does. it would be anomalous if not totally impossible for a priest to have this intention in going through a bakery in that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 [quote name='Fixxxer' post='1216776' date='Mar 20 2007, 11:39 PM']What if he sneezes and messed up a word [/quote] Hopefully he turned away from the Blessed Sacrament before he sneezed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budge Posted March 21, 2007 Author Share Posted March 21, 2007 Just so you all know I didnt bring up the Hocus Pocus thing... Lets think this out logically... without the proper type bread...ie {Rye isnt going to do it}...the wafer supposely wont change into "jesus" Without the right man with the special "mojo", ie if I sent over my last pastor to say the Mass, the wafer supposely wont change into "jesus". Leave acouple sentences out, [the This is my body, this is my blood} same thing... Come on folks look at this objectively, youre whole church is centered around supposely changing pieces of bread into "jesus", a "miracle" that really isnt one. Endless qualifiers for the "magic" to happen. and I dont even want to get started on the hubris of men who use this proclaimed power they *think*have over God to call Him down into bread whenever THEY feel like it supposely, and who to reign folks in and say we are the only legitimate 'jesus" wafer makers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budge Posted March 21, 2007 Author Share Posted March 21, 2007 This shows UTTER confusion. Im sorry but telling people "its a mystery, youre NOT supposed to UNDERSTAND" I believe it is a lie from Satan who is the author of confusion. From www.catholic.com forums..Ask An Apologist. [quote] Do we really eat His flesh? We believe that tthe Eucharist is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. When we recieve Christ in the Eucharist, we believe we are eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ. I have always thought that this meant that we are eating his real flesh and drinking his real blood, under the appearances or bread and wine. I am told, however that this is wrong.[b]I am told that rather that eating his real flesh and drinking his real blood, we are eating and drinking the sacramental Jesus. What exactly does this mean? What is the "sacremental" felsh and blood that we are receiving? In other words, if I tell a non-Catholic "oh no, we don't really eat the real flesh and drink the real blood of Christ, we only eat and drink the Sacremental Christ." What am I saying? What does this mean? Thank you.[/b] __________________ For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself not discerning the body of the Lord 1Corinthians 11:29 St.Eric View Public Profile Send a private message to St.Eric Find all posts by St.Eric #2 Old Today, 10:28 am Fr. Vincent Serpa Fr. Vincent Serpa is online now Catholic Answers Apologist Join Date: May 4, 2004 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 1,478 Default Re: Do we really eat the flesh? Hi, I just answered a similar question. But you seem to want to go deeper. To go deeper, however, is to enter into a mystery that is divine. All we know is that Jesus insisted in the necessity of eating His flesh and drinking His blood. This the Apostles did at the Last Supper. [b]They obviously were not trying to consume His body as He physically sat in their presence. They consumed His flesh and blood under the appearances of bread and wine. When we say that they sacramentally consumed His body and blood, we clearly understand what they were NOT doing. No one was nawing on any part of His physical person. Yet by His own statement, they were receiving His body and blood.[/b] A sacrament is a sign instituted by Christ that actually makes present the grace that it signifies. Baptism not only symbolizes a washing or cleansing, it actually IS a cleansing (of original sin). [b]The Eucharist not only symbolizes Christ’s body and blood, it actually IS the His body and blood. [/b]But it is a mystery which defies our present ability to fully understand. We simply take the Lord at His word as His Apostles and early Church did. Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.[/quote] Ok Let me get this straight, they are eating the body of Christ but it really ISNT? Who is the author of confusion? its NOT GOD. And the MYSTERY excuse, UGH, just a way to pull wool over people's eyes and allow them to stay confused. what do you all think of what this priest wrote. [b]Do you believe you are eating Jesus's actual flesh or not?[/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 [quote name='Budge' post='1216797' date='Mar 21 2007, 07:31 AM']Just so you all know I didnt bring up the Hocus Pocus thing... Lets think this out logically... without the proper type bread...ie {Rye isnt going to do it}...the wafer supposely wont change into "jesus" Without the right man with the special "mojo", ie if I sent over my last pastor to say the Mass, the wafer supposely wont change into "jesus". Leave acouple sentences out, [the This is my body, this is my blood} same thing... Come on folks look at this objectively, youre whole church is centered around supposely changing pieces of bread into "jesus", a "miracle" that really isnt one. Endless qualifiers for the "magic" to happen. and I dont even want to get started on the hubris of men who use this proclaimed power they *think*have over God to call Him down into bread whenever THEY feel like it supposely, and who to reign folks in and say we are the only legitimate 'jesus" wafer makers.[/quote] Jesus told us to Baptize "in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." If He doesn't have a problem using formulas, neither do I. I already sufficiently answered all the things in this post, but you have not answered to my response. Oh, and I don't know what you mean by "mojo." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Cat Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Budge' post='1216797' date='Mar 21 2007, 08:31 AM']Just so you all know I didnt bring up the Hocus Pocus thing... Lets think this out logically... [b]without the proper type bread...ie {Rye isnt going to do it}...the wafer supposely wont change into "jesus"[/b] [1] [b]Without the right man with the special "mojo", ie if I sent over my last pastor to say the Mass, the wafer supposely wont change into "jesus".[/b] [2] Leave acouple sentences out, [the This is my body, this is my blood} same thing... [b]Come on folks look at this objectively, youre whole church is centered around supposely changing pieces of bread into "jesus", a "miracle" that really isnt one. Endless qualifiers for the "magic" to happen.[/b] [3] and I dont even want to get started on the hubris of men who use this proclaimed power they *think*have over God to call Him down into bread whenever THEY feel like it supposely, and who to reign folks in and say we are the only legitimate 'jesus" wafer makers.[/quote] [[b]1[/b]]In the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass the Priest utters the words in commemoration of our Blessed Lord, meaning that certain conditions have to be met and which has been understood from the early church and had been more thoroughly defined through the ages. The example although would be Baptism, there are certain conditions that have to be met, such that water has to be used. Someone cannot come in with a bucket of sap and think that it is the correct matter for Baptism.[quote][b]Luke 22:19[/b] "And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: [b][color="#FF0000"]This is my body[/color][/b], which is given for you. Do this for a [u][b]commemoration[/b][/u] of me." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/49022.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/49022.htm[/url][/quote][quote][b]1 Corinthians 11:25[/b] "In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: [color="#FF0000"][b]This chalice is the new testament in my blood[/b][/color]: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the [b][u]commemoration[/u][/b] of me." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/53011.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/53011.htm[/url][/quote] [[b]2[/b]]Our Blessed Lord picked the Apostles to be His ministers unto the whole world, but after their deaths who would minister unto the whole world? But notice the commissioning words of our Blessed Lord, “As the Father hath sent me, I also send you.” This is very important for we profess that those of the Sacrament of Holy Orders have the “Persona of Christ.” Meaning that in a special way our Blessed Lord works through them and that in a special way they work by the authority of our Blessed Lord. During the Holy Mass and in their ministries they do not act of their own accord but rather in this “Persona.” This ministry by the authority of the Church founded by our Blessed Lord is passed on through the Sacrament of Holy Orders that our Blessed Lord established for this purpose. For this reason through the Sacred Scriptures there is a concern of who the Bishops lay their hands upon and ordain. Moreover, it makes sense that this is Apostolic Succession that their ministry is being passed on that we can see in the election of Saint Matthias. Notice that in the first verse I quote it writes the Apostles selected them but then later on it says Almighty God selected them, this shows how our Blessed Lord works through the Church. Moreover the important verse is “the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.” So this shows how he becomes one of the Apostles by the ministry and the authority that was left with them. Therefore only those in the Sacrament of Holy Orders in Apostolic Succession acting in the Persona of Christ could perform such ministries and authorities of the Church that our Blessed Lord founded. Because non-Catholics frequently do not have this Apostolic Succession not only do they have no authority in matters of the Church they also have no ministry to say the Holy Mass or to Consecrate bread and wine in the manner our Blessed Lord intended throughout the Holy Scriptures.[quote][b]John 20:21[/b] "He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. [b][u]As the Father hath sent me, I also send you[/u][/b]." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50020.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50020.htm[/url][/quote][quote][b]Matthew 16:19[/b] "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. [b]And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven[/b]: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/47016.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/47016.htm[/url][/quote][quote][b]Acts of the Apostles 1:23-26[/b] "[u]And they appointed two[/u], Joseph, called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And praying, they said: Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, [u]shew whether of these two thou hast chosen[/u], To take the place of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas hath by transgression fallen, that he might go to his own place. [b][u]And they gave them lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles[/u][/b]." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/51001.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/51001.htm[/url][/quote] [[b]3[/b]]Our Blessed Lord taught this as the centering point of our Holy Religion that we profess this belief. If we refuse to eat His Body and drink His Blood we shall have no life within us, further we shall not abide in Him that it goes onto write we shall be cut off being cast into the fire for such an offence. Moreover, the early Church and even the early heretics professed belief in the True Presence of our Blessed Lord. There is no dissent from this belief until nearly seven hundred years later and even then it is still retained. We do not see a dissent from this belief until far after the supposed Protestant Reformation (more properly called Deformation).[quote][b]John 6:51-60[/b] "[u]I am the living bread which came down from heaven[/u]. [u]If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world[/u]. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: [b]Amen[u], amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you[/u][/b]. [u]He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day[/u]. [u]For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed[/u]. [u]He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, [color="#0000FF"][b]abideth in me, and I in him[/b][/color][/u]. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; [u]so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me[/u]. This is the bread that came down from heaven. [b][u]Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead[/u][/b]. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum. Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it? But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. But there are some of you that believe not. [u]For Jesus knew from the beginning, [b]who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him[/b][/u]." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50006.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50006.htm[/url][/quote][quote][b]John 15:4-7[/b] "[b][u][color="#0000FF"]Abide in me, and I in you[/color][/u][/b]. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you, [b]unless you abide in me[/b]. [u]I am the vine: you the branches: he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit[/u]: [b][u]for without me you can do nothing[/u][/b]. [u]If any one abide not in me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up, and case him into the fire, and be burneth[/u]. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, you shall ask whatever you will, and it shall be done unto you." [url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50015.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/50015.htm[/url][/quote] [[b]4[/b]]Our Blessed Lord said “[b][color="#FF0000"]This is My Body[/color][/b]” and “[b][color="#FF0000"]This is My Blood[/color][/b]” so I am sure He would not lie to us. I am sure that the Apostles who wrote referring to this as “meat” would not be foolish to call mere bread and wine “meat.” I am very sure that Saint Paul the Apostle would not be foolish enough to say that those who take Communion unworthily are to be judged with the Body and Blood of our Divine King. Moreover, that the early Church would continue on this belief for centuries without dissent for so long and that even after our doubts Almighty God delivers miracles to strengthen our belief in this fundamental Christian Dogma. What the Priest wrote being “under the appearance” refers to the fact that our Blessed Lord changes the substance of the bread and whine but the appearance remains the same. In metaphysics there are substances and appearances (accidents). So our Lord’s Body will look, taste, feel, sound, weigh, and have the same attributes as it did before but its substance has truly changed. In fairytales (which are just stories) we understand this concept when someone is changed into a frog they are still the same person, their essence or substance is still the same. This is the manner our Blessed Lord founded for us to eat and drink His Body and Blood. He required it for eternal life for those able to receive it knowing of their need... Edited March 21, 2007 by Mr.CatholicCat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 [quote name='Budge' post='1216798' date='Mar 21 2007, 07:35 AM']This shows UTTER confusion. Im sorry but telling people "its a mystery, youre NOT supposed to UNDERSTAND" I believe it is a lie from Satan who is the author of confusion.[/quote] The Trinity is a Mystery, we can not understand that. The end of time is a mystery we do not understand when that will be, among many other things God does not chose to reveal to us as of yet. So to imply something is a Mystery means we must conclude that it comes from Satan lacks true Biblical understanding. [quote name='Budge' post='1216798' date='Mar 21 2007, 07:35 AM']From www.catholic.com forums..Ask An Apologist. Ok Let me get this straight, they are eating the body of Christ but it really ISNT? Who is the author of confusion? its NOT GOD. And the MYSTERY excuse, UGH, just a way to pull wool over people's eyes and allow them to stay confused.[/quote] Take it up with Jesus Christ. You don't like the way He lays down the law your problem is with Him. God keeps secrets or mysteries all the time, because you can not and do not understand that does not mean those mysteries are from Satan. [quote name='Budge' post='1216798' date='Mar 21 2007, 07:35 AM']what do you all think of what this priest wrote. [b]Do you believe you are eating Jesus's actual flesh or not?[/b][/quote] I believe you do not understand what the Priest wrote, I believe you are confused by no fault but your own on many teachings of Holy Mother Church. We are eating Christ' actual body and drinking His actual blood under the appearance of bread and wine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 [quote name='Budge' post='1216798' date='Mar 21 2007, 07:35 AM']This shows UTTER confusion. Im sorry but telling people "its a mystery, youre NOT supposed to UNDERSTAND" I believe it is a lie from Satan who is the author of confusion. From www.catholic.com forums..Ask An Apologist. Ok Let me get this straight, they are eating the body of Christ but it really ISNT? Who is the author of confusion? its NOT GOD. And the MYSTERY excuse, UGH, just a way to pull wool over people's eyes and allow them to stay confused. what do you all think of what this priest wrote. [b]Do you believe you are eating Jesus's actual flesh or not?[/b][/quote] In short, yes we do believe we are eating Jesus' actual flesh in the Eucharist, as taught by the Church and by the Holy Bible: [quote]For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [/quote](John 6:56) Apparently Budge finds this a hard saying, and cannot hear it. [quote]Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard; and who can hear it? But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?[/quote](John 6:61-62) [quote]After this, many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him. Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away?[/quote](John 6:67-68) [quote]And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples and said: Take ye and eat. [b]This is my body[/b].[/quote](Matthew 26-26. See also Mark 14:22 and Luke 22:19) [quote]Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. [b]For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.[/b][/quote](1 Corinthians 11:27-29) St. Paul is speaking here of the Eucharist. But apparently Budge does not discern the Body of the Lord. Why should we trust the unbiblical words and opinions of Budge over those of Christ and St. Paul as found in Holy Scripture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 it is only confusion to you, budge. we all understand it quite fine as do most people in the world who read such statements. we are not chewing on a part of His body; we are receiving His whole body by receiving the Eucharist. a semitic mindset would understand this substitution quite well whereas your concepts, formed by modernist assumptions about what is substantially true about material things. it's all a very simple concept to the ancient mindset: Christ is present in the Eucharist in His total body and soul, not divided portions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffpugh Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Budge' post='1216797' date='Mar 21 2007, 09:31 AM']Just so you all know I didnt bring up the Hocus Pocus thing... Lets think this out logically... ...Leave acouple sentences out, [the This is my body, this is my blood} same thing...[/quote] Lets think this out logically. What if you left out Father, "Son and Holy Spirit" in baptism? Oh noes... its majix because the HS wont come down unless you have those exact words... Oh yeah, and the hocus pocus thing was me. Don't pretend to not take credit... never mind... Edited March 22, 2007 by Sacred Music Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budge Posted March 23, 2007 Author Share Posted March 23, 2007 Just read the ENTIRE chapter of John 6.... Start at the beginning and go to the end. It is a COMPLETE lesson plan for the ages, of course, the Catholic Church goes right into the middle, SNIPS OUT the magic stuff that elevates the power of her priesthood, and ignores the rest. Jesus gives an Old Testament prophecy showing how HE was the Manna, shows how the word IS the Manna/bread/flesh, and concludes with the wrapup, it is spiritual, not physical. Just read it without your Catholic Church glasses on for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groo the Wanderer Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 [quote name='Budge' post='1217621' date='Mar 23 2007, 09:37 AM']Just read the ENTIRE chapter of John 6.... Start at the beginning and go to the end. It is a COMPLETE lesson plan for the ages, of course, the Catholic Church goes right into the middle, SNIPS OUT the magic stuff that elevates the power of her priesthood, and ignores the rest. Jesus gives an Old Testament prophecy showing how HE was the Manna, shows how the word IS the Manna/bread/flesh, and concludes with the wrapup, it is spiritual, not physical. Just read it without your Catholic Church glasses on for once.[/quote] YOU read it. Especially the part where Jesus speaks LITERALLY about the need to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Notice that when the disciples couldn't handle it, they left Him? Notice that Jesus did NOT go chasing after them saying "Wait wait! You misunderstood me. I was speaking figuratively. It's just symbolic". Just read it without your anti-Catholic Church glasses on for once...then again...and again... Personal interpretation can lead you to the ruin of your soul...250 points (or tacos, so very tasty and good for you, if you prefer) if you can tell mewhere that is in the Bible. (HINT: try the New Testament) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Budge' post='1217621' date='Mar 23 2007, 08:37 AM']Just read the ENTIRE chapter of John 6.... Start at the beginning and go to the end. It is a COMPLETE lesson plan for the ages, of course, the Catholic Church goes right into the middle, SNIPS OUT the magic stuff that elevates the power of her priesthood, and ignores the rest. Jesus gives an Old Testament prophecy showing how HE was the Manna, shows how the word IS the Manna/bread/flesh, and concludes with the wrapup, it is spiritual, not physical. Just read it without your Catholic Church glasses on for once.[/quote] I've already tried to discuss this, you had no response but since perhaps now you wish to talk about it lets start with "John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically[size=5]. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic."[/size] As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us." So Budge why is The Spirit just a symbol to you? Where else or anywhere in Holy Scripture does spirit = symbolic? [quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1210762' date='Mar 9 2007, 12:00 AM']Have fun reading it all! Rather good... [url="http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html"]Scripture[/url] [size=3](a). Jesus Promises His Real Presence in the Eucharist[/size] John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old Testament (e.g., 2 Kings4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread which is Him. Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 - these passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to the Eucharist. Matt. 16:12 - in this verse, Jesus explains His metaphorical use of the term "bread." In John 6, He eliminates any metaphorical possibilities. John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover, and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says. John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven. John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread which must be consumed. John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat? John 6:53 - 58 - [b]Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact, Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically.[/b] John 6:23-53 - [b]however, a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word "phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus does what?[/b] John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - [b]He uses an even more literal verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch. He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52).[/b] John 6:55 - [b]to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not "soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh. It is always literal.[/b] John 6:55 - [b]further, the phrases "real" food and "real" drink use the word "alethes." "Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink.[/b] John 6:60 - [b]as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque. [/b] John 6:61-63 - [b]Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words. [/b] John 3:6 - [b]Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding.[/b] In Mark 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh." John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically[size=5]. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic."[/size] As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us. John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly. Mark 4:34 - [b]Jesus always explained to His disciples the real meanings of His teachings. He never would have let them go away with a false impression, most especially in regard to a question about eternal salvation.[/b] John 6:37 - Jesus says He would not drive those away from Him. They understood Him correctly but would not believe. John 3:5,11; Matt. 16:11-12 - here are some examples of Jesus correcting wrong impressions of His teaching. In the Eucharistic discourse, Jesus does not correct the scandalized disciples. John 6:64,70 - [b]Jesus ties the disbelief in the Real Presence of His Body and Blood in the Eucharist to Judas' betrayal. Those who don't believe in this miracle betray Him.[/b] Psalm 27:2; Isa. 9:20; 49:26; Mic. 3:3; 2 Sam. 23:17; Rev. 16:6; 17:6, 16 - [b]to further dispense with the Protestant claim that Jesus was only speaking symbolically, these verses demonstrate that symbolically eating body and blood is always used in a negative context of a physical assault.[/b] It always means “destroying an enemy,” not becoming intimately close with him. Thus, if Jesus were speaking symbolically in John 6:51-58, He would be saying to us, "He who reviles or assaults me has eternal life." This, of course, is absurd. John 10:7 - Protestants point out that Jesus did speak metaphorically about Himself in other places in Scripture. For example, here Jesus says, "I am the door." But in this case, no one asked Jesus if He was literally made of wood. They understood him metaphorically. John 15:1,5 - here is another example, where Jesus says, "I am the vine." Again, no one asked Jesus if He was literally a vine. In John 6, Jesus' disciples did ask about His literal speech (that this bread was His flesh which must be eaten). He confirmed that His flesh and blood were food and drink indeed. Many disciples understood Him and left Him. Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18 – Jesus says He will not drink of the “fruit of the vine” until He drinks it new in the kingdom. Some Protestants try to use this verse (because Jesus said “fruit of the vine”) to prove the wine cannot be His blood. [b]But the Greek word for fruit is “genneema” which literally means “that which is generated from the vine.”[/b] In John 15:1,5 Jesus says “I am the vine.” So “fruit of the vine” can also mean Jesus’ blood. In 1 Cor. 11:26-27, Paul also used “bread” and “the body of the Lord” interchangeably in the same sentence. Also, see Matt. 3:7;12:34;23:33 for examples were “genneema” means “birth” or “generation.” Rom. 14:14-18; 1 Cor. 8:1-13; 1 Tim. 4:3 – Protestants often argue that drinking blood and eating certain sacrificed meats were prohibited in the New Testament, so Jesus would have never commanded us to consume His body and blood. [b]But these verses prove them wrong[/b], showing that Paul taught all foods, even meat offered to idols, strangled, or with blood, could be consumed by the Christian if it didn’t bother the brother’s conscience and were consumed with thanksgiving to God. Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says we must become like children, or we will not enter the kingdom of God. We must believe Jesus' words with child-like faith. Because Jesus says this bread is His flesh, we believe by faith, even though it surpasses our understanding. Luke 1:37 - with God, nothing is impossible. If we can believe in the incredible reality of the Incarnation, we can certainly believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. God coming to us in elements He created is an extension of the awesome mystery of the Incarnation. [size=3](b). Jesus Institutes the Eucharist / More Proofs of the Real Presence[/size] Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood. Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - [size=4]the Greek phrase is "Touto estin to soma mou." This phraseology means "this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood.[/size] 1 Cor. 11:24 - [b]the same translation is used by Paul - "touto mou estin to soma." The statement is "this is really" my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare something without making it so.[/b] Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19 -[b] to deny the 2,000 year-old Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, Protestants must argue that Jesus was really saying "this represents (not is) my body and blood." However, Aramaic, the language that Jesus spoke, had over 30 words for "represent," but Jesus did not use any of them. He used the Aramaic word for "estin" which means "is."[/b] Matt. 26:28; Mark. 14:24; Luke 22:20 - Jesus' use of "poured out" in reference to His blood also emphasizes the reality of its presence. Exodus 24:8 - Jesus emphasizes the reality of His actual blood being present by using Moses' statement "blood of the covenant." 1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul asks the question, "the cup of blessing and the bread of which we partake, is it not an actual participation in Christ's body and blood?" Is Paul really asking because He, the divinely inspired writer, does not understand? No, of course not. [b]Paul's questions are obviously rhetorical.[/b] This IS the actual body and blood. [b]Further, the Greek word "koinonia" describes an actual, not symbolic participation in the body and blood.[/b] 1 Cor. 10:18 - in this verse, Paul is saying we are what we eat. We are not partners with a symbol. We are partners of the one actual body. 1 Cor. 11:23 - Paul does not explain what he has actually received directly from Christ, except in the case when he teaches about the Eucharist. Here, Paul emphasizes the importance of the Eucharist by telling us he received directly from Jesus instructions on the Eucharist which is the source and summit of the Christian faith. 1 Cor. 11:27-29 - in these verses, Paul says that eating or drinking in an unworthy manner is the equivalent of profaning (literally, murdering) the body and blood of the Lord. If this is just a symbol, we cannot be guilty of actually profaning (murdering) it. We cannot murder a symbol. Either Paul, the divinely inspired apostle of God, is imposing an unjust penalty, or the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ. 1 Cor. 11:30 - this verse alludes to the consequences of receiving the Eucharist unworthily. Receiving the actual body and blood of Jesus in mortal sin results in actual physical consequences to our bodies. 1 Cor. 11:27-30 - thus, if we partake of the Eucharist unworthily, we are guilty of literally murdering the body of Christ, and risking physical consequences to our bodies. This is overwhelming evidence for the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. These are unjust penalties if the Eucharist is just a symbol. Acts 2:42 - from the Church's inception, apostolic tradition included celebrating the Eucharist (the "breaking of the bread") to fulfill Jesus' command "do this in remembrance of me." Acts 20:28 - Paul charges the Church elders to "feed" the Church of the Lord, that is, with the flesh and blood of Christ. Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3 - in the Our Father, we ask God to give us this day our daily bread, that is the bread of life, Jesus Christ. Matt. 12:39 – Jesus says no “sign” will be given except the “sign of the prophet Jonah.” While Protestants focus only on the “sign” of the Eucharist, this verse demonstrates that a sign can be followed by the reality (here, Jesus’ resurrection, which is intimately connected to the Eucharist). Matt. 19:6 - Jesus says a husband and wife become one flesh which is consummated in the life giving union of the marital act. This union of marital love which reflects Christ's union with the Church is physical, not just spiritual. Thus, when Paul says we are a part of Christ's body (Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23,30-31; Col. 1:18,24), he means that our union with Christ is physical, not just spiritual. But our union with Christ can only be physical if He is actually giving us something physical, that is Himself, which is His body and blood to consume (otherwise it is a mere spiritual union). Luke 14:15 - blessed is he who eats this bread in the kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven. Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus commands the apostles to "do this," that is, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice, in remembrance of Him. Luke 24:26-35 - in the Emmaus road story, Jesus gives a homily on the Scriptures and then follows it with the celebration of the Eucharist. This is the Holy Mass, and the Church has followed this order of the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist for 2,000 years. Luke 24:30-31,35 - Jesus is known only in the breaking of bread. Luke is emphasizing that we only receive the fullness of Jesus by celebrating the Eucharistic feast of His body and blood, which is only offered in its fullness by the Catholic Church. John 1:14 - literally, this verse teaches that the Word was made flesh and "pitched His tabernacle" among us. The Eucharist, which is the Incarnate Word of God under the appearance of bread, is stored in the tabernacles of Catholic churches around the world. John 21:15,17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed" His sheep, that is, with the Word of God through preaching and the Eucharist. Acts 9:4-5; 22:8; 26:14-15 – Jesus asks Saul, “Why are you persecuting me?” when Saul was persecuting the Church. Jesus and the Church are one body (Bridegroom and Bride), and we are one with Jesus through His flesh and blood (the Eucharist). 1 Cor. 12:13 - we "drink" of one Spirit in the Eucharist by consuming the blood of Christ eternally offered to the Father. Heb. 10:25,29 - these verses allude to the reality that failing to meet together to celebrate the Eucharist is mortal sin. It is profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Heb. 12:22-23 - the Eucharistic liturgy brings about full union with angels in festal gathering, the just spirits, and God Himself, which takes place in the assembly or "ecclesia" (the Church). Heb. 12:24 - we couldn't come to Jesus' sprinkled blood if it were no longer offered by Jesus to the Father and made present for us. 2 Pet. 1:4 - we partake of His divine nature, most notably through the Eucharist - a sacred family bond where we become one. Rev. 2:7; 22:14 - we are invited to eat of the tree of life, which is the resurrected flesh of Jesus which, before, hung on the tree. Top [size=3] ©. Jesus' Passion is Connected to the Passover Sacrifice where the Lamb Must Be Eaten[/size] Matt. 26:2; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7 - Jesus' passion is clearly identified with the Passover sacrifice (where lambs were slain and eaten). John 1:29,36; Acts 8:32; 1 Peter 1:19 - Jesus is described as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. The Lamb must be sacrificed and eaten. Luke 23:4,14; John 18:38; 19:4,6 - under the Old Covenant, the lambs were examined on Nisan 14 to ensure that they had no blemish. The Gospel writers also emphasize that Jesus the Lamb was examined on Nisan 14 and no fault was found in him. He is the true Passover Lamb which must be eaten. Heb. 9:14 - Jesus offering Himself "without blemish" refers to the unblemished lamb in Exodus 12:5 which had to be consumed. Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25 - Jesus is celebrating the Passover seder meal with the apostles which requires them to drink four cups of wine. But Jesus only presents the first three cups. He stops at the Third Cup (called “Cup of Blessing” - that is why Paul in 1 Cor. 10:16 uses the phrase “Cup of Blessing” to refer to the Eucharist – he ties the seder meal to the Eucharistic sacrifice). But Jesus conspicuously tells his apostles that He is omitting the Fourth Cup called the “Cup of Consummation.” The Gospel writers point this critical omission of the seder meal out to us to demonstrate that the Eucharistic sacrifice and the sacrifice on the cross are one and the same sacrifice, and the sacrifice would not be completed until Jesus drank the Fourth Cup on the cross. Matt. 26:30; Mark 14:26 - they sung the great Hallel, which traditionally followed the Third Cup of the seder meal, but did not drink the Fourth Cup of Consummation. The Passover sacrifice had begun, but was not yet finished. It continued in the Garden of Gethsemane and was consummated on the cross. Matt. 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42; John 18:11 - our Lord acknowledges He has one more cup to drink. This is the Cup of Consummation which he will drink on the cross. Psalm 116:13 - this passage references this cup of salvation. Jesus will offer this Cup as both Priest and Victim. This is the final cup of the New Testament Passover. Luke 22:44 - after the Eucharist, Jesus sweats blood in the garden of Gethsemane. This shows that His sacrifice began in the Upper Room and connects the Passion to the seder meal where the lamb must not only be sacrificed, but consumed. Matt. 27:34; Mark 15:23 - Jesus, in his Passion, refuses to even drink an opiate. The writers point this out to emphasize that the final cup will be drunk on the cross, after the Paschal Lamb's sacrifice is completed. John 19:23 - this verse describes the "chiton" garment Jesus wore when He offered Himself on the cross. These were worn by the Old Testament priests to offer sacrifices. See Exodus 28:4; Lev. 16:4. John 19:29; cf. Matt. 27:48; Mark 15:36; - Jesus is provided wine (the Fourth Cup) on a hyssop branch which was used to sprinkle the lambs' blood in Exodus 12:22. This ties Jesus' sacrifice to the Passover lambs which had to be consumed in the seder meal which was ceremonially completed by drinking the Cup of Consummation. Then in John 19:30, Jesus says, “It is consummated.” The sacrifice began in the upper room and was completed on the cross. God’s love for humanity is made manifest. Matt. 27:45; Mark 15:33; John 19:14 - the Gospel writers confirm Jesus' death at the sixth hour, just when the Passover lambs were sacrificed. Again, this ties Jesus' death to the death of the Passover lambs. Like the Old Covenant, in the New Covenant, the Passover Lamb must be eaten. 1 Cor. 5:7 - Paul tells us that the Lamb has been sacrificed. But what do we need to do? Some Protestants say we just need to accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. 1 Cor. 5:8 - But Paul says that we need to celebrate the Eucharistic feast. This means that we need to eat the Lamb. We need to restore communion with God. Heb. 13:15 - "sacrifice of praise" or "toda" refers to the thanksgiving offerings of Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30 which had to be eaten. 1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul's use of the phrase "the cup of blessing" refers to the Third Cup of the seder meal. This demonstrates that the seder meal is tied to Christ's Eucharistic sacrifice. John 19:34-35 - John conspicuously draws attention here. The blood (Eucharist) and water (baptism) make the fountain that cleanses sin as prophesied in Zech 13:1. Just like the birth of the first bride came from the rib of the first Adam, the birth of the second bride (the Church) came from the rib of the second Adam (Jesus). Gen. 2:22. John 7:38 - out of His Heart shall flow rivers of living water, the Spirit. Consequently, Catholics devote themselves to Jesus' Sacred Heart. Matt. 2:1, Luke 2:4-7 - Jesus the bread of life was born in a feeding trough in the city of Bethlehem, which means "house of bread." Luke 2: 7,12 - Jesus was born in a "manger" (which means "to eat"). This symbolism reveals that Jesus took on flesh and was born to be food for the salvation of the world. [size=3] (d). The Eucharist Makes Present Jesus' One Eternal Sacrifice; it's Not Just a Symbolic Memorial[/size] Gen. 14:18 - remember that Melchizedek's bread and wine offering foreshadowed the sacramental re-presentation of Jesus' offering. Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - the translation of Jesus' words of consecration is "touto poieite tan eman anamnasin." Jesus literally said "offer this as my memorial sacrifice." The word “poiein” (do) refers to offering a sacrifice (see, e.g., Exodus 29:38-39, where God uses the same word – poieseis – regarding the sacrifice of the lambs on the altar). The word “anamnesis” (remembrance) also refers to a sacrifice which is really or actually made present in time by the power of God, as it reminds God of the actual event (see, e.g., Heb. 10:3; Num. 10:10). It is not just a memorial of a past event, but a past event made present in time. In other words, the “sacrifice” is the “memorial” or “reminder.” If the Eucharist weren’t a sacrifice, Luke would have used the word “mnemosunon” (which is the word used to describe a nonsacrificial memorial. See, for example, Matt. 26:13; Mark 14:9; and especially Acts 10:4). So there are two memorials, one sacrificial (which Jesus instituted), and one non-sacrificial. Lev. 24:7 - the word "memorial" in Hebrew in the sacrificial sense is "azkarah" which means to actually make present (see Lev. 2:2,9,16;5:12;6:5; Num.5:26 where “azkarah” refers to sacrifices that are currently offered and thus present in time). Jesus' instruction to offer the bread and wine (which He changed into His body and blood) as a "memorial offering" demonstrates that the offering of His body and blood is made present in time over and over again. Num. 10:10 - in this verse, "remembrance" refers to a sacrifice, not just a symbolic memorial. So Jesus' command to offer the memorial “in remembrance” of Him demonstrates that the memorial offering is indeed a sacrifice currently offered. It is a re-presentation of the actual sacrifice made present in time. It is as if the curtain of history is drawn and Calvary is made present to us. Mal. 1:10-11 - Jesus' command to his apostles to offer His memorial sacrifice of bread and wine which becomes His body and blood fulfills the prophecy that God would reject the Jewish sacrifices and receive a pure sacrifice offered in every place. This pure sacrifice of Christ is sacramentally re-presented from the rising of the sun to its setting in every place, as Malachi prophesied. Heb. 9:23 - in this verse, the author writes that the Old Testament sacrifices were only copies of the heavenly things, but now heaven has better “sacrifices” than these. Why is the heavenly sacrifice called “sacrifices,” in the plural? Jesus died once. This is because, while Christ’s sacrifice is transcendent in heaven, it touches down on earth and is sacramentally re-presented over and over again from the rising of the sun to its setting around the world by the priests of Christ’s Church. This is because all moments to God are present in their immediacy, and when we offer the memorial sacrifice to God, we ask God to make the sacrifice that is eternally present to Him also present to us. Jesus’ sacrifice also transcends time and space because it was the sacrifice of God Himself. Heb. 9:23 - the Eucharistic sacrifice also fulfills Jer. 33:18 that His kingdom will consist of a sacrificial priesthood forever, and fulfills Zech. 9:15 that the sons of Zion shall drink blood like wine and be saved. Heb. 13:15 - this "sacrifice of praise" refers to the actual sacrifice or "toda" offering of Christ who, like the Old Testament toda offerings, now must be consumed. See, for example, Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30 which also refer to the “sacrifice of praise” in connection with animals who had to be eaten after they were sacrificed. 1 Peter 2:5-6 - Peter says that we as priests offer "sacrifices" to God through Jesus, and he connects these sacrifices to Zion where the Eucharist was established. These sacrifices refer to the one eternal Eucharistic sacrifice of Christ offered in every place around the world. Rom. 12:1 - some Protestants argue that the Eucharist is not really the sacrifice of Christ, but a symbolic offering, because the Lord's blood is not shed (Heb. 9:22). However, Paul instructs us to present ourselves as a "living sacrifice" to God. This verse demonstrates that not all sacrifices are bloody and result in death (for example, see the wave offerings of Aaron in Num. 8:11,13,15,21 which were unbloody sacrifices). The Eucharistic sacrifice is unbloody and lifegiving, the supreme and sacramental wave offering of Christ, mysteriously presented in a sacramental way, but nevertheless the one actual and eternal sacrifice of Christ. Moreover, our bodies cannot be a holy sacrifice unless they are united with Christ's sacrifice made present on the altar of the Holy Mass. 1 Cor. 10:16 - "the cup of blessing" or Third cup makes present the actual paschal sacrifice of Christ, the Lamb who was slain. 1 Cor. 10:18 - Paul indicates that what is eaten from the altar has been sacrificed, and we become partners with victim. What Catholic priests offer from the altar has indeed been sacrificed, our Lord Jesus, the paschal Lamb. 1 Cor. 10:20 - Paul further compares the sacrifices of pagans to the Eucharistic sacrifice - both are sacrifices, but one is offered to God. This proves that the memorial offering of Christ is a sacrifice. 1 Cor. 11:26 - Paul teaches that as often as you eat the bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death. This means that celebrating the Eucharist is proclaiming the Gospel. 1 Cor. 10:21 - Paul's usage of the phrase "table of the Lord" in celebrating the Eucharist is further evidence that the Eucharist is indeed a sacrifice. The Jews always understood the phrase "table of the Lord" to refer to an altar of sacrifice. See, for example, Lev. 24:6, Ezek. 41:22; 44:16 and Malachi 1:7,12, where the phrase "table of the Lord" in these verses always refers to an altar of sacrifice. Heb. 13:10,15 - this earthly altar is used in the Mass to offer the Eucharistic sacrifice of praise to God through our eternal Priest, Jesus Christ. [size=3](e). Jesus in Glory Perpetually Offers the Father His Sacrifice on Our Behalf[/size] Rev. 1 to 22 - Jesus is described as the "Lamb" 28 times in the book of Revelation. This is because Jesus emphasizes His sacrifice in heaven and in His Holy Catholic Church. Rev. 1:13 - Jesus is clothed in heaven with a long robe and golden girdle like the Old Testament priests who offered animal sacrifices. See Exodus 28:4. Rev. 2:17 - the spiritual manna, our Lord's glorious body and blood, is emphasized in the heavenly feast. Rev. 3:20 - as Priest and Paschal Lamb, our Lord shares the Eucharistic meal with us to seal His New Covenant. Through the covenant of his body and blood, we are restored to the Father and become partakers of the divine nature. Rev. 5:6 - this verse tells us that Jesus in His glory still looks like a lamb who was slain. Also, Jesus is "standing" as though a Lamb who was slain. Lambs that are slain lie down. This odd depiction shows Jesus stands at the Altar as our eternal priest in forever offering Himself to the Father for our salvation. Rev. 7:14 - the blood of the Lamb is eternally offered in heaven with the washing of the robes to make them white. Rev. 14:1, Heb. 12:22 - Zion is the city where Jesus established the Eucharist and which was miraculously preserved after the destruction of Jerusalem. See also Psalms 2:6 and 132:13. It represents the union of heaven and earth, of divinity and humanity. This is why those who enter into the Eucharistic celebration on earth enter into the presence of innumerable angels, the souls of the just made perfect, Jesus the Mediator of the Covenant and His sprinkled blood, and God the Judge of all. Rev. 19:13 - in all His glory, Jesus' sacrifice is eternally present as He presents Himself to the Father clothed in a robe dipped in blood. Jesus' sacrifice is the focus in heaven and in the Mass. When the Father beholds His Son, He beholds His sacrifice for humanity. Rev. 19:9 - we are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb where we become one with Him by consuming His body and blood. This is the nuptial union of divinity and humanity. Heb. 2:17; 3:1; 4:14; 8:1; 9:11,25; 10:19,22 - Jesus is repeatedly described as "High Priest." But in order to be a priest, “it is necessary for [Jesus] to have something to offer.” Heb. 8:3. This is the offering of the eternal sacrifice of His body and blood to the Father. Heb. 2:18 - although His suffering is past tense, His expiation of our sins is present tense because His offering is continual. Therefore, He is able (present tense) to help those who are tempted. Heb. 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:15,17 - these verses show that Jesus restores the father-son priesthood after Melchizedek. Jesus is the new priest and King of Jerusalem and feeds the new children of Abraham with His body and blood. This means that His eternal sacrifice is offered in the same manner as the bread and wine offered by Melchizedek in Gen. 14:18. But the bread and wine that Jesus offers is different, just as the Passover Lamb of the New Covenant is different. The bread and wine become His body and blood by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit. Heb. 4:3 – God’s works were finished from the foundation of the world. This means that God’s works, including Christ’s sacrifice (the single act that secured the redemption of our souls and bodies), are forever present in eternity. Jesus’ suffering is over and done with (because suffering was earthly and temporal), but His sacrifice is eternal, because His priesthood is eternal (His victimized state was only temporal). Heb. 4:14 – Jesus the Sacrifice passes through the heavens by the glory cloud of God, just like the sacrifices of Solomon were taken up into heaven by the glory cloud of God in 2 Chron. 7:1. See also Mark 16:19; Luke 24:51; and Acts 1:10. Heb. 7:24 – Jesus holds His priesthood is forever because He continues forever, so His sacrificial offering is forever. He continues to offer His body and blood to us because He is forever our High Priest. Heb. 8:2 - Jesus is a minister in the sanctuary offering up (present tense) His eternal sacrifice to the Father which is perfected in heaven. This is the same sanctuary that we enter with confidence by the blood of Jesus as written in Heb. 10:19. See also Heb. 12:22-24. Heb. 8:3 - as High Priest, it is necessary for Jesus to have something to offer. What is Jesus offering in heaven? As eternal Priest, He offers the eternal sacrifice of His body and blood. Heb. 8:6; 9:15; cf. Heb. 12:22-24; 13:20-21 - the covenant Jesus mediates (present tense) is better than the Old covenant. The covenant He mediates is the covenant of His body and blood which He offers in the Eucharist. See Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - which is the only time Jesus uses the word “covenant” (which is the offering of His body and blood). Heb. 9:12 – Jesus enters into heaven, the Holy Place, taking His own blood. How can this be? He wasn’t bleeding after the resurrection. This is because He enters into the heavenly sanctuary to mediate the covenant of His body and blood by eternally offering it to the Father. This offering is made present to us in the same manner as Melchizedek’s offering, under the appearance of bread and wine. Heb. 9:14 - the blood of Christ offered in heaven purifies (present tense) our consciences from dead works to serve the living God. Christ's offering is ongoing. Heb. 9:22 – blood is indeed required for the remission of sin. Jesus' blood was shed once, but it is continually offered to the Father. This is why Jesus takes His blood, which was shed once and for all, into heaven. Heb. 9:12. Heb. 9:23 – Jesus’ sacrifice, which is presented eternally to the Father in heaven, is described as “sacrifices” (in the plural) in the context of its re-presentation on earth (the author first writes about the earthly sacrifices of animals, and then the earthly offerings of Jesus Christ’s eternal sacrifice). Heb. 9:26 – Jesus’ once and for all appearance into heaven to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself shows that Jesus’ presence in heaven and His sacrifice are inseparable. This also shows that “once for all,” which refers to Jesus’ appearance in heaven, means perpetual (it does not, and cannot mean, “over and done with” because Jesus is in heaven for eternity). “Once for all” also refers to Jesus’ suffering and death (Heb. 7:27; 9:12,26;10:10-14). But “once for all” never refers to Jesus’ sacrifice, which is eternally presented to the Father. This sacrifice is the Mal. 1:11 pure offering made present in every place from the rising of the sun to its setting in the Eucharist offered in the same manner as the Melchizedek offering. Heb. 10:19 - we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus on earth in the Eucharistic liturgy, which is the heavenly sanctuary where Jesus’ offering is presented to God in Heb. 8:2. Heb. 10:22 - our hearts and bodies are (not were) washed clean by the action of Jesus' perpetual priesthood in heaven. Heb. 13:10 – the author writes that we have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. This altar is the heavenly altar at which Jesus presides as Priest before the Father, eternally offering His body and blood on our behalf. See. Mal. 1:7,12; Lev. 24:7; Ez. 41:22; 44:16; Rev. 5:6; 6:9; 9:13; 11:1; 16:7. Heb. 13:20-21 - Jesus died once, but His blood of the eternal covenant is eternally offered to equip us (present tense) with everything good that we may do God's will. Heb. 13:8 - this is because Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. While His suffering was temporal (because bodily pain is temporal), Jesus and His sacrifice are eternal (because redemption, salvation, and the mediation of the New covenant are eternal). Heb. 13:15 – the letter concludes with an instruction to continually offer up, through Christ, a sacrifice of praise to God. The phrase “sacrifice of praise” refers to the “toda” animal sacrifices that had to be consumed. See, for example, Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30. 1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 20:6 - we are a royal priesthood in Jesus, and offer His sacrifice to the Father on earth as He does in heaven. 1 John 1:7 - the blood of Jesus cleanses us (present tense) from all sin. His blood cannot currently cleanse us unless it is currently offered for us. [size=3](f). The Book of Revelation and the Holy Mass[/size] The Book of Revelation shows us glimpses of the heavenly liturgy – Jesus Christ’s once and for all sacrifice eternally present in heaven. This is why the Church has always incorporated the elements that John saw in the heavenly liturgy into her earthly liturgy, for they are one and the same liturgical action of Jesus Christ our High Priest. Rev. 1:6, 20:6 - heaven's identification of the priesthood of the faithful is the same as the Church's identification on earth. Rev. 1:10 - John witnesses the heavenly liturgy on Sunday, the Lord's day, which is a Catholic holy day of obligation for attending Mass on earth. Rev. 1:12, 2:5 - there are lampstands or Menorahs in heaven. These have always been used in the Holy Mass of the Church on earth. Rev. 1:13 - Jesus is clothed as High Priest. Our priests also clothe themselves as "alter Christuses" (other Christs) in offering His sacrifice in the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 1:13, 4:4, 6:11, 7:9, 15:6, 19:13-14 - priests wear special vestments in heaven. Our priests also wear special vestments in celebrating the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 2:5,16,21; 3:3; 16:11 - there is a penitential rite in heaven which is also part of the liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 2:17 - there is manna in heaven given to the faithful. This is the same as the Eucharistic manna given to the faithful at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 4:4, 5:14; 11:16, 14:3, 19:4 - there are priests ("presbyteroi") in heaven. Priests offer sacrifice. Our earthly priests participate with the heavenly priests in offering Jesus' eternal sacrifice in the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 4:8 - heaven's liturgical chant "Holy, Holy, Holy" is the same that is used in the liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 4:8-11, 5:9-14, 7:10-12, 18:1-8 - the various antiphonal chants in the heavenly liturgy are similar to those used at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 5:1 - there is a book or scroll of God's word in heaven. This is reflected in the Liturgy of the Word at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 5:6 and throughout - heaven's description of Jesus as the "Lamb" is the same as the description of Jesus as the Lamb of God in the Eucharistic liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 5:8, 6:9-11, 8:3-4 - heaven's emphasis on the intercession of the saints is the same as the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 5:8, 8:3-4 - there is incense in heaven which has always been part of the liturgy of the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 5:14; 7:12; 19:4 - heaven's concluding liturgical prayer "Amen" is the same as is used at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 6:9 - the martyrs who are seen under the heavenly altar is similar to the Church's tradition of keeping relics of saints under the earthly altars. Rev. 7:3, 14:1, 22:4 - there is the sign of the cross ("tau") in heaven. This sign is used during the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 7:9; 14:6 - the catholicity or universality of heaven as God's family is the essence of the Catholic faith on earth. Rev. 8:1 - the silent contemplation in heaven is similar to our silent contemplation at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 8:3, 11:1, 14:18, 16:7 - there is an altar in heaven. But no altar is needed unless a sacrifice is being offered in heaven. This is the same sacrifice that is offered on the altars used in the Holy Masses on earth. Rev. 11:12 - the phrase "come up here" is similar to the priest's charge to "lift up your hearts" at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 12:1-6, 13-17 - heaven's emphasis on the Blessed Virgin Mary is the same as the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 12:7 - heaven's emphasis on the Archangel Michael's intercession is the same as the concluding prayers at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 14:4 - there are consecrated celibates in heaven, as there are with our Catholic priests and religious on earth. Rev. 15:7, 16:1-4,8,10,12,17; 21:9 - there are chalices (or bowls) in the heavenly liturgy. This is like the chalices used to offer Christ's sacrifice in the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 15:3-4 - there is the recitation of the "Gloria" in heaven. This is also recited at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 15:5 - there is a tent or tabernacle in heaven. Tabernacles are used to store the Eucharist at the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 17, 19:9 - the consummation of the Lamb at heaven's marriage supper is the same as the Lamb's supper in the Holy Mass on earth. Rev. 19:1,3,4,6 - there is the recitation of the "Alleluia" in heaven. This is also recited at the Holy Mass on earth.[/quote] Edited March 23, 2007 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now