This study was the product of a question posed to us
about the Roman Catholic Eucharist. The question
is: are we to believe that the bread and the wine at the
Last Supper are the literal body and blood of Christ which
supports the doctrine of "transsubstantiation"? What
is Transubstantiation? From Catholic Encyclopedia: "The
"change of substance" of bread into the Body of Christ
and wine into the Blood of Christ at the Consecration of the
Mass. Although this fundamental doctrine of the Catholic Church
was held by the faithful since the apostolic days, the term "transubstantation"
was adopted by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, to describe
the Eucharistic mystery. This was reinforced by the Council of
Trent (1545-63), which spoke of "a wonderful and singular
conversion" of the Eucharistic elements. Only a validly
ordained priest can confect the Eucharist. Because of the reality
of transubstantiation, reference to the Euchristic Species as
"bread and wine" is wrong. They are properly called
the Body and Blood of Christ." (Catholic Encyclopedia, Our
Sunday Visitor Inc.1991)
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that one is to imagine
in one's mind that one is virtually eating Christ's flesh
and drinking His blood when one partakes in the Eucharist. Protestants
call the tradition of the Eucharist, Holy Communion, which relates
to the Last Supper of Christ with His Disciples..
This is probably the most important subject in the
Gospel and warrants careful Scripture
study. A Catholic defender claims, "Fundamentalist
writers who comment on John 6 also assert one can show Christ
was speaking only metaphorically by comparing with verses
like John 10:9 ("I am the door") and John 15:1
("I am the true vine"). The person who posed the question
stated: "the problem is that there is not a connection
to John 6:35, "I am the bread of life." "I am
the door" and "I am the vine" to make sense as
metaphors because Christ is like a door - we
go to heaven through him - and he is also like a
vine - we get our spiritual sap through him. But Christ
takes John 6:35 far beyond symbolism by saying, "For my
flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed."
(John 6:55)
He continues in John 6:57, "As the living Father hath
sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that
eateth me, even he shall live by me." (John
6:57). Jesus repeatedly emphasized that He deliberately spoke
in parables. "And the disciples came, and said
unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He
answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to
know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them
it is not given." (Matthew 13:10,11)
A few Scriptures out of context are not going to
explain what Jesus was talking about. I hope you
bear with me and read what developed out of
this question. It will give you a different
perspective than your Catholic defender gave.
Before we go into the meat of the Gospel, the Apostle Paul
made it quite clear that Communion should be done
in memory of Jesus Christ and His crucifixion.Here is
why: God cannot contradict His own teachings. There are
a number of verses in the Bible which forbid the practice of
drinking blood beginning with Genesis 9:4 "But
flesh with the life thereof, [which is] the blood
thereof, shall ye not eat."
"[It shall be] a perpetual statute for your generations
throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat
neither fat nor blood." (Leviticus 3:17
Others are Lev.7:26; 19:26; Deut. 12:23; Eze. 33:25;
Acts 15:20; 15:29).
In fact the admonitions get quite threatening. "And
whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of
the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth
any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that
soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people."
(Leviticus 17:10)
"As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written
[and] concluded that they observe no such thing, save only
that they keep themselves from [things] offered
to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from
fornication." (Acts 21:25)
Jesus did not make it as clear as the Apostle Paul
did, what Jesus meant by the Last Supper. Paul stated:
"For I have received of the Lord that which also I
delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the [same] night
in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he
had given thanks, he brake [it], and said, Take,
eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do
in remembrance of me. After the same manner also [he took] the
cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the New Testament
in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance
of me.
"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink
this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink [this]
cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and
blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself,
and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of
[that] cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily,
eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not
discerning the Lord's body." (1 Corinthians
11:23-29)
What he meant by "Not discerning (1252) the
Lord's body," or diakrino meant in Greek denoting
to separate and to distinguish, decide and judge. To make
to differ and determine who Jesus is.
Our job is to prove, that Jesus did not mean at the last supper,
that the bread and wine were literally His body and blood
which were to be eaten literally. This act would be the
basis of being cleansed from sin, for healings and strength.
Catholics are encouraged to attend daily Mass in a Roman Catholic
Church to be continually built up.
Along with the Scriptures a second resource to study Roman Catholic
traditions, are their artifacts they display during
their ceremonies and later preserve in museums. These
speak much louder than words. The fact that they are on
display to this day means that the Roman Catholic
Church still identifies with the history displayed on coins and
procession symbols.
In the treasury of Saint Peter, are many "sacred"
objects preserved which are periodically brought
into museums for all to see all over the world, they are called
the Vatican Collections, the Papacy and Art, Exhibits.
The symbolism used on old coins are reminiscent of
sun worship. For instance one coin portrays the emblems
of the Catholic Eucharist as a large round wafer embedded in
sun streams (representing the bread) over a gold goblet
decorated with more sun streams, which is supposed to have
the blood of Christ in it. The circle enfolding an obelisk
at Saint Peters Basilica is another strong indication of their
pagan connections to sun worship.
In spite of that, when one reads some of their literature without
discernment, it is easy to come to the conclusion that the Roman
Catholic Church is the historical church as many believe
deep down. The only way to disprove that Catholicism does
not really agree with the Gospel, is to pay attention to what
the Pope really does and states in his crusades and study their
traditions. One will soon find that there a lot of problems that
are irreconcilable with the Gospel. To compare Catholic traditions
with the Scripture is the safest way to discuss the problems
in their teachings.
Colossians 2:8 warns "Beware lest any man spoil you through
philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after
the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with
corruptible things, [as] silver and gold, from your vain
conversation [received] by tradition from your
fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as
of a lamb without blemish and without spot:" (1 Peter
1:18,19) "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and
to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made
you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath
purchased with his own blood." (Acts 20:28)
To truly understand why Jesus had to offer Himself for
our redemption through His blood for the forgiveness of
sins, according to the riches of his grace; (Ephesians 1:7) we
have to briefly study the Old Testament which describes
how Israel was covered from sin by the slaughter
of specific numbers and types of animals for certain sins.
Hebrews points back to that day: "Neither by the blood
of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in
once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption
[for us]. For if the blood of bulls and of goats,
and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth
to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the
blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from
dead works to serve the living God?" (Hebrews 9:13,14)
Because these animal sacrifices could only cover Jews temporarily
and never Gentiles, who lived outside the law but were just
as condemned through Adam's transgression, a change
had to take place. The Old Testmanent had to be replaced
by a New Testament. Speaking of Jesus Christ: "And
for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament,
that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions
[that were] under the first testament, they which
are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."
(Hebrews 9:15)
Who are they which are called? "For many are
called, but few [are] chosen." (Matthew
22:14) Again speaking of Jesus who was "declared
[to be] the Son of God with power, according to the
spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: By whom
we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the
faith among all nations, for his name:
Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus
Christ:" (Romans 1:4-6) Ye refers to the body of Christ,
the church. The chosen are the Jews, who will be few in
the end.
The Bible is comprised of an Old Testament and a New Testament.
Have you ever wondered why? It had to do with the Old Testament
Abrahamic covenant. Abram, whose name was changed to Abraham
by God after he was circumcised, was a Gentile. God watches people
and He found Abraham to have such faith in God, that God personally
made a covenant with him, which God had to keep. God promised
Abram seed, the numbers he wouldn't be able to count and land
which would be his forever. This promise was a reward for
Abram's faith which was counted to him for righteousness
(Gen15:6). It became the key of the entire Old and New
Testament
The Apostle Paul later proved that Abraham's faith was not
merely a general confidence in God nor simple obedience to God's
command, but that it was indeed faith in the promise
of redemption through Christ (Rom. 3:21,22; 4:18-25; Gal.
3:14) in Genesis thousands of years before Jesus Christ was born.
Abraham knew that God is good, God is love.
How did God perform the oath which would stick forever? He
placed Abraham in a deep sleep at night time. Between a left
and right side of a slain heifer, God Himself via a smoking furnace,
and a burning lamp, passed between the heifer sides, swearing
to Abraham, that He would keep the promise He had made to Abraham
forever. God, a Spirit, could not shed blood. This act by God
was reminiscent of some groups of people who cut their arms to
make them bleed and two people would mingle their blood by laying
their arm on the other's arm performing an unbreakable oath to
each other. God did not swear in Abraham's presence because God
didn't want anything to interfere with this act. (Genesis 15:9-21)
What had God done? He had promised Abraham eternal life which
couldn't be accomplished without a blood sacrifice that would
cover all sins once and for all time. (Genesis 15:9-21)
When a testament is made, a person has to die before an
inheritance can be transfered to those left behind. The promise
to Abraham was made by God himself the
testator. "For where a testament [is], there must
also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament
[is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength
at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither
the first [testament] was dedicated without blood.
(Hebrews 9:16-18) Hebrews refers to the Abrahamic covenant here
and the fact that God made it and cannot die for anyone, He is
eternal. The Old Testament could only be fulfilled with a New
Testament.
Since God Himself was the testator, He had to be represented
by His Son who offered to die for His Father to fulfill the promise
His Father had made. Jesus became the Father while on earth.
He not only died for our sins but died for His Father as His
representative.
Truly realizing and comprehending that Jesus Christ
was indeed God Himself, in fact had to be God Himself,
to satisfy the Abrahamic Covenant, one begins to understand
the awesomeness of it and even more the security in it.
We can be absolutely sure that God Himself will fulfill
the final part of the Scriptures since He has already fulfilled
most of the Bible prophecy. It is impossible to doubt anything
at this point. A light begins to come on about remembrance of
the flesh and blood. It satisfied God' oath to Abraham.
Now ask yourself: did Abraham have to eat sacrificed
flesh and drink blood to have his faith in "a
resurrected Christ" to be accounted for righteousness
by God? No, so why would that be
changed today? Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son Isaac because
he believed Isaac would be resurrected since God had pormised
that he would be the father of nations. Isaac was to be the father
of the future generation. His faith was enough to
set God in motion to get the sin factor under
control and buy back Abraham and the rest of mankind.
Only those who have faith will take advantage of it though. This
is why Jesus said: "It is finished." God backed up
His Word through His Son. Since all of humanity was doomed to
die and go to hell by just one transgression: Adam's disobedience,
by one man all mankind was revived to live forever. Wether it
will be in heaven or hell is their choice. Jesus paid the penalty
for all sin by shedding His blood parallel to animals who had
to be slaughtered in the Old Testament to pay for committed sins
on a temporary basis. Without the Abrahamic Covenant we would
still die in our sins. God might have abandoned this planet due
to the corruption that was and still is prevalent.
In Catholicism the sin is never ending. Catholics spend
much time praying people out of purgatory. Purgatory is not in
the Bible.
"How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the
eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your
conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (Hebrews
9:14)
Another proof why drinking the blood cannot apply:
In the Old Testament as well as the New Testament,
the blood was separated from the flesh when
it was sacrificed for sins. The blood of the animal
was taken and presented to God and was applied to
man through sprinkling the blood externally, never by
drinking it. (Hebrews 9:7-29).
The same is true of the blood of Christ which
represents the blood of the covenant necessary to
satisfy the promise God made. The Law of Moses could
not be satisfied through the Aaronic priesthood.
It ceased to exist. The temple was destroyed. With
Christ's resurrection, an eternal Priesthood was instituted.
Jesus Christ received the Melchizedek Priesthood, when He returned
to the Father in heaven. There is only one Melchizedek Priest.
It is Jesus Christ. Only through this priesthood can one receive
eternal life. That is another reason we can only be resurrected
by Him. The New Testament was established in Christ's blood,
applied not only to Jews but to all mankind. The Pope calls himself
also a Melchizedek priest which is an impossibility according
to the Word of God.
To go deeper in relation to the meaning of bread
and wine in reference to Jesus's body and blood,
in Greek, the word for blood is haima (129); the
blood of the human or animal body is the substantial
basis of their lives. The life of the flesh is in the blood.
Haima by itself may denote life passing away in bloodshed, generally
taken away by force. Haima is used to denote life given up or
offered as an atonement. (Matt. 26:28; Heb. 9:12, 25; 1John 1:7)
Christ (5547) in connection with the blood, the word
used was Christos which means to
anoint. Used in the Old Testament, anointed
applied to everyone anointed with the holy oil, pertains primarily
to the high priesthood (Lev.4:3,5,16;6:22). It is also
a name applied to others as redeemers. In the Gospels (NT) Christos
appears as a proper noun alone in connection
with Jesus Christ. Jesus who is called Christ and
Christos also refers to the society of which
Christ is the head. It also means the doctrine of
Christ (Eph 4:20), the benefits (Heb 3:14); and the
disposition arising in believers from a sound Christian
faith. (Gal 4:19, cf. 2Cor. 3:14; Eph. 3:17; Phil. 2:5)
Taking the meaning of Christos, "the
doctrine of Christ" (Eph 4:20), a step
further, we find in Revelation 19:13 the following: "And
he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood (haima): and
his name is called "The Word of God.""
His name (3686) is called The Word (3056) of God. His name,
onoma (3686) in Greek, means a character described by the name,
the name as a substitute or representative
of a person. Since in Jesus' case His name is the
Word of God, it represents Jesus and His character. If
Jesus represents God, it would represent God's character.
From this we can deduce that the Word of God is what
He left with us to represent that which wants to get into
us to become one with Him, His character, not physical
flesh eaten at a Mass. His name, onoma, also gives importance
to confession of a name for the sake
of the person so confessed (Matt. 10:22;
19:29); 24:9..) so to be baptized into someone's name means to
be baptized into the faith or confession of that person
and to be identified with his character. It also
delegated authority: "And whatsoever ye shall
ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father
may be glorified in the Son." (John 14:13) This
promise only applies if it is conformable to
His character and to His purpose.
The Word (3056) is logos in Hebrew which means to speak.
It is articulated utterance of human language, also
applies to thought in the mind. It refers to spoken
words which are accepted as truth and understood.
Those who are of God hear God's words (John 3:34, 8:47). Jesus
Christ being sent of God, speaks exactly God's utterances. In
the first chapter of John, Jesus Christ in His
preincarnate state is called ho Logos, the Word, meaning
first immaterial intelligence and then the expression of
that intelligence in speech that humans could understand.
It also refers to the practice of the gospel (Matt.
13:21; Mark 4:17; John 8:31; Rev. 1:9; 20:4)
Apply this to the Eucharist in Roman Catholicism, which
is supposed to cleanse a Catholic daily. This practice
does away with the scriptural admonition that the Word
of God needs to wash us clean.
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away
thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (Acts 22:16)
Calling on the Word of God as confirmed in Ephesians 5:25,26:
"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved
the church and gave himself for it; That he
might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of
water by the word,"
"Jesus answered, "Verily, verily, I say unto
thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
(John 3:5) Not by works of righteousness which we have
done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by
the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the
Holy Ghost; (Titus 3:5)
John 1:1: "In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God, and the Word
was God." "And the Word was made flesh,
and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of
the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John
1:14) Here is the connection between the Word and
the flesh Catholics want one to eat. It is
the Word that God wants us to eat daily just like
bread is necessary daily for physical sustenance, the Word
is necessary for spiritual sustenance. We are not in Jesus when
we do not take in the Word to sustain us in Jesus. The Word is
what Jesus refers to when He says I am the vine. "I am the
true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. (John 15:1)
In the following verses, Jesus is speaking of Israel, it did
not bear fruit by rejecting the Word of God (Christ Jesus)
and not teaching the world as they were to
do. He states that they will be cut off because of it,
so that new branches can spring out of the cuts.
Gentile evangelists bore much more fruit (the spoken
Word of God representing Jesus Christ) instead. Every branch
in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and
every [branch] that beareth fruit, he purgeth it,
that it may bring forth more fruit. (John 15:2)
In His first miracle, Jesus made wine out of water
which was prophetic of what was to come. The
water was the symbol of the Old Testament truth.
It was the Word of God, the Law. Moses hit the rock and
got water. The water parted by the Word of God. The flood
waters cleansed the world. The teaching was referred to as
water from deep wells. Jesus changed the water to
wine which refers to the New Testament and
His blood shed for the sins of the world.
Why did Jesus tie His message to the disciples to
meal time. Going back to the Old Testament,
God was in the habit of that. One of the
reasons God wanted all the male children of Israel circumcised
on their penis was to remind them every time
they used it, who they belonged to. They were God's elect.
In another instance he told them to put
long fringes on their garments (shawls) and
memorize a commandment with each fringe, something they
wore every day to not forget. Jewish priests still
wear their shawls.
"Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that
they make them fringes in the borders of their garments
throughout their generations, and that they put upon
the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue: And
it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may look upon
it, and remember all the commandments of the LORD, and
do them; and that ye seek not after your own heart and
your own eyes, after which ye use to go a whoring:" (Numbers
15:38,39)
But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit
of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with
you in my Father's kingdom. (Matthew 26:29)
Why did Jesus tell them that He would not drink of this fruit
of the vine, He was still alive before He shed
His blood. He was
still under the Old Covenant and would not be with them in flesh
and blood. To leave a New Testament, He had to be separated from
His blood representing the wine in the cup. In Jesus' case
the body was resurrected.
Note Jesus does not include blood when he reappeared
to his disciples after His death to fulfill His promise
to "drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."
He didn't mean up in heaven but His Father's kingdom which
is to be headed by Jesus Christ here on earth had already
been achieved by His atonement.
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me,
and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see
me have. (Luke 24:39)Why on earth would we
be drinking His blood or eating His flesh to get cleansed.
It makes no sense whatsoever. Jesus is alive at the right
hand of the Father intercessing for us against accusations
from Satan to the Father. He must be grossed out at
the thought of having people by the millions
chewing him up and drinking His precious
blood daily simply by Scripture twisting and blindness
to the truth.
Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God,
[even] to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose
from the dead. (Acts 10:41)
So what did Jesus mean at the Last Supper?
"And from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful
witness, [and] the first begotten of the dead, and
the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto Him that loved
us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, (Revelation
1:5) Notice present tense "He is the prince of the
kings of the earth" and past tense, "and washed
us from our sins in his own blood" (external). It is done]
Since He is the Word (John 1:1), to do it He became
the Word in the flesh to make sure we got the message.
The Word only stands if every tittle is fulfilled
to the finest detail. How would we know what God did for us without
the Word of God.
Matthew 26:26,27: "And as they were eating, Jesus took
bread, and blessed [it], and brake [it], and gave [it] to the
disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he
took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave [it]
to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;"
This was clearer put by Mark: "And he took the cup, and
when he had given thanks, he gave [it] to them: and
they all drank of it. And he said unto them,
This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for
many. (Mark 14:23,24)
The "broken" bread represented His broken
body, by demoralizing Him in placing a crown
of thorns on His head, pushing it hard into His skull.
They ripped his clothes off, spat in His face and nailed Him
to the cross. To make sure He was dead, they pierced him
and blood and water gushed out of Him.
The blood and water dissipated into the ground. The
blood in itself has no life. It only has life in
conjunction with the Word of God. The blood and the Word are
interrelated. One without the other has no power of it's
own. Jesus without the Word of God is just a man.
Nobody would have known what his purpose for being
here was or who He was.
When we pray "Give us this day our daily bread," we
are not only asking for food for the belly but for
the Word of God (Jesus Christ) "And forgive
us our debts..". We are forgiven through His crucifixion
which is represented in the Lord's Last Supper. We
are to remember it every time we break bread and remember Him
and what He did for us.
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not
live by bread alone, but by every word that
proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Matthew
4:4) If Jesus wanted us to eat His body and drink
His blood, He would have written this Scripture differently.
Another wonderful example of bread being something
other than bread is in Matthew 15:23-28: The woman
who came to Jesus wanted a healing for her daughter establish
that these verses are not about physical bread or the eating
of Jesus' flesh.
"But he [Jesus] answered her [the woman] not
a word. And his disciples came and besought
him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But
he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep
of the house of Israel.
Then came she and worshiped Him, saying, Lord, help me.
But He answered and said, It is not meet to take
the children's bread, and to cast [it] to dogs.
And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the
crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great [is]
thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt.
And her daughter was made whole from that very hour."
Here he could have only been referring to the Word
of God. If one replaced bread with shepherd
representing Jesus himself, it wouldn't fit the sentence
where the Word can be doled out in bits and pieces.
Place the "Word of God" where Christ is mentioned into
the Scripture John 10:9, John 15:1 6:35 and John 6:27, it fits.
John 6:63 is where Jesus confirms what I just wrote.
"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth
nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are
spirit, and [they] are life." (John 6:63)
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take
the book, and to open the seals thereof: for
thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God
by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people,
and nation; (Revelation 5:9) Praise the Lord, halleluja !
From Vatican II, Some Light on Procedures
The Catholic Vatican II is one of the books of "how
to" proceed enforcing Roman Catholic traditions laid
down by the leadership of the Catholic Church for priests
and teachers. It states that the Eucharist is the
center of Roman Catholicism. "Celebrating the
Eucharist in which "the victory and triumph of his death
are again made present." (The Council of Trent, session
23: Decree on the Holy Eucharist, ch.5)
The Most Sacred Mystery of the Eucharist 47. At the Last Supper,
on the night he was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic
sacrifice of his Body and Blood. This he did in
order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the Cross throughout
the ages until he should come again, and so to entrust
to his beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of
his death and resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity,
a bond of charity, a paschal banquet in which Christ is
consumed, the mind is filled with grace and a pledge
of future glory is given to us. (Roman Breviary: Feast of Corpus
Christi, Second Vespers, Antiphon of Magnificat.)
"In the celebration of the Eucharist, a sense of community
should be encouraged. Each person will then feel himself united
with his brethren in the communion of the Church local and universal,
and even in a way with all men. In the sacrifice of the Mass
in fact, Christ offers himself for the salvation of the entire
world. The congregation of the faithful is both type
and sign of the union of the whole human race in Christ
its Head. (cf. Constitution on the Church, n.3:AAS 57 (1965),p.6)
The Eucharist is also presented to the faithful "as
a medicine, by which we are freed from our daily
faults and preserved from mortal sin: (Council of
Trent, Session 13: Decree on the Eucharist, ch.2: Denz. 875 (1638)..)
The custom of the Church declares this to be necessary,
so that no one who is conscious of having committed mortal
sin, even if he believes himself to be contrite, should approach
the holy Eucharist without first making a sacramental confession."
(Council of Trent, Session 13; Decree on the Eucharist,
ch. 7: Denz. 880 (1646-47).
Frequent or daily reception of the Blessed Eucharist
increases union with Christ, nourishes the spiritual life
more abundantly, strengthens the soul in virtue
and gives the communicant a stronger
pledge of eternal happiness.. (S.C. of the
Council, Decree on the daily reception of communion, 20
Dec.1905, n.6:AAS 38 (1905-06), pp.401.
Priests should ensure that they preside over the celebration
of the Eucharist that the faithful know that they are attending
not a rite established on private initiative, but the Church's
public worship, the regulation of which was entrusted by
Christ to the apostles and their successors. (Vatican II
p.127)
The reasons for receiving the Eucharist is that the sick are
led to the praiseworthy custom of adoring the heavenly
food which is preserved in churches. This practice of adoration
has a valid and firm foundation," especially since belief
in the real presence of the Lord has as its natural consequence
the eternal and public manifestation of that belief."
(Ibid., p 130)
The Blessed Sacrament.. should have only one tabernacle..
safe and inviolable.. in a prominent place, in the middle
of the main altar.. In the celebration of Mass the principal
modes of worship by which Christ is present to his Church are
gradually revealed.
First of all, Christ is seen to be present among
the faithful gathered in his name; then
in his Word.. Care should be taken that the
presence of the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle is
indicated to the faithful by a tabernacle veil.. a lamp
should burn continually near the tabernacle as a sign of
the honor paid to the Lord. (CF. C.I.C., can 1271.)
"All men are called to this catholic unity which prefigures
and promotes universal peace. And in different ways
to it belong, or are related: the Catholic faithful, others
who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called
by God's grace to salvation;" (Vatican II,1992)
Editors note: This final call includes literally, Buddhists,
Islams, Hindus, Mormons, in other words all religions because
they all have some sort of faith which is all it takes according
to the Pope. His goal is to gather the whole world under himself
as Vicar of Christ. |