The Papists

Anon, you’re not alone! Lots of people, including myself, have doubts or have had doubts about what we believe to be the pinnacle of our Catholic faith.

The Eucharist is the ultimate source of life for the soul, because in both species, it’s Jesus’ body and blood, soul and divinity. We know this because in the Gospel, Jesus referred to himself as the Bread of Life, He told us that if we don’t eat the flesh of the Son of Man, we will die, and He commanded us to “do this in memory of me:”

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” (John 6: 35)

Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” (John 6: 53-58)

While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many.” (Mark 14: 22-24)

Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you.” (Luke 22: 19-20)

As Catholics, we take all of these statements literally. We don’t believe the bread and wine are symbols of Jesus, we believe they actually are Jesus. And this is a tough bullet to bite! Why would the God of the Universe tell people to eat bread and drink wine (which was supposedly His body and blood) in Give us this day our daily bread” section of the Our Father. Says the Catechism #2387:

2837“Daily” (epiousios) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. Taken in a temporal sense, this word is a pedagogical repetition of “this day,”¹²⁸to confirm us in trust “without reservation.” Taken in the qualitative sense, it signifies what is necessary for life, and more broadly every good thing sufficient for subsistence.¹²⁹Taken literally (epi-ousios: “super-essential”), it refers directly to the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ, the “medicine of immortality,” without which we have no life within us.¹³⁰Finally in this connection, its heavenly meaning is evident: “this day” is the Day of the Lord, the day of the feast of the kingdom, anticipated in the Eucharist that is already the foretaste of the kingdom to come. For this reason it is fitting for the Eucharistic liturgy to be celebrated each day.

The Eucharist is our daily bread. The power belonging to this divine food makes it a bond of union. Its effect is then understood as unity, so that, gathered into his Body and made members of him, we may become what we receive. . . . This also is our daily bread: the readings you hear each day in church and the hymns you hear and sing. All these are necessities for our pilgrimage.¹³¹

The Father in heaven urges us, as children of heaven, to ask for the bread of heaven. [Christ] himself is the bread who, sown in the Virgin, raised up in the flesh, kneaded in the Passion, baked in the oven of the tomb, reserved in churches, brought to altars, furnishes the faithful each day with food from heaven.¹³²

Taken literally, the Eucharist is our daily bread. But why bread? I think that Jesus chose bread because it’s something that’s accessible to everyone: everyone understands we need food to live, and every believer understands we need God to live, so why not combine the two? In the Eucharist, God takes a mere symbol of life (bread for a mortal body) and turns it into actual life (His body, given up for the immortal soul). Isn’t that neat?

All this information aside, it’s still tough to believe, especially when you’re at Mass and the incense is choking your lungs, there are screaming children at the back of the church, someone’s cell phone goes off, your nose itches, your knees hurt from kneeling because you got the pew that didn’t have the padding, ad infinitum. There are a ton of reasons as to why our “experience” of God (especially during the Eucharistic prayer and most especially during the Consecration—the highest part of the Mass) doesn’t always feel the same. I find that I “experience” the Eucharist better at youth rallies, retreats and other gatherings. Sure, we can have warm fuzzy feelings about the Eucharist when packed into a crowded gymnasium full of other young crazy people who are also on fire for Christ, but does the actual Eucharist itself change from a retreat setting to a boring, home parish setting? Of course not! Jesus makes Himself present at every valid Mass, regardless of who believes and what emotional circumstances they find themselves in. And that’s the beauty of the Catholic faith: God is present in the transubstantiated bread and wine even if we don’t believe it. It still happens no matter what! 

There’s one miracle in particular that I want to focus on: The Miracle at Lanciano.

During Holy Mass, after the two-fold consecration, the host was changed into live Flesh and the wine was changed into live Blood, which coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size.

… 

[A]nalyses were conducted with absolute and unquestionable scientific precision and they were documented with a series of microscopic photographs.
These analyses sustained the following conclusions:

• The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.
• The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.
• The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.

So basically, a priest was doubting the presence of Jesus in the Eucharist (just like you!) and the accidents of the bread and wine actually turned into flesh and blood! It always gets me. I mean, I don’t think it would have happened unless God wanted to tell us that the transubstantiated bread actually is His body and the wine actually is His blood. It’s amazing, really. 

Last question: “How can I believe?” 

That’s a hard one to answer. I don’t think there’s anything you can do about it on your own. However, ask the Holy Spirit to give you a spirit of knowledge and understanding the next time you’re in Eucharistic Adoration! Sometimes, things just ‘click,’ and you say to yourself, “yeah. That’s the Body of Christ.” It’s happened to me a bunch of times. 

I’ll be praying for you!!

-Olivier

PS: Here’s a list of Eucharistic Miracles

You may very well be experiencing what Niko referenced here. Thank God for the grace of Christ’s sacramental presence, and get back to your pew! ;)

Be holy! Be happy!

- Phillip

I can’t discern exactly what you’re asking, but I’ll take a stab at this anyway. 

Catholics receive the Eucharist - which we believe truly is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ substantially present under the appearances of bread and wine - because Jesus commanded us to do so.

In John 6:53-56: “Jesus said to them, ‘Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.’”

Again in 1 Corinthians 11:24-25: “‘This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’”

It should be noted that in the passage from John’s Gospel, Jesus is speaking literally. Jesus, having every opportunity to correct his listeners’ misunderstandings, doesn’t, and we see in John 6:66 that “as a result of this, many [of] his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.”

Simply put, we eat and drink Christ’s body and blood because He told us to. Be holy! Be happy!

- Phillip

Well, howabout the General Instruction for the Roman Mass?  You’re right though, all of Christ is present in a single particle of consecrated Host.

http://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/2008/10/04/pcs-26-29-viaticum/

In its sacramental sign value communion under both kinds expresses a more complete sharing by the faithful. (See GIRM 240. a.-e. )

Receiving Communion under the form of both bread and wine is a more complete sharing. In later years, it will be described as a “more perfect” expression.

-Niko

Well, actually the new church you are going to is doing it closer to what the tradition has been.  Officially, the practice of receiving only bread has been around since the 15th century.  The reasons for this are mainly practical.  It’s easier to give it under just the bread especially to large congregations.  Furthermore, if the body is dropped, it is easily recoverable.  The precious blood can be more difficult to recover.

In the United States, we tend to do things our own way and give both body and blood,  (which is Canonically acceptable.  The Canon actually notes that receiving both is a more perfect sign,) because this is what most American Catholics were used to seeing, since they were surrounded by large swaths of protestant churches.

For more info:

http://catholicism.about.com/b/2008/04/11/reader-question-why-do-catholics-receive-only-the-host.htm

-Niko

Re: Can Catholics receive the Eucharist from the Orthodox?

While Jordan’s answer highlights the general teaching that is unacceptable for Catholics to receive the Eucharist or other sacraments from non-Catholic priests, there are exceptions. In fact, the Catholic Church is much more willing for the Catholic faithful to receive sacraments from the Orthodox than the Orthodox are to receive sacraments from Catholics!

From Canon Law:

Members of the Orthodox churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these churches. (canon 844 § 3)

If one is traveling in a country where no Catholic churches or priests are available, for example, it is acceptable to attend and Orthodox liturgy, and it is my understanding that it will fulfill your Sunday obligation—it is, after all, the same Divine Liturgy. In fact, in many countries, Eastern Catholic and Orthodox priests serve each other’s parishes and needs quite interchangeably. 

Also, if one is in danger of death and no Catholic priests are available, it is acceptable to receive the sacraments from an Orthodox priest, if he is willing to grant them. (See this for a little more info.)

But there’s the catch: Catholics can receive legitimate sacraments from the Orthodox, but if the Orthodox priest knows you are Catholic, particularly Roman Catholic, he will most likely refuse to give them.

And here is one of the several Catholic Answers quick answers:

Q: What does the Church teach about Catholics receiving Communion in an Eastern Orthodox Church and participating in its liturgy?

A: The Directory Concerning Ecumenical Matters: Part One explains when a Catholic may receive the Eucharist in an Eastern Orthodox church. Catholics may receive Communion there when “special circumstances make it materially or morally impossible over a long period for one of the faithful to receive the sacraments in his own Church, so that in effect he would be deprived without legitimate reason of the spiritual fruit of the sacraments.”

This provision doesn’t apply to those who have normal recourse to the sacraments in the Catholic Church.

The same document also emphasizes that attendance at Orthodox liturgies by Catholics is permitted “if they have reasonable grounds, e.g. arising out of a public office or function, blood relationships, friendships, desire to be better informed, etc. In such cases there in nothing against their taking part in the common responses, hymns, and actions of the Church in which they are guests.”

Roman Catholics cannot receive the Eucharist or fulfill their Sunday Mass duty at an Eastern Orthodox liturgy.

While the Roman Catholic Church considers the Eastern Orthodox Church a true church - that is, the Roman Catholic Churchrecognizes that the Eastern Orthodox Church can tie its roots back to the Apostolic Church founded on Jesus Christ by the Apostles, and the Roman Catholic Church recognizes all seven sacraments in the Eastern Orthodox Church as valid - the Eastern Orthodox Church does not recognize the primacy of the pope and papal infallibility; Eastern Orthodox Christians recognize the pope as first in honor, but not unique in his authority in the Church.

The union between the two churches is real, but not complete as of yet because of the differences in belief regarding papal infallibility and the dogma of infallibility.

A Roman Catholic can, however, ask to partake in an Eastern Orthodox liturgy and receive a blessing during the distribution of communion and venerate the chalice. 

I hope this helps! 

Grace be with you,

- Jordan

Transubstantiation

“Exactly when” the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ is considered differently between Eastern and Western Christianity. In the East, they do not deign to say at which specific moment in the whole Eucharistic prayers transubstantiation occurs. In the West, we hold that it is the words of consecration themselves (Christ’s words) that effect the change, though we do not parse out the syllables to say when within that prayer.

From Catholic Answers:

Q: Both the Director of Religious Education and the pastor at my parish believe that the bread and wine do not become the body and blood of Christ at the words of institution, but over the whole Eucharistic Prayer. I disagree. Who’s right?

A: You are. How could transubstantiation occur over the whole Eucharistic Prayer, when, after the words of consecration of the host and chalice, the priest shows the sacred species to the people for adoration?

The answer is also in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

CCC 1105:The Epiclesis (“invocation upon”) is the intercession in which the priest begs the Father to send the Holy Spirit, the Sanctifier, so that the offerings may become the body and blood of Christ and that the faithful by receiving them, may themselves become a living offering to God. 
CCC 1353: In the institution narrative, the power of the words and the action of Christ, and the power of the Holy Spirit, make sacramentally present under the species of bread and wine Christ’s body and blood, his sacrifice offered on the cross once for all. 
CCC 1375: It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament. The Church Fathers strongly affirmed the faith of the Church in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion. Thus St. John Chrysostom declares: “It is not man that causes the things offered to become the body and blood of Christ, but he who was crucified for us, Christ himself. The priest, in the role of Christ, pronounces these words, but their power and grace are God’s. This is my body, he says. This word transforms the things offered.”

This article from the Catholic Encyclopedia is also useful on the subject, as well as containing proofs from Scriptures and the Church Fathers concerning the reality of transubstantiation.

Quick note: I’ve seen several unfortunate instances of people on tumblr using the word “consubstantiation” in association with Catholic Eucharistic doctrine—perhaps they’re confusing with the Father and Son being “consubstantial,” which is something different. It’s Lutherans who believe in  eucharistic consubstantiation—that Jesus is somehow mysteriously present in the bread and wine in a way we can’t name or know. Catholics, on the other hand, hold that the bread and wine is substantially transubstantiated into the real, physical Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Confusing terminology, perhaps, but a very important distinction.

- Q

In reference to “When exactly does the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus?”

It is my understanding that the “process” takes place throughout the entire Eucharistic Prayer, which is completed with the Great Amen. 

-Kayla

Great question!

These Canons from the Code of Canon Law are instructive:

• “One who is to receive the most Holy Eucharist is to abstain from any food or drink, with the exception only of water and medicine, for at least the period of one hour before Holy Communion” (CIC 919 §1).
• Elderly people, those who are ill, and their caretakers are excused from the Eucharistic fast (CIC 191 §3).
• Priests and deacons may not dispense one obligated by the Eucharistic fast unless the bishop has expressly granted such power to them (cf. CIC 89).

For more information on who can receive Communion, visit Catholic Answers.

Be holy! Be happy!

- Phillip