The Meaning of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church

What is the meaning of Eucharist in the Catholic Church?
The Greek origin of the word Eucharist is eucharistia, which means "thanksgiving."
The term comes from the Last Supper when Jesus took the bread, broke it, and gave thanks (eucharistia) saying, "This is my body, which is given up for you."
When we celebrate the Mass, we recall all we have to be thankful for as a human race and as individual people. We thank God for his creation, his redemption, and his presence in our lives. We thank God for all the good things he has given to us. We are grateful, especially, for the gift of God's Son and the life that Jesus sacrificed forus.
The term Eucharist is used to refer to the bread and wine that become Christ's true body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, which the Church has called the source and summit of Christian life.
"The Eucharist is the heart and the summit of the Church's life, for in it Christ associates his Church and all her members with his sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving offered once for all on the cross to his Father; by this sacrifice he pours out the graces of salvation on his Body which is the Church." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1407)
SUBSCRIBE for more Catholic videos: kzbin.info_c...
CONNECT WITH THE RELIGION TEACHER:
-- Facebook: / thereligionteacher
-- Pinterest: / religionteacher
CONNECT WITH JARED:
-- Instagram: / jareddees
-- Twitter: / jareddees
-- LinkedIn: / jareddees
ARE YOU A RELIGIOUS EDUCATOR? CHECK OUT THESE RESOURCES:
-- Activities: www.thereligionteacher.com/re...
-- Popular Lesson Plans: www.thereligionteacher.com/ca...
-- The Religion Teacher's Guide to Lesson Planning: www.thereligionteacher.com/gu...
-- BECOME A MEMBER: Access hundreds of printable worksheets, class videos, and online courses here: members.thereligionteacher.co...

[@dimplejaimal3348]

Giving thanks to you Jared Dees for your teaching 🌸

[@Bubblesandcandyfloss]

Thanks for this.

[@jaypandya9661]

Eucharist 2 u. Thanksgiving 2 u 4 d lovely teachings

[@gabrielmmaria]

I'm falling in love for this vídeo

[@mariedurant205]

Glory of God 🙏😇

[@tlewis84able]

I didn’t know that translation. Thanks!

[@papafir3manch3f66]

thank you ☺️

[@chrispolen2712]

THANK YOU!

[@032islandwoman]

God Bless you! We are using your videos for our home-school catechism class. Do you have activity sheets per topic?

[@dianamsyiemlieh8800]

Thank you so much ..regards fro. Shillong India 👍👍👍

[@bebeconnection]

Amen

[@brantandstaceylayaguen6013]

Thanks I have learned a lot 1 new subscriber 😁

[@brantandstaceylayaguen6013]

Hehe

[@aym_gei9708]

@@brantandstaceylayaguen6013 what?

[@mariedurant205]

Jesus Christ the Lord

[@user-wh4ft3se5x]

🙏🙏🙏

[@Everettjinkins]

Im at all informed

[@markbaker4259]

One critique, if I may: I would recommend against saying "As Catholic we believe ...". Particularly in the case of the Eucharist, it's not that we believe this as Catholics. We KNOW this to be true. The fact that non-Catholics might not believe what It is does not change the existence of the Body and Blood under the species of bread and wine.

[@deandraalexis]

What he should REALLY say, though, is "As Christians". Greek Orthodox see the bread and wine in the same way, except our wine is nasty and our bread is real, rather than the wafer cracker the Catholics call bread.

[@JeffreyMyersII]

@@deandraalexis the cracker is unleavened bread. leaven/yeast is what makes bread fluffy. Jesus doesn't specify which kind of bread we should use, it isn't what's important. the practice of eating unleavened bread is something you find in the old testament. i am protestant and we don't believe the bread and wine become Jesus' literal flesh and blood as if we are eating human meat but the sanctity and importance are the same. we partake in communion, as Jesus told us to, as a symbol and profession of our rememberence that His body was broken and His blood poured out for all the world so that we might be saved. whether you believe that the bread and wine literally become the flesh and blood of Jesus is a secondary issue. what's important is that we know and remember its meaning: for God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.

[@deandraalexis]

@@JeffreyMyersII Oh cool, I didn't realize it was still bread. I just thought it was kinda like a thin ice cream cone and was always so excited to eat the body of Jesus during mass in school because it was right before lunch lol. But also good to know I didn't hunger for Jesus' literal body ahaha. I was technically not supposed to accept it because to the Catholics, idk if Protestants are as discriminatory towards other forms of Catholicism, bit as being baptized Greek Orthodox and being in a Catholic school we were supposed to cross our arms in an X and just get blessed, which I gave up because I was just too hungry lol, but also Jesus wouldn't refuse anyone bread so I never got it. He also wouldn't refuse anyone the right to repent and reconcile, but one priest in grade 5 refused to let my Orthodox friend confess to his sins and receive reconciliation, so in turn I didn't go in either. I'd like to believe it is just some bad priests who would do this. Even as not Christian anymore, I did once need forgiveness from Jesus as my chosen religion doesn't really have right or wrong. I felt Him stronger, actually, than any other time I was forced to pray before.

[@JeffreyMyersII]

@@deandraalexis that's unfortunate for them. anyone who denies someone genuinely seeking the faith is committing a sin. as Christians, it is our role to bring others to the truth of scripture, not push them away. protestantism is very different from catholicism and, perhaps, even orthodoxy in several ways. i know more about catholicism than i do orthodoxy, but as protestants, the Word of God is the only authority of truth where as catholics also hold the pope and other church leaders as authorities of biblical truth. we also believe that all Christians who continually further their relationship with God, by seeking His Word, repenting, praying, and worshipping, are priests and Jesus is the one and only high priest. if you aren't familiar with the protestant reformation, it comes from the 1400's when a member of the catholic church, martin luther, realized that the church was teaching many dangerous false doctrines not supported by scripture. in fact, many of the catholic doctrines are opposite of scripture. for example, Jesus tells us that He is the mediator to the Father, noone else. paul also affirms this. yet catholics often pray to saints for intercession on their behalf. this is a tradition explicitly contradictory to biblical doctrine. even catholic confession is biblically contradictory. we, as sinners, are to confess our sins and ask forgiveness to only one man, Jesus who is God incarnate. the gospel that many catholics teach involves salvation by works. as protestants, the ones who made it standard for everyone to own and read the Bible rather than just church leadership, we know that salvation is given by grace alone, not works. the catholic church erroneously forces tradition as doctrine. unfortunately, many protestant denominations are guilty of this as well. however, the important difference is that our relationship with God is purely personal. the church exists to help Christians fellowship and work with one another, not to enforce unbiblical Christian law. in many ways, the body of Christ has fallen into the same fallacies the pharisees and sadducees had fallen into by the time Jesus walked among us. this is why Jesus criticized them so much. they took the laws of man and enforced them as the laws of God making the burden of believers heavy. Jesus told israel, "take my yoke for it is easy". by enforcing laws and traditions not given to us by Jesus, we place more burden on the body of Christ than what He intended. i pray that you find true believers who will gracefully accept you as a fellow follower of Christ.

[@approvedofGod]

Jesus broke bread and said, "this is my body." Is the Eucharist "host" the same as bread?

[@JaimeGarcia-pe7bj]

The eucharistic is the part of the unicorn that the unicorn drags through the weeds.😮

[@sarahaccardi]

Just to be clear this is the same as communion in evangelical churches right?? If I’m wrong pls explain the difference

[@pjcanseco2590]

No, it is way different. The evangelicals follow Jesus' own teachings and own commandments in the New Testament where Jesus commanded us to "Do these things in remembrance of Me". He clearly did not tell them that they are to drink actual blood or eat actual flesh of a person. Whoever came up with that teaching just made it up outside of the bible.

[@deandraalexis]

@@pjcanseco2590 I like this a lot more lol. Makes a lot more sense to follow Jesus' actual teachings

[@patrickpelletier9298]

Unfortunately, no, because they gave up their line of priests, connected to the apostles

[@Chuckschwartz]

@@patrickpelletier9298are we not all called to be disciples though? (Those in Christ Jesus). One sinner isn’t holier than another based on vocation or devotion. I am not asking to argue or be smart, I just struggle to understand that!

[@patrickpelletier9298]

@@Chuckschwartz no, it's good to ask questions from a desire to learn. we are called to be disciples, yes, but not all were called to be elders in the church. We see ordination of church leaders, and servers (those positions by 100AD would be called Bishop and Deacon, with a third being added to be where the Bishop couldn't be) by the laying on of hands. there is an unbroken connection of ordination going back to the twelve, and before that, the Upper Room at the Last Supper with the washing of the feet.

[@deandraalexis]

So.... I am Greek. On Thanksgiving day, can I tell my relatives, "Happy Eucharist"?

[@bleedingcovenant9495]

i’m sure you can, you can say happy eucharist everyday 😊

[@deandraalexis]

@@keepthefaith9805 Yeah but at Thanksgiving, we eat the bread and drink wine, so how is that different from eating bread and drinking wine any day, if jt is Jesus' body and blood? In Greek Orthodox, we don't have the little communion bread at church. We have a whole, real, thick piece of bread where a piece gets broken off and we eat that. In fact, in the Catholic masses I went to in school, they wanted Orthodox kids to refuse their communion because they are simply racists to any other form of Christianity (although I always took it cause I was so damn hungry lol) So because of this, in my household, any and every bread was the body of Christ and was a massive issue to throw out, we were not allowed to throw out bread or my dad would eat it if we were done. So I don't really think the bread and wine are holy only when under the church.

[@deandraalexis]

I like your answer more lol. Happy Eucharist!

[@RealEstateVideoMktg1]

Any difference? Body and Blood of Jesus and Body and blood of christ?

[@deandraalexis]

Jesus is Christ. Jesus Christ. Think of it like Jesus is his first name and Christ is his last name, or superhero name or something lol. Jesus the Christ 🦸‍♂️

[@gabrielmmaria]

WE NEED TO RECEIVE THE BODY OF CHRIST JUST INTO THE MOUTH NO HANDS

[@deandraalexis]

So the priest is supposed to feed you the communion? Father, feed me 😏

[@lupelo8819]

DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE EUCHARIST..! BELIEVE IN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST..ON THE REAL PRESENCE OF JESUS..!!

[@ninadhairdresser2682]

Sounds like a horror movie scene to me, " spreading out the blood and... the body"

[@Dubblesteel]

How does it become the physical body and blood of Jesus?

[@grannytrollosiris]

It doesn’t (speakings as a non catholic) the blood and body of Christ was in the cross when he did the one and only sacrifice forever Heb 10:11-12 KJV

[@gustavocordero4759]

@Joseph Fossa the bread of from heaven is Jesus, not the bread that is given out in the Catholic church

[@michelsalazar2859]

Consecration, Transubstantiation, Epiclesis, accidents of the eucharist, And Real presence . Basically the bread and wine don’t change their image, but it holds Jesus’s real presence.

[@richlopez5896]

It becomes the Body and Blood of Christ after the Eucharistic prayer which is our weekly miracle we get to receive

[@richlopez5896]

@@grannytrollosiris Nobody said he is sacrificed again.I also noticed you are quoting out of the New Testament which was written by Catholics.Saint Paul who wrote Hebrews was a Catholic priest who sent out his Letters from Rome

[@aym_gei9708]

Help I'm Christian but I don not believe god's created the world I believe it scientifically. what's wrong with me

[@ridwanmichaelwelong7]

Then you’re not a Christian Read genesis 1

[@deandraalexis]

Welcome to Scientology, it's perfectly normal and okay to believe in something else. People change their beliefs over time, and that is okay. I converted to Hellenic polytheism from Greek Orthodox and I see more results from my change in belief. I still pray to Jesus as a god of Forgiveness of sins, but if you do not believe in anything but the big bang and not in any Gods watchong over us, that is okay

[@patrickpelletier9298]

I would say you are scientific. You want to know how things happened in the physical sense, beyond what happened through the power of God

[@Ryan_Zell]

John 6:51. Watch an Elder of the SDA, Samuel Williams, kill his witness to Christ. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXfUg5t-lqZmrLs He is still there trying to convince us that its okay to deny the Red Letter Words of Christ: "...., and the bread that I will give IS my flesh, for the life of the world.

[@bobbyrice2858]

Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54: (Jn. 6:40) “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” (Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” According to this parallel, beholding and believing (v.40) are equated with eating and drinking Christ’s flesh (v.54). This is further paralleled by verse 35: (Jn. 6:35) I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. (Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” To “hunger” and “thirst” and parallel to the one who “eats” and “drinks.” But note what Jesus says satisfies our hunger: “He who comes to Me… he who believes in Me.” Jesus isn’t speaking about his literal flesh and blood any more than he is speaking about literal bread (Jn. 6:35) or literal water (Jn. 4:10-14). Indeed, Jesus uses the term sarx for his “body,” rather than the common term sōma (which was the common term used in the Lord’s Supper). Indeed, the “term ‘flesh’ is never used in the NT to refer to the Lord’s Supper.”[4] Hence, this seems “to caution against a sacramental or eucharistic understand of these verses.”[5] This is why Augustine of Hippo wrote regarding this passage: “Believe, and you have eaten.” The early church knew NOTHING of transubstantiation. Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 180) stated that the elements do not lose the nature of bread and wine (Against Heresies, 4.18.4-5; 5.2.2). Tertullian (AD 200) said Jesus’ statement was figurative (Against Marcion, 3.19). Clement of Alexandria (AD 200) called the bread and wine symbols of Jesus’ body (The Instructor, I.6). Origen (AD 250) held his typical allegorical and spiritual view when referring to the elements in the Last Supper. Eusebius of Caesarea (AD 340) called the elements the body and blood of Christ, but also referred to them as symbolic of spiritual realities (On the Theology of the Church, 3.2.12). Augustine (AD 350) believed that John 6:53 should be understood spiritually and symbolically-not literalistically (On Christian Doctrine 3.16.2). Gelasius I (5th century pope): “The sacrament which we receive of the body and blood of Christ is a divine thing. Wherefore also by means of it we are made partakers of the divine nature. Yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine does not cease to be… Thus, as the elements pass into this, that is, the divine substance by the Holy Ghost, and none the less remain in their own proper nature.”

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

You’re selectively quoting the fathers, Irenaeus explicitly stated in his writings that after the words of invocation the bread is no longer ordinary bread, that’s clearly recognizing a change in substance. And Justin Martyr also wrote about the mass in ch66 of his first apology. It was the consensus of the early fathers that there is a real presence in the Eucharist.

[@bobbyrice2858]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 exegetically I don’t see that in the writings, however, even if you believe that, I don’t think it really breaks anything The problem really comes when we start bowing to it and treating it like he’s really right there in front of you in the flash. That’s a little too far. But here’s the thing, they were not in complete and total agreement. Some believed real presents but most did not. Irenaeus “For it behooves us to make an oblation to God, and in all things to be found grateful to God our Maker, in a pure mind, and in faith without hypocrisy, in well-grounded hope, in fervent love, offering the first-fruits of His own created things. And the Church alone offers this pure oblation to the Creator, offering to Him, with giving of thanks, [the things taken] from His creation.” Parallel with the Didiche Didache 9.1 - (AD 100) Now, concerning the Eucharist, practice it as follows. " First, concerning the cup: We give thanks to you, our Father, for the holy vine of David your son, which you made known to us through Jesus your son, glory to you forever a Next, concerning the broken BREAD: We give thanks to you, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through Jesus your son, glory to you forever. Just as this broken bread was being scattered over the mountains and being brought together it became one; likewise bring together your church from the ends of the earth into your kingdom, so that yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever But none shall eat or shall drink from your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; for also concerning this the Lord has said, "Do give not what is holy to the dogs." - Notice, there’s never a transubstantiated description, but rather in action of giving thanks. Also, notice who can partake of the Eucharist. It’s not members of the church or members of Rome. It’s those who have put their faith in Christ alone. Unbelievers cannot partake.- The Didache (AD 100): “On the Lord’s day assemble and break bread and give thanks, having first confessed YOUR sins, that your sacrifice may be pure. If any have a dispute with his fellow, let him not come to the assembly till they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not polluted. For this is the sacrifice spoken of by the Lord; ‘In every place and at every time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great king, said the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the Gentiles; (Mal. i. 11, 14).” This doesn’t refer to Jesus’ sacrifice, but to “your sacrifice.” The same Greek word for “sacrifice” (thusia) is used of Jesus’ sacrifice (Heb. 5:1), but it is also used of doing good deeds, praise, and financial giving (Heb. 13:15-16; Phil. 4:18). The same book also refers to the supper as the “cup” and the “bread,” and a means of remembering Jesus’ sacrifice in thanksgiving (Didache, 9). You are taking these Catholic fathers out of context and reading into their text What is going on today versus reading out of the text what was going on then.

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

@@bobbyrice2858 Jesus is really there in the flesh, that is church teaching, if you reject this you cannot be saved. Council of Trent, Session 13, Concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist CANON I.-If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema. Most did believe in real presence, that is undeniable, even many fathers whom you’ve quoted professed belief in real presence, despite your dishonest selective quoting of them. -Irenaeus “Let them, therefore, either alter their opinion, or cease from offering the things just mentioned. But our opinion is in accordance with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn establishes our opinion. For we offer to Him His own, announcing consistently the fellowship and union of the flesh and Spirit. For as the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly; so also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to eternity.” This is more than clear, after the words of invocation the bread is no longer common bread, it now has two realities, an earthly and heavenly reality. -Augustine Sermons 234, 2 (ca. AD 400): “The Lord Jesus wanted those whose eyes were held lest they should recognize Him, to recognize Him in the breaking of the bread. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, becomes Christ’s body.” -Justin Martyr “And this food is called among us Ευχαριστια [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.” -Ignatius of Antioch “I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]). “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]). They all believed in real presence, now stop being dishonest.

[@rbnmnt3341]

When Jesus died he said "it is finished". Apparently that is not good enough for the RCC. I guess more important question is where does scripture say that the mass is only to be done by the priest? Even more important is where does scripture say that the priest, who is probably a pedophile, have the power to bring Christ down from heaven onto the altar? If you can show me that scripture I will stop believing that this is not the biggest hoax in the world.

[@ccmagee972]

Satan's got a lot of people fooled through the CC I was raised catholic at around 30 years old I started realizing the hold it has on people it took me years to unwash my brain i.have a solid relationship with Jesus now

[@rbnmnt3341]

@@ccmagee972 Amen!

[@adude849]

"Do this in remembrance of me" Those who deny the eucharist as the actual body and blood of Christ Are heretics

[@1844D]

For your information there is phedeopiles in every church. Thats just how the devil rolls.

[@rbnmnt3341]

@@1844D the doesn't only roll in the Catholic church, he lives in it. Nothing is done . Nothing ever has been done.

[@jamiedelaughter1320]

I understand this is the teaching of the Catholic Church, however the bread and the wine do not become the flesh and blood of Jesus. That would be cannibalism. Jesus’s statement at the last supper (Passover) was simply identifying Himself as The Passover. His flesh that we partake of is repentance and obedience to His commandments. The blood we partake of is the forgiveness of sins that faith (repentance and obedience) in Him allows to cover us. There is nothing magical about the bread & wine. Just as nothing that goes into a man may defile him, so nothing going in can make him righteous. The lords supper, just like baptism aren’t sacraments, rather they’re ordinances. A sacrament is a means of obtaining grace. The scripture is very clear in Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” We are saved by God’s grace ALONE through faith. NOTHING we do, no work we can accomplish, can do anything to earn or provide salvation. If you believe that eating bread or drinking wine has some kind of supernatural ability to do anything spiritual for you, you are completely missing what the Lord was saying at that table.

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

Jesus said His flesh was real food and His blood was real drink, if you reject His words, don’t be surprised if He rejects you (John 6:53-59, Matthew 26:26)

[@jamiedelaughter1320]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 Just as it is not what enters into a man’s mouth that defiles him, so also, nothing that enters into a man’s mouth can save him. Salvation is by God’s grace alone, through faith, which is itself is a gift from God, not of any kind of work, so that no one may boast. The Last Supper is about Jesus identifying Himself as THE Passover lamb. He wasn’t telling them that eating bread or drinking wine had any supernatural effect. He was telling them that they were His if they believed on Him for salvation (blood) which is proven by their obedience to His Word (bread).

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

@@jamiedelaughter1320 The sacraments of the church are means of receiving grace, instituted by Christ, so when you eat His body in communion, that is grace you’re receiving which leads to salvation. The interpretation of the earliest Christians is clear, they believed Him to be speaking literally when He said His flesh is real food. This idea that it’s only a “symbol” only began to exist much later on. Taking communion isn’t a “work” as you’re trying to suggest, nor is it ever defined that way in the Bible. But Jesus Himself taught that unless you eat His flesh and drink His blood that you have NO life in you. Saved by faith alone is heretical, and plainly refuted by James in James 2:24 word for word.

[@jamiedelaughter1320]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 Friend, that idea of eating and drinking physical things is the very definition of a work. Jesus didn't say that He knew those that loved Him because they ate blessed bread and drank blessed wine. "Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will follow My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our dwelling with him. The one who does not love Me does not follow My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me." - John 14:23-24 There must be a change of heart in faith which results in obedience. NOTHING physical, no matter how blessed it is, can bring salvation or be a means of receiving grace. Grace, by its very nature cannot be earned, but must be given freely. It is a GIFT from God as it says in Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast." No one may boast about their salvation because it is completely a work of God by His grace and nothing that we do, even eating and drinking. True faith cannot be separated from repentance. no matter what you eat or drink or what the circumstance is that you do so, if you do not repent and follow Jesus, you cannot be His disciple.

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

@@jamiedelaughter1320 Grace is given freely, through taking the Eucharist. Eating what appears to be bread isn’t a work, nor is it ever defined as a work in the Bible, that’s a real stretch.

[@michaelkehl3033]

Weirdly cannabalistic. God became man, (flesh), then we eat him to obtain his "grace"? Cannibals ate opposing warriors to obtain their strength & courage.

[@JovenAlbarida]

This is not in the bible. Pagan practice

[@adude849]

"Do this in remembrance of me" say that again bitch

[@lupelo8819]

Have you noticed that catholics have to materialized the spiritual so that they "feel" and "see" with their "eyes" and bow down to worship it..?? They adore and worship Mary so much they made a statue of her so they can feel and see and bow down to worship her..! They materialized Jesus flesh,blood,soul and divinity into a man-made cookie 🍪 and eat 😋 😳..!

[@adude849]

@@lupelo8819 you think he was joking on the last supper do you?

[@lupelo8819]

The eucharist is unbiblical. It's just an invention by corrupt, ungodly sinful popes to keep their deceived and deluded catholics followers under their authority, power and control..! The eucharist is a lie. Don't believe it.

[@adude849]

​​@@lupelo8819oh really ?last time I heard they took his phrase to serouisly even Paul taught the Corinthians that the bread and blood is the actual body Even christian scholars like Ignatius called out the Heretics for denying the eucharist as the actual body and blood

[@johntaylor4707]

This is false, we take communion in remembrance in a symbolic way , we should not believe for one minute that we are putting Jesus on the cross again , the book says once for all!.

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

John 6:53-59, Matthew 26:26.

[@johntaylor4707]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 yes indeed I follow these readings but Jesus also says do this in remembrance of me. I take wine and break bead in remembrance of Jesus dyeing for my sins, once for all , not over and over. GOD BLESS.

[@christsavesreadromans1096]

@@johntaylor4707 Jesus said the bread is His body, so it’s not symbolic, nor did the earliest christians view it as symbolic, but literal.

[@johntaylor4707]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 it doesn't make sense to put Jesus on the cross time after time when it's once for all. The host has also been scientifically examined and not found to contain nothing of the sort. JESUS LIVES.

[@johntaylor4707]

@@christsavesreadromans1096 the earliest Christians didn't pray to Mary but you do that.

[@pjcanseco2590]

This is a very poor translation of what Jesus told his disciples. He instructed them to eat a piece of bread/wafer and drink the wine/grapes strictly symbolically. After all, Jesus said "Do these things in remembrance (in memory) of Me." You can't be serious when you tell people here that you expect them to believe they are drinking actual blood and eating an actual man's flesh. It sounds totally ridiculous and is not at all based on anything Jesus or anyone else ever said or taught.

[@calebbrown6595]

Amen brother!

[@richlopez5896]

Jesus was telling his followere they WERE indeed to eat his body and drink his blood.He even repeated it and it was after he clarified it was indeed his body and blood that Judas left.ALL of the apostles taught the literal true presence and so did all of their followers.If you read the Early Church Fathers who were taught by apostles and even ordained they state it is litearlly his body and blood as well. John 6:30 begins a colloquy that took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that “our ancestors ate manna in the desert.” Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. “Give us this bread always,” they said. Jesus replied, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically. Again and Again Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: “‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’” (John 6:51-52). His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally-and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53-56). No Corrections Notice that Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, no attempt to correct “misunderstandings,” for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically. In John 6:60 we read: “Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’” (It is here, in the rejection of the Eucharist, that Judas fell away; look at John 6:64.) “After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him” (John 6:66). This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically. But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have “to eat my flesh and drink my blood.” John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper-and it was a promise that could not be more explicit. St.Paul Confirms This Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.

[@francesannr]

@@richlopez5896 I don't get it, where are you getting this real blood and flesh???? 🤨

[@richlopez5896]

@@francesannr From Jesus Christ's own words and from his apostles and the Early Church Fathers who succeeded them.The Christian faith has always held it to be his flesh and blood.

[@bk3720]

May the words of our Lord, God and Savior Jesus speak. “Amen, 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. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up in the last day”-Jesus (John 6:54-55 ) 🎤drop I highly suggest taking Jesus at his word, and not be accounted amongst those who could not accept his teaching. Ignatius of Antioch d. 110A.D. Stated: “They abstain from the Eucharist and from the public prayers; because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ; which suffered for our sins, and which the Father of his goodness, raised again from the dead. And for this cause contradicting the gift of God, they die in their disputes: but much better would it be for them to receive it, that they might one day rise through it. It will therefore become you to abstain from such persons; and not to speak with them neither in private nor in public. But to harken to the prophets, and especially to the gospel, in which both Christ’s passion is manifested unto us, and his resurrection perfectly declared. But flee all divisions, as the beginning of evils.” Letter to the Smyrneans ch2:16-20 Ignatius wrote a number of letters to various churches when he was being dragged off to his death. It is also said that Ignatius had sat on Jesus’ lap when Jesus had said “ let the children come unto me”. I am writing this to the determent of my sleep in order to help put a stop to the beating of a 1913 year old dead horse. ☦️

[@gashouse2738]

Eucharist is pagan celebration