Eucharist and Protestants
I have had many discussions with Roman Catholics and they are astonished and remain in disbelief that non Catholics reject the Eucharist. As far as they are concerned, scripture is clear. It is right there in the scripture.
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Mat 26:26-28 ESV)
Setting aside for a moment the literal reading of this piece of scripture, exactly what is the mass that leads up to the Eucharist?
This re-presentation, as Fr. John Hardon notes in his Pocket Catholic Dictionary, “means that because Christ is really present in his humanity, in heaven and on the altar, he is capable now as he was on Good Friday of freely offering himself to the Father.” This understanding of the Mass hinges on the Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. When the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, Christ is truly present on the altar. If the bread and wine remained merely symbols, the Mass could still be a memorial of the Last Supper, but not a re-presentation of the Crucifixion.”
Therein lies the problem. Jesus declared “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished,” and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” (Joh 19:30 ESV)
While the Roman Catholic church also recognizes that the Lord’s Supper is a memorial, it is also taught that He is present and “offered in an unbloody manner in the Mass.” From a Catholic source: “While the Mass is more than a memorial, it is still a memorial as well as a sacrifice.”
Christ’s work was, as He stated before giving up His spirit, finished. Prior to Christ, animals were sacrificed but it was insufficient as it needed to be repeated. Christ’s sacrifice of Himself was sufficient for all time hence forth.
Catholic theology also teaches that in “His Sacrifice on the Cross, Christ reversed Adam’s sin.” (Father Hardon) This is not supported by scripture and is a false teaching of scripture. Reversal means to undo what is not true. The definition of a reversal is “a change or overthrowing; as the reversal of a judgment, which amounts to an official declaration that it is false.” Webster’s Dictionary. Christ did not reverse Adam’s sin as this would denote that the charges against Adam was false. Christ’s sacrifice was not a reversal of the charge but a payment on our behalf.
Once Christ declared “it is finished,” there is no need for Him to be offered over and over again in an unbloody manner. He paid the penalty on our behalf and it is now over.
The phraseology “do this in remembrance of me” is a term that implies a memorial and is a term that we use in our modern language that indicates a memorial without a presence. We may do something in remembrance of someone that is no longer with us. Even our Memorial Day is a day that is held in remembrance of soldiers that have died for our country. The day is set aside in remembrance of those fallen soldiers. No presence is necessary.
The theology behind the Eucharist is a theological problem with Protestants which supersede the Catholic belief that the bread and wine are Christ’s actual body and blood. The Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist holds that Christ is re-sacrificed in an unbloody manner which ultimately dismisses Christ’s finished work on the cross.
Our Lord’s work was finished on the Cross and He is not present in the bread and the wine. It is a memorial to His finished work on the cross. Praise God.
Related posts:
