Eucharist and Cannibalism

[morostheos]

Hi there,

One of my students in RCIA said she keeps getting asked by her friends and family how if we believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist it's not cannibalism. She asked our priest and he explained how the sacramental presence of Christ's glorified body is not the same as His human flesh and blood, but she didn't really understand that explanation, especially with the presence of Eucharistic miracles. Most explanations I've found online are pretty similar to that one.

I know that the early Church dealt with this issue pretty extensively, does anyone know of anywhere I could find quotes/explanations about this from them? I'm hoping their explanations might be more direct.

[thessalonian]

I have to say that there may not be a much better answer, nor do we need one. Jesus didn't say "understand this fully, ....". The Church says that the Eucharist is sacramental flesh, not the physical flesh of Christ as in taking a bite out of his arm. Your friends won't likely take the Chuch at it's word but historically this has been the understanding if you look at tertullian and Augustine and Aquinas. We are not partaking in actual human flesh but Christ's glorfied body. It is not cannibalism. In no way is the intent of anyone to eat a human body. The best evidence I an give that it is not said to be Christ's physical flesh is that there is NOT ONE OFFICIAL STATEMENT (I will not claim no priest or bishop has said such a thing, but no council or Pope) by the Church in 2000 years claiming that it is Christ's physical flesh. An arguement from silence but a valid one I think.

There is far to much evidence in scripture and history for the Catholic view that the Eucharist is not a bit of bread and some wine that causes some nuerological activity in the brain, recalling a memory of something that was never experienced directy (except when we participate in the Mass). Not only in John 6 but from one end of the bible to the other from the very tree of life in Genesis 1 to the Wedding Supper of the Lamb and hundreds of places in between a solid case can be made that the Catholic Church is correct on this matter and that the Eucharist is not just a symbol or spirtual. That it is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. Tell your friends to "trust not in your own understanding " prov 3:5 but rely on the Lord who gave us the Church which is the "pillar and support of the truth" 1 tim 3:15 and also to stop limiting God and creating a God that they can comprehend fully. Such a god is no god at all but an idol.

Edited February 6, 2006 by thessalonian

[thessalonian]

There is a short piece at the bottom of this page on Jimmy Akin's blog that I found helpful in this regard. It's by a sr. Lorainne at the bottom of the page.

[url="http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/05/space_warp_to_h.html"]http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/05/space_warp_to_h.html[/url]

It should be noted for those who claim that the catholic view is a realtively recent one that in the early days of the Church, Christians were accused of cannabalism because of their teaching on the Eucharist so it seems the friends claim could come back to bite : them.

Edited February 6, 2006 by thessalonian

[phatcatholic]

here is a slightly different way to respond that i always use:

if we look at the [url="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cannibalism"][b]definition of cannibalism[/b][/url], we find that the following phrase is central to it: "eating the flesh of human beings". this phrase, while one sentence, actually says three things:

[b]1. [/b]the flesh of a human being is being [i][b]eaten[/b][/i], as opposed to washed or marked on, or some other [i][b]action[/b][/i].
[b]2. [/b]what is being eaten is [i][b]flesh[/b][/i], as opposed to bone or grass, or some other [i][b]substance[/b][/i].
[b]3. [/b]the flesh being eaten is of a [i][b]human being[/b][/i], as opposed to flesh of an animal or a fish, or some other [i][b]creature[/b][/i].

these three statements comprise the essence of cannibalism. thus, in order for the Eucharistic celebration to be cannibalistic, it must fulfill these requirements. however, it fulfills none of them.

in cannibalism, the substance is flesh, the flesh is of a human being, and the action made upon the substance is "eating." in the Eucharistic celebration, the substance is Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity. this substance is not of a mere human being, but of Jesus Christ, who is True God and True Man. finally, there is no action made upon the substance. instead, the action is made upon bread and wine. put another way, in consuming the Eucharistic elements, the physical mechanisms of eating injure only the accidents of bread and wine. the process of consuming the host doesn't involve ripping and tearing Christ's body, despite its substantial presence.

thus, the Eucharistic celebration defies cannibalism on all levels.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[morostheos]

thanks guys, that helps a lot!

[curtins]

the fact that when we partake in the Eucharist- we are eating Christ's body but not as you say- ripping his flesh out of his arm or something- is a miracle because since he's God he can be present in the Eucharist like that and it can be his real Body and Blood without him being eaten. I dont know if that makes any sense but oh well