John is the only gospel of the 4 to omit Jesus' explanation of the Communion bread and wine at the Last Supper. That's because John chooses to relocate His teaching about Holy Communion in 6:53-58. Here are the key verses:
''Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son Man an drink His blood, you have no life in you...For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them...When many of His disciples heard it, they said, "This is hard teaching. Who can accept it?"...Because of this, many of His disciples turned back and no longer went about with Him (John 6:53-56, 66)."
For at least 4 reasons Catholics rightly understand Jesus to be truly present in this sacramental act.
(1) Jesus teaches that the bread and wine are more than mere symbols; they are a means by which Christ actually comes to abide in us, and we in Him.
(2) To guard against a merely symbolic interpretation Jesus stresses that His body and blood are real food and drink, and so, those who eat the bread actually "eat me (6:57)."
(3) The apparent crudeness of this teaching costs Jesus many of His followers--a loss He might have prevented by explaining that He was merely speaking symbolically! But He wasn't; He taught that He was truly present in the Eucharistic act.
(4) Ignatius is the 2nd bishop of Antioch and is installed in that role by the apostles. As such, Ignatius bears witness to the apostolic understanding of Holy Communion as the real presence of Christ. Thus, Ignatius laments that “those who hold heretical opinions about the grace of Jesus Christ … refuse to acknowledge that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father by his goodness raised up” (Smyrnaeans 6.2). This is stunningly realistic language. Because the Eucharist unites us to Christ who suffered and was raised, the Eucharist “is the medicine of immortality, the antidote we take in order not to die but to live forever in Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 20.2)."
''Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son Man an drink His blood, you have no life in you...For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them...When many of His disciples heard it, they said, "This is hard teaching. Who can accept it?"...Because of this, many of His disciples turned back and no longer went about with Him (John 6:53-56, 66)."
For at least 4 reasons Catholics rightly understand Jesus to be truly present in this sacramental act.
(1) Jesus teaches that the bread and wine are more than mere symbols; they are a means by which Christ actually comes to abide in us, and we in Him.
(2) To guard against a merely symbolic interpretation Jesus stresses that His body and blood are real food and drink, and so, those who eat the bread actually "eat me (6:57)."
(3) The apparent crudeness of this teaching costs Jesus many of His followers--a loss He might have prevented by explaining that He was merely speaking symbolically! But He wasn't; He taught that He was truly present in the Eucharistic act.
(4) Ignatius is the 2nd bishop of Antioch and is installed in that role by the apostles. As such, Ignatius bears witness to the apostolic understanding of Holy Communion as the real presence of Christ. Thus, Ignatius laments that “those who hold heretical opinions about the grace of Jesus Christ … refuse to acknowledge that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father by his goodness raised up” (Smyrnaeans 6.2). This is stunningly realistic language. Because the Eucharist unites us to Christ who suffered and was raised, the Eucharist “is the medicine of immortality, the antidote we take in order not to die but to live forever in Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 20.2)."
