Note how the author to the Hebrews uses the term.
Heb 10:3-4;
“But in those sacrifices there is a REMEMBRANCE again made of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
He continues;
Heb 10:10-12;
“By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;”

In other words, the “remembrance” looking forwards “sacrifices” were made multiple times. THE SACRIFICE OF JESUS WAS ONCE FOR ALL. The “remembrance” looking backwards “Communion” is made multiple times.

Note what Jesus said;
Joh 6:48-65;
I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU, THEY ARE SPIRIT, AND THEY ARE LIFE.

In this passage, Jesus Himself tells us that the flesh and blood He is speaking of IS SPIRITUAL and not physical.

Not only the words, “flesh” and “blood” are used in a “spiritual” sense, but likewise the word “body”.
1Co 12:27;
“Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”

http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=2031

It’s not just memory in Passover btw. There is a tradition that every Jewish of every generation stood at Sinai – that’s part of saying ‘we’ rather than ‘our ancestors’.

Have you ever thought of a higher view of “Real Presense” (my tradition does hold this) in terms of “anamnesis” and “prolepsis”? I think this IS in keeping with Jewish passover practices. N.T. Wright talks about this in his lecture (at Calvin College, I believe) “Space Time and Sacraments” on http://www.ntwrightpage.com.

I’m terrible with Philosophy, please forgive me and my poorly formed thoughts. Like you, I do not believe Jesus an animal, but see Him in the context of atoning sacrifice and in great mystery by the Holy Spirit, in Eucharist a continuation of His incarnation in our midst.

Hmmm… I guess what I was getting at is this, what in his argument NECESSITATES the required “must be interpreted symbolically and not literally” ? Ultitmately, the Paschal Lamb prefigured symbolically Christ not vice versa. He is our New Passover and its substance is not subject to be defined by what has come before.

I just found this, it says infinitely clearer what I’m trying to say:

“When Jesus instituted the Eucharist, he gave a new and definitive meaning to the blessing of the bread and the cup.” CCC 1334

“By celebrating the Last Supper with his apostles in the course of the Passover meal, Jesus gave the Jewish Passover its definitive meaning Jesus’ passing over to his father by his death and Resurrection, the new Passover, is anticipated in the Supper and celebrated in the Eucharist, which fulfills the Jewish Passover and anticipates the final Passover of the Church in the glory of the kingdom.” CCC 1340

I’m running into quotes from St. Irenaeus and St. Justin I’d love to include but don’t desire to be a gluttonous consumer of Michael’s space :O).

Best to You!
Jenny

On John 6, it strikes me to wonder if original offence taken was over the concept of drinking blood – which would have been anathema to Jews.

Check out Gerhard Von Rad’s OT theology, Volume II, Chapter G, section 1, “The Origins of Hebrew Thought about History.” You don’t have to buy into Von Rad’s source criticism to appreciate his insistance that we understand the Old Testament from the ancient Hebrew’s conception of time as opposed to our linear conception. Their understanding of Passover as something they participated in was directly related to their understanding of time and history.

WEZLO is right, in the Passover the Hebrew’s participated in the Exodus, and in the Lord’s Supper, Christians participate in the Body and Blood of Christ.

In John:6 Jesus says three times that we must eat His flesh. The last time He used the Greek word that means ‘to grind with the teeth.’ Thats why many of the disciples turned away at that point, because they clearly understood what He meant, and being devout Jews were scandalized. So in answer to your question, as far as Jesus is concerned, apparently not.

What I said regarding symbolism is that there’s nothing *mere* about it. By adding many explanations to it, we may end up heaping judgment upon ourselves. Scriptural language is powerful, and has purpose.

Jesus’ offering of bread and wine explains and fulfills Abraham (w/Melchizedek) and Moses (w/the Passover) and introduces a new covenant in Him. The reminder, the symbol, and the reality is far too rich to degrade with the word “mere.” And it’s far too fleshy to describe with the clinical “transsubstantiation” or “consubstantiation.”