When Catholics explain our faith in the Real Presence – Christ’s body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist – it’s common to point to John 6 and examine the “Bread of Life” discourse from Jesus.  While this is indeed the longest – and arguably the most clear – teaching of this doctrine in the Bible, there are other passages and expository teachings that are equally convincing.

I personally enjoy, for example, taking a deep dive into the Old Testament, understanding the nature of God’s covenant relationship to His people, and seeing how the Eucharist is the fulfillment of eating the Passover Lamb.  A study in the Old Testament demonstrates how the Eucharist relates to manna and the Bread of the Presence.  It’s a study that leads you through the vast majority of Israel’s history and concludes with the “new and eternal covenant” in the Blood of Christ that fulfills the Old Covenants that God made.  It’s not a short undertaking but by the end of the study, not only will you understand the Eucharist… but you’ll also know Bible history to a much greater understanding!

But there’s another passage that more easily – and certainly more concisely – explains the doctrine of the Real Presence.  It’s in 1 Corinthians chapter 11.  Before we dig into this passage, let’s briefly recall what Jesus taught in the Bread of Life discourse mentioned above – the passage most often alluded to when discussing the Eucharist.

In John 6, Jesus has just fed the 5,000 by multiplying the five loaves of bread and two fish before setting out to Capernaum.  Many of those who were miraculously fed followed Jesus.  Upon their finding Him in the synagogue, Jesus told them that they were seeking him not because they saw signs… but rather because they had eaten their fill of food.  He told them, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you.” (John 6:27, RSV-2CE)

After Jesus spoke about this bread from heaven a little more, stating that it comes from the Father and gives life to the world, they pleaded with Jesus, “Lord, give us this bread always.”  This is when Jesus tells them, “I am the Bread of Life” and states that He came down from Heaven – a clear claim of His divinity!

The disciples murmured at this statement which they considered blasphemous.  Here was Jesus, a man whom they knew, claiming divinity for Himself!  Jesus then takes it one step further.  Already having called Himself the “Bread of Life,” He then explains more – alluding to the manna that the Jews ate in the time of the Exodus – and finally stating that the bread that gives life is His very flesh, which will be given for them.

The followers murmur even more at this claim.  How could He give them His flesh to eat, they ask.  Rather than explaining that it’s some kind of metaphor or symbol, Jesus goes all in on His remarkable claim.  He tells them that unless they eat His flesh and drink His blood, they will not have life… but if they do eat His flesh and drink His blood, then He will raise them up at the last day.  After making this claim, he reiterates it… and this time tells them that if they eat and drink His flesh and blood, then He will abide in them and they will live forever.

Notice that Jesus added the drinking of His blood along with the eating of His flesh.  To a Jew, this was a forbidden practice.  Also notice that Jesus claims to be able to offer eternal life to those who eat and drink of Him.  Furthermore, He claims to be the One who will raise the dead at the last day.  These are more claims of Christ’s divinity.

One other item to mention:  the word for “to eat” that is used here is, in Greek, “trogo.”  It literally means to gnaw and chew on.  In Greek literature, you find this word used in reference to animals chewing food.  It gives a crude connotation and is a different Greek word from other times the word “eat” is used.  In these other cases, the Greek word “esthio” is used.  “Esthio” implies eating in a more “general activity” sense.  As in, “what will we eat today for breakfast?”  “Trogo” doesn’t seem to be a word you’d use if you were expressing symbolic eating.  It conveys the physical sense of chewing flesh.

The disciples were outraged and dismayed at hearing this teaching but Jesus held his ground.  And that’s when we read that many of His disciples left and no longer followed Him. Jesus didn’t try to stop them.  He didn’t send Peter after them to tell them it was all hyperbolic language and symbolism.  He let them go.  And then, you can almost feel God’s emotion in the Biblical narrative as Christ turns to his Twelve Apostles and says to them, “Will you also go away?”

Peter answers Christ in the most truthful and simple way possible:  “To whom shall we go?  You have the words of eternal life;  and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”

We aren’t given evidence that Peter understood the teaching.  We aren’t lead to believe that Peter, in contrast to the departing disciples, thought any of this was any an “easy teaching.”  We are only shown that Peter had faith.  He believed Jesus was the Christ and he took Jesus at His word.

We read about this in John 6 and later, at the Last Supper and the ensuing Passion of Christ, we see it all come together as Christ institutes the Eucharist, fulfills the Passover, and ushers in the New and Eternal Covenant: the fulfillment of all of the Old Covenants. (For a great summary of this theology, I highly recommend two books… Bible Basics for Catholics by John Bergsma and The Fourth Cup by Scott Hahn).  But later, in 1 Corinthians 11, the Apostle Paul provides an equally convincing passage to teach the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

Paul writes to the church in Corinth that Jesus Himself revealed to him how He instituted the Eucharist (1 Cor 11:23).  Paul tells the Corinthians how Jesus, at the Last Supper, took the bread, broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you.”  Likewise, He took the chalice and said, “This chalice is the new covenant in my blood.”  Then Paul explains that, in light of this, anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner is guilty of “profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:27, RSV-2CE).  He instructs the Christians to perform an examination of conscience before partaking of the Eucharist to determine if he/she is worthy to receive the Sacrament.  Furthermore, Paul plainly states in verse 29, “For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself.”  He goes on to say that many are weak, ill, or have died because they did not discern the body before partaking.

Let’s examine the seriousness with which Paul addresses the subject.  Paul advises the Church not to profane the body and blood of the Lord by taking Him into ourselves while we are unworthy to receive Him.  If it were all just a symbol, why would it matter so significantly?  But if it is indeed the real body and blood of our Lord, then we certainly can understand Paul’s instruction.  We Catholics believe that Mary herself was redeemed by Christ “in advance” so that Christ was placed in Mary’s womb as a pure, holy, and sinless tabernacle.  Simply put, God does not go into something unclean.

Just look at all the warnings Paul gives:

• He advises the Church members to give themselves an examination of conscious prior to receiving the Eucharist
• He cautions the Church members about potentially profaning the body and blood of Christ if they were to receive Him unworthily
• He tells them that is they don’t discern the body of Christ when they behold the Eucharist, then they eat and drink judgement upon themselves
• He even says that many are weak, ill, or have died because they didn’t discern the body of Christ when they partook in the Eucharist.

Clearly, this is not a light subject for the Apostle Paul.  And he’s certainly not saying, “You better be worthy before you dare to remember me.”  That would make no sense!  He’s not saying, “You better do an examination of conscious before you ever dare to remember me.”  Rather, he’s cautioning us to make sure we are not in a state of mortal sin and to ensure that we recognize the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist before partaking.

In light of the context – and in light of the literal reading of the passage – Paul is telling us that Jesus Himself received this teaching of the Real Presence in the Eucharist straight from the Lord Jesus (perhaps in a vision).  This teaching matches that which Christ previously taught the Apostles and his disciples, as recorded in John 6.

As a protestant for roughly thirty years, I can count on one hand how many times we recited the “Our Father” prayer in church. In fact, I could lose a few fingers in a freak accident and still count how many times on just one hand. I’m well aware that some protestant churches may recite the Lord’s Prayer more regularly but in my own experience, in particular at a well known “mega church” I attended, we neither recited it nor studied it. On the other hand, during my Catholic childhood it was recited as a regular part of our lives – not just in mass.

After becoming a protestant, I remember hearing several objections to regular recitations of the prayer. All objections generally fell into two categories:

• In giving us the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus was teaching us how to pray by specifically telling us NOT to continually repeat the same prayer over and over – the Lord’s Prayer was simply a model prayer to use in creating our own personally crafted prayers
• Jesus wants us to open up intimately to Him about our desires and concerns and wants to hear what’s on our mind. Tell him what we are asking for… let Him know the personal desires of our heart.

Let’s take a look at both general objections more closely.

In Matthew 6, Jesus is teaching His Sermon on the Mount. Beginning in verse 5, he begins to reference proper prayer. In this discourse, He tells those listening:

Do not pray just for the purpose of being seen and heard by others.

In other words, even if no one were around to hear how much time you spend in prayer, would you still be praying with the same fervency and devotion? Christ mentions two places where people pray for the glory of man rather than God: 1) from street corners and 2) from within the synagogues. Think of people who, at church or before a meal with others or before a bible study, will lead a prayer. Do they also pray before their own personal and private bible study (assuming they have such a study time)? Do they also pray before their own private meals when eating alone? Do they also pray throughout the day on any given Tuesday, when they are not at church, but perhaps passing a homeless man on the street? To avoid being like the hypocrite who prays aloud for the glory of others, Christ presents a Godly picture of someone who enters his closet, shuts the door, and prays silently in solitude to our omnipresent God.

This certainly does not mean you must go into your closet to pray (though that’s obviously a fine idea!) but Christ is contrasting the hypocritical prayer for the benefit of one’s self, being seen by others vs. the sincere prayer of the true believer whose heart is set on God alone – even when no one notices.

This also does not mean that a spoken, congregational prayer being led by a priest during mass is, by nature, shameful or hypocritical. It can be assumed that we who attend a mass are indeed a unified congregation with our belief in Christ. We are speaking, in unity, a prayer aloud to our Father in heaven. If some are there in attendance for the purpose of gaining the attention of others, shame on those people. And for sure, God knows. And those people’s acts of prayer will not be rewarded (see Matthew 6:5-6). But for those praying in unity with a sincere heart, God is pleased.

Do not pray with many useless words and phrases as the Gentiles do, as they think they will be heard for being so verbose.

Many protestants mistakenly use this admonition of Christ to say that repeating prayers (or praying the rosary) is what Christ has in mind here. But this literally can’t be the case. For Jesus Himself repeats prayers in the New Testament record (e.g. in the Garden of Gethsemane where Christ prays three times saying “the same words”). Furthermore, we read in Revelation of angels repeating the same prayer day and night to God. Are the angels just issuing “vain repetition”?  Of course not!  Furthermore, there are other Biblical examples of repeating prayers and psalms I could mention – these two examples are not unique.

What Christ is saying here – and I quote – is to not repeat “empty phrases as the Gentiles do,” thinking they will be heard for their many words. The Gentiles, who worshipped false pagan gods, believed you had to spend a good deal of time appeasing these gods with prayer so that you could carry on your daily activities. The pagans had to be sure to mention all the false gods in their prayers. These prayers were indeed empty – the pagan gods were not real (i.e. false gods).

One further note on this… and this is not original to me. I read this somewhere else (most likely from one of the apologists at Catholic Answers or perhaps one of the teachers from the Augustine Institute – both of which have been very beneficial resources of information during my return to Catholicism). But I thought it was good and bears repeating. Imagine your spouse sincerely looking at you and saying, “I love you! I love you! I love you!” then embracing you, kissing you, and then repeating again, “I love you so much!” You’d never tell her, “you’ve already told me that, stop using vain repetitions.” If the words are sincere and not out of obligation, then they are not vain repetitions but rather words that you relish hearing from your beloved. We NEVER get tired of hearing a sincere “I love you.”  Neither does God tire of our sincere praise and adoration.  This seems like a good analogy to me!

In the context, I see verses 5-6 as being a warning not to pray like hypocritical believers (e.g. the Jews that Christ observed in his day) and verses 7-8 to be a warning not to pray like pagan Gentiles, either. Which begs the question, how then shall we pray? From there, Jesus teaches us His prayer. And just as we quote and repeat Psalms and prayers of the Old Testament times, we can certainly benefit from (when prayed sincerely and with our hearts and minds on God) quoting this New Testament prayer that our Lord Himself taught us, which we call the “Our Father.”

And this leads us to the next objection often heard about repeating the “Our Father.” That is, Jesus wants to know our intimate and personal desires so we should just speak whatever concerns us that we want the Father to hear – or, put another way, the Lord’s Prayer was just an example and wasn’t meant to be repeated.  Instead, ask God for your desires.  What’s important in your world, so to speak.

As for being a model prayer or an example – we can agree! It is indeed! Where we Catholics would differ from the protestants is saying it’s “just” a model prayer. It’s so much more. We repeat the Psalms and call them Scripture. Why not the Lord’s Prayer? Isn’t it, too, Scripture? And this prayer was spoken by God Himself in the Person of Christ. I’ve already shown that Christ was not telling us to avoid ever simply repeating prayers (or scriptures, for that matter). He just wants us to pray with a sincere heart… to a sincere and true God.  But what about God desiring to know us intimately and desiring to hear what concerns us? Repeating the “Our Father,” the objectors say, rather than telling God our simple daily concerns do not “invite the Lord into our daily lives.” This is where I’d draw you back to the very words of Jesus as He is teaching us how to pray in this same chapter (Matthew 6). The very next verse after telling us not to pray like the Gentiles says, “for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.” Let’s dive into each line of the “Our Father” to see what prayer should look like, as Jesus tells us. But let me clarify first upfront… there’s certainly nothing wrong with – and, in fact, we should certainly develop the habit of – praying in your own words. I’m not suggesting you must pray the “Our Father” rather than pray in your own words. Nor am I suggesting you must pray the rosary to please God. But when you pray, what should prayer look like? Jesus tells us. Let’s dive into each line of the “Our Father.” As we do, something very clear should stand out (and by the way, if you’re wondering where the Eucharist comes in, just stay tuned…)

1. “Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed by They name.”

God is our Heavenly Father, His name is holy.

2. “Thy kingdom come, They will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”

We pray for the Kingdom of God to come and we pray for God’s will rather than our own.

3. “Give us this day our daily bread.”

Stay tuned…. we’ll get into this line a bit later as we bring up the Eucharist.

4. “And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.”

I’ll let Jesus’ own words summarize this one: if you forgive others their trespasses, your Heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. 

5. “And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.”

We ask God to help us avoid temptation and not fall into a life of sin.

As we examine each of these five lines of the “Our Father,” you will notice that at first glance it appears that four out of five lines are either God-centric or dealing with the problem of sin and the hope of salvation. Lines 1 and 2 are God-centric, honoring God and giving way to His will over our own. Lines 4 and 5 deal with sin and temptation, asking God to help us overcome sin. You’ll notice that I “passed over” line 3.

Line 3, “give us this day our daily bread,” is thought to be the one single line in the prayer that is focused on our earthly needs. But even if this is the full understanding of this line, notice that the prayer suggests that we obtain our daily bread. This isn’t a Christmas wish list. God isn’t a cosmic Santa Claus. The prayer is for daily bread.  But… could it possibly be that this line of the prayer has another meaning… one that is, like the rest of the prayer, God-centric and dealing with the soul? I ask you to consider another explanation for this line. One that takes us to the theology of the Eucharist.

The words of Christ were presumably spoken in the Aramaic language. The Gospel According to Matthew was written in Koine Greek. While there is therefore no Aramaic original text quoting Christ, the earliest disciples put His words into the Koine Greek language, giving us these accounts of Jesus’ life known as the Gospels. Notice the root word “day” occurring twice in this line of the Lord’s Prayer.

Give us this DAY our DAILY bread

It’s interesting to note that in the Greek, this word does NOT occur twice.

The first usage (give us this day) contains the Greek word hemera. This is the normal word for “day.”  The word translated in English to “daily,” however (our daily bread), is the Greek word epiousios. So what does that Greek word mean? Herein lies the problem. It’s a “new word.” It was used for this very first known time right here in the “Our Father” to describe this bread.

The word was created in Greek using epi (meaning on, upon, or above) and ousia (meaning being, substance, or nature). A good literal translation of the word: supernatural (the prefix super meaning above, as in superscript type).

Give us this day our SUPERNATURAL bread.

In the 4th Century Latin Vulgate, St. Jerome translated this verse in just that very way. He wrote – in the 4th Century – “Give us this day our supersubstantial bread” for that verse. St. Jerome clarified his meaning of that translation with the commentary: “[the bread of the Lord’s Prayer] is above all substances and surpasses all creatures.” Other early church leaders were in agreement. St. Cyprian of Carthage, for example, writing in the 200s, said of this bread that it is “heavenly bread” and “the food of salvation.” And St. Cyril said of it that, “this Holy Bread is supersubstantial.”

What other supernatural bread – which was also a daily bread – existed other than this bread spoken of in the “Our Father”?  Manna – the truly supernatural bread that came down from heaven and fed the Jews after their exodus and the passover.  And remember, manna was a “daily bread” that came down for the Jews.  Furthermore, Jews in the time of Christ had written that the Messiah would soon come… and with the Messiah, the return of the manna.

“I am the bread that came down from heaven” – Words of Jesus (from John 6)

Supernatural bread. The real presence of Christ in the bread. The Eucharist. And now the full story comes into context.

With this understanding, the Lord’s Prayer, in line 3, also becomes focused on God, His sacrifice for us, and the coming Eucharist.

There is so much more evidence and explanation behind this theology and the topic of the Real Presence in the Eucharist. A great resource I found that summarizes it clearly is Brant Pitre’s book, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist. I highly recommend this reading.

To close, let me share my own personal thoughts on prayer. There’s nothing “wrong” with getting personal in prayer with God and asking for specific requests (e.g. “Lord God, I pray that I find work in order to feed my family properly”). That’s a fine prayer to ask. And I myself do make personal petitions in my own prayer time. But keep in mind, we know that the Lord knows our needs before we pray (Matthew 6:8). I believe God seeks our heart, our trust, and our faith in Him. And when those are in order, the rest falls into place. Spend more time focusing on God in your prayer and the rest will flow. Think of it like this. I may (translation: I do) seek my wife’s physical attention. I don’t have to tell her that for her to know. She knows what I desire. If I continually ask her for her physical attention without giving her what she desires, how would she feel? Instead of continually asking her to fulfill my own desires, I could instead focus on her, flirt with her, tell her I love her, and more importantly, SHOW her I love her. Then, without having to ask, she’d meet my desires of her own free will. All analogies fall short, but I think this makes the point.

Too often during my thirty years as a protestant, I’ve noticed how prayer was always about “me.”  I’ve heard middle class and upper class people pray for better or newer cars that didn’t require so much maintenance… while 83% of the world has no car at all (2023 statistic). I’ve heard middle class and upper class people pray for job promotions while 700 million people live in extreme poverty, less than $1.90 per day (2024 statistic). How often have these same people prayed for the poor around the world. How often have they done anything for these poor?

It’s a mindset. It’s not a sin to desire a different job nor a sin to earn a decent income and live in America. But where is your heart? How do you live? These are matters important to God. I think the best petitions in prayer, after praying and praising about God, is to pray for a more compassionate heart, a more selfless lifestyle, a more forgiving nature. When we focus too much on “me” it tends to lead in the direction of a “prosperity gospel” – which is no gospel at all.

All of this is also why I feel so connected to God in Catholic worship. The reverence to God in the mass, the partaking of His Body broken for us… these seem in stark contrast to the party atmosphere found in many mega church services. Please don’t take my words as judgmental… these are simply my observations and my beliefs. And I hope they make sense and strike a familiar bell to anyone who’d describe themselves as a returning catholic.