St. Anthony of Padua (1195-1231). Feast Day: June 13.
Born Fernando Martins de Bulhões in Lisbon, where he would enter an Augustinian order, St. Anthony would eventually leave them for the Franciscans shortly after becoming a priest. He modeled his spiritual life after St. Anthony of Egypt, and had hoped to die a martyr in North Africa. He was eventually sent to Morocco, but he was not killed, so he returned and remained in Italy, preaching and teaching.
St. Anthony was renowned for his preaching skills. In early art, he was depicted with a Bible and a small figure of Jesus on the pages — legend has it that he was so good at understanding and explaining scripture because Jesus himself would appear in order to explain it to him during his study times.
Over time, the figure of Jesus was made larger and larger until it was about the size of a child, at which time the artists began to depict the Jesus figure as the child Jesus, standing or sitting on the book held by St. Anthony, while the Saint embraced him lovingly.
St. Anthony is a Doctor of the Church, an incorruptible saint (you can see his tongue on display to this day, and is the patron saint of those seeking to find lost articles.
The “Bread of Life Discourse” in John 6 is crucial for all Christians to understand (as it was for the first Christians). Prior to verse 6:54, Jesus used the word φαγειν for “to eat.” In 6:54, 56, and 57, Jesus becomes even more emphatic and literal, when he changes the term used for “to eat” to τρωγων which would be most accurately translated as “to gnaw” or “to chew.” He used the most visceral and literal term for what He meant. He further doubled-down on the literalness of what he meant with the term αληΘως, that is “truly,” regarding his flesh being literal food and his blood being literal drink in 6:55.
The earliest Christians understood the literalness of Jesus’s words, and practiced the faith accordingly. We know this, because they left detailed accounts of their practices behind.
In AD 155, St. Justin Martyr wrote what came to be called his “First Apology.” In it, he explains the Christian faith to the pagan Emperor Antonius Pius. Scholars believe that Justin was personally taught the faith by the Apostle John himself. When it comes to the early Christian belief about the Body and Blood of Jesus, he says the following:
“And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [i.e. the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration [i.e. baptized], and who is so living as Christ has enjoined [i.e.in a state of grace]. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh [i.e. transubstantiation]. …And when the presider [i.e. the priest] has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us “deacons” give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion [i.e. implying that a permanent change had taken place at the consecration and that the bread and wine were more than a mere symbol].”
While Catholics do not subscribe to Sola Scripture, it would seem that those who do and are most intent at finding application for the most literal rendering of scripture without external traditions imparting to it the un-literal, as well as those most intent on “reclaiming” the earliest Christian practice, should necessarily both subscribe to the Catholic (and Eastern Orthodox) understanding of the role and nature of the Eucharist in Christian worship.
Jesus’s audience knew well that He meant that his flesh was literally food and his blood was literally drink and that He expected them to literally eat and drink of it as such. They understood this so well, that they walked away from Him and refused to follow Him after this teaching. If Jesus had been speaking figuratively, when He saw that they were offended by taking Him literally, He would have corrected them. Instead, He lets them walk away because He knows that they understood His literal teaching correctly and chose to reject it.
Likewise, there is an important lesson in Peter’s words for those who struggle with the human imperfections that are a part of the Church that Christ instituted. Whether we struggle with a teaching that offends our modern sensibilities, struggle to reconcile the Church’s moral authority in light of immoral scandals, or struggle to swallow our pride when we don’t like priests/homilies/music/decor/etc, we must remember that it is only within Holy Mother Church that we have access to the sacraments (like the Eucharist), and it is through the sacraments that God prefers to impart His grace to us. If we walk away from Christ’s Church, we necessarily walk away from God’s Sacraments and the grace they permit us to access. A Christian who truly understands Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist could never walk away from the Catholic Church, for if he did, “to whom should he go?”
Catholic Bricks 