Cannibalism and Magic in Christianity

[Munin-Hugin]

I was raised Roman Catholic, and all through that time there were a few things that I never really quite understood, no matter who I asked or how hard I listened during sermons and Sunday School. Interestingly, the two biggest things sort of went hand in hand.

Let's assume that we agree that the definition of cannibalism is the act of eating the flesh of a being that is the same as the ones doing the eating. Let us also assume that we agree that Jesus, before the time of his death and Resurrection was, despite his divine father, was human. During the Last Supper, we were taught (and are reminded of each week at mass) that Jesus stood before his Apostles and said (to paraphrase) "here's my blood, here's my flesh, take a sip and take a bite", then passed around bread and wine.

Now, one of the things that is part of the Roman Catholic sect is that there is a belief in the practice of transubstantiation. Basically, this is the belief that the bread and wine, once blessed, in actuality becomes the flesh and blood of Jesus, even though the appearance of bread and wine remains. In magical terms, that would be considered transmutation, the creation of one thing out of another.

Put those two things together, and when stated in a way that is not referencing any specific religion, you have the following: A respected member of the community, possessing of magical powers, transforms mere food and drink into the actual flesh and blood of the human child of their deity. Then, the gathered people eat and drink of the physical body of said son, in an act of ritualized cannibalism.

So what is the actual difference between magic and miracle, and cannibalism and taking part of the Holy Communion ritual?

[B. de Corbin]

Symbolism, metaphor vs. actuality.

[Munin-Hugin]

Symbolism, metaphor vs. actuality.

Well, sure. But what's the purpose? I've never been able to suss out the actual meaning of the cannibalism either. The words don't really go a long way to explain it. "Eat this, for this is my body, which has been given up for you."

- - - Updated - - -

Symbolism, metaphor vs. actuality.

Should have added this. But that's the thing. Transubstantiation means that it is reality, not metaphor.

[magusphredde]

Jesus words were intended to mean that if you believe in his divinity ( eat his flesh) and his sacrifice for your sins (drink of his blood) then you will be saved ... These acts are symbolic of faith ... you don't really have to partake in bar-b-que Jesus on a bun

[Munin-Hugin]

Jesus words were intended to mean that if you believe in his divinity ( eat his flesh) and his sacrifice for your sins (drink of his blood) then you will be saved ... These acts are symbolic of faith ......

Again, though. It's not purely symbolic, as it is believed that you are eating and drinking the physical body and blood. I get the symbolism of it. I don't understand why it's not left to BE symbolic, and instead is the use of "miracle" or magic to become reality.

[anunitu]

If you consider the tribal idea of eating your enemy in order to obtain the courage and warrior spirit it might seem that what you are talking about is kind of consuming the body and spirit to obtain the purity and divinity of Jesus kinda.

[Rae'ya]

I was taught in Catholic primary school that it was symbolic, not reality. That we were partaking of the essence of Jesus in order to strengthen our faith and connection with God.

[magusphredde]

Again, though. It's not purely symbolic, as it is believed that you are eating and drinking the physical body and blood. I get the symbolism of it. I don't understand why it's not left to BE symbolic, and instead is the use of "miracle" or magic to become reality.

I would LOVE to know what Christian faith believes that they are really eating his body and drinking his blood ... Yes, it is symbolic ...

[MaskedOne]

I would LOVE to know what Christian faith believes that they are really eating his body and drinking his blood ... Yes, it is symbolic ...

Err, Catholocism, well sort of

The Vatican has a long list of compiled comments on the Eucharist but the one below handles Transubstantiation

"The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."

Regarding why....

erm,,,,

go through the link above. If you're lucky, you'll spot an answer that makes sense to you. If not, shrug, someone around here might be adequately versed in Catholic theology to handle this in detail. I don't think I could do it justice without putting more work into it than I want to.

[Medusa]

A lot of Christians, Jews and Muslims believe the bible is literal. Just different parts of the bible I guess depending upon your religion. Catholics and the Eucharist? Yup. It's the real deal. Evengalists and Fundamentalists as well.