Catholic Answers Live: Episode #12478 – "Who Thought the Eucharist Was Just Symbolic? Early Church Beliefs and Transubstantiation" (ENCORE) with Joe Heschmeyer
Original Air Date: November 28, 2025
Host: Cy Kellett
Guest: Joe Heschmeyer (Catholic apologist, author of The Eucharist is Really Jesus)

Overview

This episode dives into common objections and confusions regarding the Eucharist, especially focusing on whether early Christians believed it to be “just symbolic” or truly the Body and Blood of Christ. Joe Heschmeyer addresses objections from Protestant, Catholic, and secular perspectives and brings out the deep biblical and historical roots of the Church’s eucharistic doctrine—including the real presence, the role of philosophy (transubstantiation), Old Testament prefigurements, and responses to modern misunderstandings.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Depth and Mystery of the Eucharist

Timestamps: 00:00–03:47

• Cy Kellett introduces the profound nature of the Eucharist; it's simple enough for a child, yet inexhaustible for even the greatest theologians.
• Joe Heschmeyer notes the Eucharist as central to the heavenly liturgy and as an image of personal intimacy:

  “The whole image of heavenly liturgy is centered around the wedding banquet of the Lamb. … You are united to Christ in a special and unique way that’s unrepeated and unrepeatable.” (01:13–02:41)

• The early Church recognized a combination of communal unity and personal relationship in the Eucharist.

Early Church Unity on the Real Presence

Timestamps: 03:47–07:10

• When did disputes on the Eucharist begin?
  Joe: Practically all early Christians were united in affirming Christ’s real presence, except Gnostics (denied incarnation, and so denied a bodily Eucharist).
• Quote from St. Ignatius of Antioch shows that denying the Real Presence was already seen as a grave error in the 2nd century.
• Joe cites Gregory Dix:

  "There is no pre-Nicene Eastern or Western writer whose eucharistic doctrine is at all fully stated who does not regard the offering and consecration of the Eucharist as the present action of our Lord himself." (05:11–06:06)

• Protestant attempts to create theological conflicts among the early fathers are often reading in divisions not present at the time.

Apostolic Understanding: Did the Apostles Object?

Timestamps: 07:11–08:58

• Objection: “The Apostles didn’t object, so it must have been symbolic.”
• Joe: Their lack of objection shows faith, not metaphor. Peter’s response in John 6:68 embodies trust without full understanding:

  "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life…” (07:35–08:58)

“Breaking of the Bread” – Eucharist or Just a Meal?

Timestamps: 08:58–12:48

• Objection: Catholics read Eucharist into every “breaking of bread.”

• Joe notes the ritual, liturgical context. "Breaking bread" in Scripture (Emmaus, Acts) is distinctive and tied to Eucharistic acts—not just an idiom for eating.

• “To take the metaphor and then explain away the Bible with a metaphor that derived from the Bible’s original meaning is completely backwards.” (10:14–10:22)

• The four ritual verbs (take, bless, break, give) are unique to Eucharistic settings, not casual meals.

Objection: “The Eucharist Doesn’t Do Anything”

Timestamps: 12:48–20:22

• Objection: If the Eucharist is so powerful, why don’t I feel anything? Why isn’t my life changed dramatically by Communion?
• Joe uses the analogy of electricity:

  “Grace is not magic... Your free will can get in the way. … The light switch can impede the flow of power to the light… What you can do is get in the way.” (15:56–17:00)

• St. Paul already anticipated this objection (1 Corinthians 10–11): Israel received miraculous food and drink but still fell.

  “Anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.” (1 Cor 11:27–30; cited at 19:18–20:22)

• The fruitful reception of the Eucharist depends on preparation—self-examination, confession if needed, and discernment.

Getting “Plugged In” to Eucharistic Grace

Timestamps: 20:22–22:41

• Joe: Examine your conscience, receive in a state of grace, and recognize Christ in both the Sacrament and your neighbor.
• Real growth in charity and transformation flows from deeper Eucharistic faith and reception.

Objection: “Transubstantiation Is Just Greek Philosophy”

Timestamps: 22:41–26:11

• Objection: The language of substance and accident is foreign to biblical/Jewish origins.
• Joe: The Church uses “substance” to express the mystery; the philosophical terms are tools, not the essence of the faith.

  “If there’s another way you can articulate that same truth, then go for it. But transubstantiation is an adequate way of capturing it… That looks like Jesus but isn’t. The Eucharist doesn’t look like Jesus but is.” (25:25–25:58)

Objection: “Lutherans/Anglicans Say Jesus Is Really There Too—What’s the Difference?”

Timestamps: 29:23–35:16

• Objection: Why not accept consubstantiation or another “real presence” doctrine?
• Joe: Catholicism teaches the bread and wine cease to exist—only Christ remains. Early Church fathers (e.g., Cyril of Jerusalem) are clear:

  “The seeming bread is not bread ... but the body of Christ” (31:16–31:42)

• Also, only Catholic teaching (and Orthodox) maintains the Eucharist is a true sacrifice, not solely a presence.

Objection: “Ongoing Priesthood Isn’t Biblical/New Testament”

Timestamps: 35:16–40:22

• Objection: “We don’t need priests between us and God anymore.”
• Joe: The Old Testament high priest was “high” because there were many priests. In the New Covenant, there is a general (baptismal) priesthood and a ministerial (ordained) priesthood—prefigured in Isaiah 66:21 (“some of them I will take for priests and for Levites”).
• The notion that all or none are priests contradicts both OT typology and specific NT passages.
• The argument from silence (“the NT doesn’t explicitly detail this”) is weak—Hebrews explicitly names Christ as high priest, and only in one book.

Objection: “Catholics Divide by Not Allowing Open Communion”

Timestamps: 43:23–48:03

• Objection: If the Eucharist brings unity, why exclude non-Catholics?
• Joe:

  “This is how Christians have done it for 2,000 years… You don’t give what is holy to the dogs.” (44:22–46:03; referencing Matt 7:6)

• From Justin Martyr (2nd century): Only those who believe the Church’s teaching, are baptized, and live as Christians may receive.
• Open communion would mean neglecting the seriousness of unworthy reception (1 Cor 11), and the Eucharist's role as the visible bond of unity in faith.

Objection: “Eucharist Is Just a Pagan Ritual Copy”

Timestamps: 48:03–53:44

• Objection: The Eucharist echoes pagan bread-and-wine rites (Mithras, Dionysus, Isis, etc.).

• Joe: Most “parallels” are either fabrications or gross exaggerations by later polemicists like Alexander Hislop.

• True similarities (food, candles, ritual) are so generic that they prove nothing; where specifics do align, the evidence usually shows pagans copying Christians.

• Justin Martyr already notes in the 2nd century that pagans were imitating Christian Eucharist, not the reverse.

• “So a lot of the stuff that looks like Christianity is because it borrowed from Christianity—not Christianity borrowed from paganism ... It’s just romanticizing paganism. It’s not good history.” (51:31–53:44)

• Catholicism teaches that Christ elevates human nature and natural signs (food, water, oil, etc.) for supernatural ends, as fitting with the Incarnation.

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On mystery and understanding:

  “You will not penetrate the full depths. Not in this life you won’t.” (00:00–01:13, Cy Kellett)

• On trusting Christ despite not understanding:

  “Peter doesn’t say, ‘Oh, we totally get it’... He doesn’t pretend to. This is a moment of just a trustful following of Christ.” (08:36)

• On misuse of biblical language:

  “To take the metaphor and then explain away the Bible with a metaphor that derived from the Bible’s original meaning is completely backwards.” (10:14)

• Eucharist as spiritual electricity:

  “Grace is not magic. … You can receive all the graces in the world and still not use them... The light switch can impede the flow of power to the light.” (15:56–17:00)

• On transubstantiation and language:

  “That looks like Jesus, but isn’t. The Eucharist doesn’t look like Jesus, but is.” (25:25–25:58)

• On closed communion:

  “Closed communion is very clearly the teaching of the early Christians, under the principle that Jesus lays out, ‘Don’t give what is holy to the dogs.’” (45:40–46:03)

• Pagan/Christian ritual confusion:

  “It’s just romanticizing paganism. It’s not good history.” (51:31–53:44)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:00–03:47 — Introduction and the inexhaustibility of the Eucharist
• 03:47–07:10 — Early unanimity, Gnostic dissent, and what counts as “Christian”
• 07:11–08:58 — Apostles’ response to Jesus’ words: faith, not symbolism
• 08:58–12:48 — “Breaking bread”: ritual or just a meal?
• 12:48–20:22 — “The Eucharist doesn’t do anything” – the role of free will and worthy reception
• 20:22–22:41 — How to prepare for and receive Eucharistic grace
• 22:41–26:11 — “Transubstantiation” and philosophical language
• 29:23–35:16 — “Real Presence” beyond Catholicism, and why Catholic teaching prevails
• 35:16–40:22 — The necessity of the ministerial priesthood
• 43:23–48:03 — Exclusion from communion as protection and timeless discipline
• 48:03–53:44 — Are Eucharistic rites borrowed from paganism?
• 53:44–end — Sacramental signs and the logic of the Incarnation

Conclusion & Takeaways

This episode equips listeners with a robust understanding of:

• The biblical and historical evidence for the real presence and sacrificial nature of the Eucharist.
• The early Church’s unanimous witness, and clarity on what was “symbolic” and what was taught as divine reality.
• The relationship between philosophy and doctrine—why philosophical language helps (but doesn’t invent) Eucharistic faith.
• Why closed communion is ancient, pastoral, and biblically grounded.
• How common Internet and secular objections (e.g., “pagan parallels”) collapse under close scrutiny.

Heschmeyer’s tone is accessible, clear, and pastorally sensitive—inviting all, Catholic or not, to deeper faith and understanding.

Recommended Resources:

• The Eucharist is Really Jesus by Joe Heschmeyer
• The Early Church Was the Catholic Church by Joe Heschmeyer
• Justin Martyr’s First Apology, Lecture 66

“We become the Body of Christ because we partake of the Eucharistic Body of Christ.” (22:41–22:55, Joe Heschmeyer)