John 6.51-58 was the Gospel reading at Sunday Mass. Reading these verses as if you're reading them for the very first time with an open mind, you would not get the impression that Jesus meant eating his flesh and drinking his blood in some symbolic way, for the Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" In this whole passage, Jesus could have added the word "symbolically" in any of the at least five spots, but he didn't. If he did, he probably would've had to explain what that meant and wouldn't likely have said "For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink" later, further confusing the issue. Arguing that the consecrated elements of the Holy Eucharist are not the true body and blood of the Lord is deliberately overlooking John 6 with the intent of saying that the Church got it wrong. It is also my personal belief that this sacrament is God's gift to the Church to keep the gates of the netherworld from prevailing against it.