The supposed Scriptural ground for [transubstantiation] is found in the words of the institution, “this is my body”, and in John 6:50 ff. But the former passage is clearly tropical2, like those in John 14:6; 15:1, 10:9 and others; and the later, literally understood, would teach more than the Roman Catholic himself would be ready to grant, namely that every one who eats the Lord’ Supper goes to heaven, while no one who fails to eat it will obtain eternal life (cf. verses 53,54). Moreover, verse 63 clearly points to a spiritual interpretation. Furthermore, it is quite impossible to conceive of the bread which Jesus broke as being the body which was handling it; and it should be noted that Scripture calls it bread even after it is supposed to have been transubstantiated, I Cor. 10:17; 11:26,27,28. This view of Rome also violates the human senses, where it asks us to believe that what tastes and looks like bread and wine, is really flesh and blood; and human reason, where it requires belief in the separation of a substance and its properties and in the presence of a material body in several places at the same time, both of which are contrary to reason. Consequently, the elevation and adoration of the host is also without any proper foundation.