Yep. That's the rejection typical of a teaching that's difficult to accept.
Evidently you heard the truth about the Eucharist. What you are believing is what those rejecting him in John 6;66 would have accepted. If it's an easy sale it isn't a hard teaching to accept.
It wasn't difficult to accept! They left off following the Lord because they misunderstood that what He was saying was figurative.
"The Spirit gives life; the flesh profits nothing.
The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life."
Regarding eating His flesh, if He was speaking literally, on the night that He was betrayed He would have cut off a piece of His flesh and given it to the disciples to eat. Likewise, the Lord would have cut himself and offered literal blood for them to drink. As it was, He broke bread and gave it to them saying "This is my body." Let me paraphrase "This bread figuratively represents my body that is broken for you." As often as you break this bread, do this in remembrance of Me. Likewise, the cup was the fruit of the vine and not His literal blood. For after He gave it to them to drink He said, "I tell you, I will not drink from this
fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom." Therefore, the cup did not contain the Lord's literal blood, but the fruit of the vine as representing His blood.
There is no transubstantiation taking place when we break bread. We are not eating the literal flesh and blood of the Lord. When we break bread we are doing this as a symbolic observance of His body that was broken for us and His blood that was shed for us.
This is exactly why God is calling all who belong to the RCC (the woman who rides the beast) to come out of the woman, because she is causing all people to commit spiritual adultery against God by her pagan practices and rituals which all stem from ancient Babylon.