Editing Transubstantiation (section)

===Protestantism===
====Lutheranism====
{{Main|Eucharist in Lutheranism}}
{{Further|Sacramental union}}
Lutherans explicitly reject transubstantiation<ref>Luther, Martin (1537), [http://bookofconcord.org/smalcald.php#sacrament ''Smalcald Articles''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210703/http://bookofconcord.org/smalcald.php#sacrament |date=2008-10-10 }}, Part III, Article VI. Of the Sacrament of the Altar, stating: "As regards transubstantiation, we care nothing about the sophistical subtlety by which they teach that bread and wine leave or lose their own natural substance, and that there remain only the appearance and color of bread, and not true bread. For it is in perfect agreement with Holy Scriptures that there is, and remains, bread, as Paul himself calls it, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1co10:16&version=NIV 1 Cor. 10:16]: The bread which we break. And [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1co11:28&version=NIV 1 Cor. 11:28]: Let him so eat of that bread."</ref> believing that the bread and wine remain fully bread and fully wine while also being truly the body and blood of Jesus Christ.<ref name="Brug2-4">Brug, J.F. (1998), [http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugReal.pdf ''The Real Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in The Lord's Supper:: Contemporary Issues Concerning the Sacramental Union''] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150204101123/http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugReal.pdf |date=2015-02-04 }}, pp. 2–4</ref><ref name="BasicDocs">Schuetze, A.W. (1986), ''Basic Doctrines of the Bible'' (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House), Chapter 12, Article 3</ref><ref name="WELS-Transubs">{{Cite web |title=Real Presence: What is really the difference between "transubstantiation" and "consubstantiation"? |url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=58&cuItem_itemID=2250 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20090928161126/http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=58&cuItem_itemID=2250 |archive-date=28 September 2009 |access-date=25 July 2016 |website=WELS Topical Q&A |publisher=[[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]] |quote=We reject transubstantiation because the Bible teaches that the bread and the wine are still present in the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 10:16, 1 Corinthians 11:27–28). We do not worship the elements because Jesus commands us to eat and to drink the bread and the wine. He does not command us to worship them.}}</ref><ref name="WELS">{{Cite web |title=Real Presence: Why not Transubstantiation? |url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=58&cuItem_itemID=1325 |url-status=dead|archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20090928161039/http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=58&cuItem_itemID=1325 |archive-date=28 September 2009 |access-date=25 July 2016 |website=WELS Topical Q&A |publisher=[[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]]}}</ref> Lutheran churches instead emphasize the [[sacramental union]]<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#part7.6 VII. The Lord's Supper: Affirmative Theses] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201031063041/http://bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#part7.6 |date=2020-10-31 }}, ''Epitome of the [[Formula of Concord]]'', 1577, stating that: "We believe, teach, and confess that the body and blood of Christ are received with the bread and wine, not only spiritually by faith, but also orally; yet not in a Capernaitic, but in a supernatural, heavenly mode, because of the sacramental union"</ref> (not exactly the [[consubstantiation]], as is often claimed)<ref name="WELSconsubs">{{Cite web |title=Real Presence Communion – Consubstantiation? |url=https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=58&cuItem_itemID=11345 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20090927184649/https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=58&cuItem_itemID=11345 |archive-date=27 September 2009 |access-date=25 July 2016 |website=WELS Topical Q&A |publisher=[[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]] |quote=Although some Lutherans have used the term 'consbstantiation' [''sic''] and it might possibly be understood correctly (e.g., the bread & wine, body & blood coexist with each other in the Lord's Supper),  most Lutherans reject the term because of the false connotation it contains&nbsp;... either that the body and blood, bread and wine come together to form one substance in the Lord's Supper or that the body and blood are present in a natural manner like the bread and the wine. Lutherans believe that the bread and the wine are present in a natural manner in the Lord's Supper and Christ's true body and blood are present in an illocal, supernatural manner.}}</ref> and believe that within the Eucharistic celebration the body and blood of Jesus Christ are objectively present "in, with, and under the forms" of bread and wine (cf. [[Book of Concord]]).<ref name="Brug2-4" /> They place great stress on Jesus's instructions to "take and eat", and "take and drink", holding that this is the proper, divinely ordained use of the sacrament, and, while giving it due reverence, scrupulously avoid any actions that might indicate or lead to superstition or unworthy fear of the sacrament.<ref name=BasicDocs/>

In dialogue with Catholic theologians, a large measure of agreement has been reached by a group of Lutheran theologians. They recognize that "in contemporary Catholic expositions, ... transubstantiation intends to affirm the fact of Christ's presence and of the change which takes place, and is not an attempt to explain how Christ becomes present. ... [And] that it is a legitimate way of attempting to express the mystery, even though they continue to believe that the conceptuality associated with "transubstantiation" is misleading and therefore prefer to avoid the term."<ref name="Luth">{{Cite web |title=The Eucharist |url=http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/ecumenical/lutheran/eucharist.cfm |access-date=2019-09-25 |website=usccb.org}}</ref>

====Reformed churches====
{{Main|Lord's Supper in Reformed theology}}
The [[Reformed Christianity|Reformed]] tradition ([[Continental Reformed]], [[Presbyterian]], [[Congregationalist]], and [[Anglicanism|Classical Anglican]]) holds [[John Calvin]]'s view of "pneumatic presence" or "spiritual feeding", a Real Presence by the Holy Spirit for those who have faith. Calvin "can be regarded as occupying a position roughly midway between" the doctrines of Martin Luther on one hand and Huldrych Zwingli on the other. He taught that "the thing that is signified is effected by its sign", declaring: "Believers ought always to live by this rule: whenever they see symbols appointed by the Lord, to think and be convinced that the truth of the thing signified is surely present there. For why should the Lord put in your hand the symbol of his body, unless it was to assure you that you really participate in it? And if it is true that a visible sign is given to us to seal the gift of an invisible thing, when we have received the symbol of the body, let us rest assured that the body itself is also given to us."<ref>McGrath, op.cit., p.199.</ref>

The Westminster Shorter Catechism summarises the teaching:{{Quote|Q. What is the Lord's supper?

A. The Lord's supper is a sacrament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to Christ's appointment, his death is showed forth; and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of his body and blood, with all his benefits, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace.<ref>Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q&A 96</ref>}}

====Anglicanism====
Transubstantiation is generally rejected in Anglicanism. 
{{quote|
Elizabeth I gave royal assent to the [[39 Articles]]. The Articles declared that "Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions." The Elizabethan Settlement accepted the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament, but refused to define it, preferring to leave it a mystery. Indeed, for many years it was illegal in Britain to hold public office whilst believing in transubstantiation, as under the [[Test Act 1673|Test Act of 1673]]. Archbishop [[John Tillotson]] decried the "real barbarousness of this Sacrament and Rite of our Religion", considering it a great [[impiety]] to believe that people who attend Holy Communion "verily eat and drink the natural flesh and blood of Christ. And what can any man do more unworthily towards a Friend? How can he possibly use him more barbarously, than to feast upon his living flesh and blood?" (''Discourse against Transubstantiation'', London 1684, 35). In the Church of England today, clergy are required to assent that the 39 Articles have borne witness to the Christian faith.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Common Worship |url=http://www.cofe.anglican.org/worship/liturgy/commonworship/texts/books/mv/preface.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080808210713/http://www.cofe.anglican.org/worship/liturgy/commonworship/texts/books/mv/preface.html |archive-date=2008-08-08 |access-date=2008-10-17 |website=cofe.anglican.org}}</ref>
}}

[[Thomas Cranmer]], the guiding figure of the [[English Reformation|Protestant Reformation in England]], aligned himself with the Eucharistic theology of [[John Calvin]], which is reflected in the 28th Article of the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England: "the Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavently and spiritual manner." This view is the [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology|real spiritual presence]] (pneumatic presence) and is held by denominations of the [[Reformed Christianity|Reformed]] (Continental Reformed, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, and Reformed Anglican) tradition.<ref name="González1987"/><ref name="Elwell2001">{{cite book |last1=Elwell |first1=Walter A. |title=Evangelical Dictionary of Theology |date=May 2001 |publisher=Baker Academic |isbn=978-0-8010-2075-9 |page=990 |language=en}}</ref>
 
The Eucharistic teaching labeled "[[receptionism]]", defined by [[Claude Beaufort Moss]] as "the theory that we receive the Body and Blood of Christ when we receive the bread and wine, but they are not identified with the bread and wine which are not changed",<ref>Claude B. Moss, ''The Christian Faith: An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology'' (London: SPCK 1943), p. 366, cited in [https://books.google.com/books?id=YjY2q6aLaMEC&dq=%22defines+receptionism+as+the+theory%22&pg=PA181 Brian Douglas, ''A Companion to Anglican Eucharistic Theology'' (Brill 2012), vol. 2, p. 181]</ref> was commonly held by 16th and 17th-century Anglican theologians. It was characteristic of 17th century thought to "insist on the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but to profess [[agnosticism]] concerning the manner of the presence". It remained "the dominant theological position in the Church of England until the [[Oxford Movement]] in the early nineteenth century, with varying degrees of emphasis". Importantly, it is "a doctrine of the real presence" but one which "relates the presence primarily to the worthy receiver rather than to the elements of bread and wine".<ref>Crockett, William R. (1988). "Holy Communion". In Sykes, Stephen; Booty, John. ''The Study of Anglicanism''. Philadelphia: SPCK/Fortress Press. p. 275. {{ISBN|978-0800620875}}</ref>

Anglicans generally consider no teaching binding that, according to the Articles, "cannot be found in Holy Scripture or proved thereby", and are not unanimous in the interpretation of such passages as John 6<ref>{{Bibleverse|John|6}}</ref> and 1 Corinthians 11,<ref>{{Bibleverse|1 Corinthians|11}}</ref> although all Anglicans affirm a view of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist: some Anglicans (especially [[Anglo-Catholics]] and some other [[High Church]] Anglicans) hold to a belief in the corporeal presence while [[Evangelical Anglicanism|Evangelical Anglicans]] hold to a belief in the pneumatic presence. As with all Anglicans, Anglo-Catholics and other High Church Anglicans historically held belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist but were "hostile to the doctrine of transubstantiation".<ref name="Poulson1999">{{Cite book |last=Poulson |first=Christine |title=The Quest for the Grail: Arthurian Legend in British Art, 1840–1920 |publisher=Manchester University Press |year=1999 |isbn=978-0719055379 |page=40 |quote=By the late 1840s Anglo-Catholic interest in the revival of ritual had given new life to doctrinal debate over the nature of the Eucharist. Initially, 'the Tractarians were concerned only to exalt the importance of the sacrament and did not engage in doctrinal speculation'. Indeed they were generally hostile to the doctrine of transubstantiation. For an orthodox Anglo-Catholic such as Dyce the doctrine of the Real Presence was acceptable, but that of transubstantiation was not.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Spurr |first=Barry |title=Anglo-Catholic in Religion |date=2010 |publisher=Lutterworth Press |isbn=978-0718830731 |page=100 |quote=The doctrine had been affirmed by Anglican theologians, through the ages, including Lancelot Andrewes, Jeremy Taylor (who taught the doctrine of the Real Presence at the eucharist, but attacked Roman transubstantiation), William Laud and John Cosin – all in the seventeenth century – as well as in the nineteenth century Tractarians and their successors.}}</ref> A major leader in the Anglo-Catholic [[Oxford Movement]], [[Edward Pusey]], championed the view of [[consubstantiation]]:<ref name="Rigg1895">{{cite book|last=Rigg|first=James Harrison|title=Oxford High Anglicanism and Its Chief Leaders|year=1895|publisher=C. H. Kelly|language=en |page=293}}</ref> 
{{blockquote|I cannot deem it unfair to apply the name of Consubstantiation to a doctrine which teaches, that "the true flesh and true blood of Christ are in the true bread and wine", in such a way that "whatsoever motion or action the bread" and wine have, the body and blood "of Christ also" have "the same"; and that "the substances in both cases" are "so mingled—that they should constitute some one thing".<ref name="Vogan1871">{{cite book|last=Vogan|first=Thomas Stuart Lyle|title=The True Doctrine of the Eucharist|year=1871|publisher=Longmans, Green|language=en |page=54}}</ref>}}
However, in the first half of the twentieth century, the Catholic Propaganda Society upheld both Article XXVIII and the doctrine of transubstantiation, stating that the 39 Articles specifically condemn a pre-Council of Trent "interpretation which was included by some under the term Transubstantiation" in which "the bread and wine were only left as a delusion of the senses after consecration";<ref name="CPS">{{Cite web |title=Transubstantiation and the Black Rubric |url=http://anglicanhistory.org/england/cps/black.html |website=anglicanhistory.org}}</ref> it stated that "this Council propounded its definition after the Articles were written, and so cannot be referred to by them".<ref name=CPS/>

Theological dialogue with the Catholic Church has produced common documents that speak of "substantial agreement" about the doctrine of the Eucharist: the ARCIC Windsor Statement of 1971,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Pro Unione Web Site – Full Text ARCIC Eucharist |url=http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/arcic/doc/e_arcic_eucharist.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181017012613/http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/arcic/doc/e_arcic_eucharist.html |archive-date=2018-10-17 |access-date=2006-01-03 |website=prounione.urbe.it}}</ref> and its 1979 Elucidation.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Pro Unione Web Site – Full Text ARCIC Elucidation Eucharist |url=http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/arcic/doc/e_arcic_elucid_euch.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181008082332/http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/arcic/doc/e_arcic_elucid_euch.html |archive-date=2018-10-08 |access-date=2006-01-03 |website=prounione.urbe.it}}</ref> Remaining arguments can be found in the Church of England's pastoral letter: ''The Eucharist: Sacrament of Unity''.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Council for Christian Unity |url=http://www.cofe.anglican.org/info/ccu/england/catholics/eucharist.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060218121033/http://www.cofe.anglican.org/info/ccu/england/catholics/eucharist.pdf |archive-date=2006-02-18 |access-date=2006-01-03 |website=cofe.anglican.org}}</ref>

====Methodism====
[[Methodists]] believe in the real spiritual presence of Christ in the bread and wine (or grape juice) while, like Presbyterians, rejecting transubstantiation.<ref name="Elwell2001"/><ref name="Collins2025"/> Methodism inherited the [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology|Reformed view of the Lord's Supper]] through the [[Twenty-five Articles]], in which Article XVIII posits a real spiritual presence of Christ in the Eucharist, noting that the "body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner."<ref name="Elwell2001" /><ref name="Mahoney2024">{{cite web |last1=Mahoney |first1=James |title=The Methodist's Duty: Wesley's "Constant Communion" and the 21st Century Methodist |url=https://firebrandmag.com/articles/the-methodists-duty-wesleys-constant-communion-and-the-21st-century-methodist |publisher=Firebrand Magazine |access-date=4 April 2025 |language=English |date=9 July 2024 |quote=Methodists say with Wesley that Holy Communion is a sacrament, and though we choose not to define our understanding along the lines of transubstantiation or consubstantiation (Methodist Articles of Religion, Art. XVIII), we do nonetheless believe in the Real Presence (that Jesus is present “after a spiritual manner,” Art. XVIII) and that this sacrament is both medicine and food.}}</ref><ref name="Collins2025">{{cite web |last1=Collins |first1=Kenneth J. |title=Worship and the Sacraments (Part 2)|url=https://www.biblicaltraining.org/learn/institute/th511-wesleyan-theology-ii/th511-17-worship-and-the-sacraments-part-2 |publisher=Biblical Training |access-date=4 April 2025 |language=en |date=2025 |quote=Wesley says that there is a spiritual presence of Jesus in the Lord’s Supper.}}</ref> According to the [[United Methodist Church]], "Jesus Christ, who 'is the reflection of God's glory and the exact imprint of God's very being',<ref>{{bibleverse||Hebrews|1:3}}</ref> is truly present in [[Holy Communion]]."<ref>{{Cite web |title=This Holy Mystery: Part Two |url=http://www.gbod.org/worship/thisholymystery/parttwo.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090707030906/http://www.gbod.org/worship/thisholymystery/parttwo.html |archive-date=July 7, 2009 |access-date=30 May 2013 |publisher=The United Methodist Church GBOD}}</ref>

While upholding the view that [[prima scriptura|scripture is the primary source of Church practice]], Methodists also [[Wesleyan Quadrilateral|look to church tradition]] and base their beliefs on the early Church teachings on the Eucharist, that Christ has a real presence in the Lord's Supper. The ''Catechism for the use of the people called Methodists'' thus states that, "[in Holy Communion] Jesus Christ is present with his worshipping people and gives himself to them as their Lord and Saviour".<ref name="Methcat">{{Cite book |title=A Catechism for the use of people called Methodists |date=2000 |publisher=Methodist Publishing House |isbn=978-1858521824 |location=Peterborough, England |page=26}}</ref>