Obviously not bread and wine |
In this post I will summarise the four major views on this: (A) Roman Catholicism, (B) Lutheranism, (C) (C) Zwinglianism, and (D) Calvinism.
Pope Clement V |
At the Communion table (with the ordained priest's blessings), the bread and wine are converted to the actual literal Body and Blood of Christ. This process is called transubstantiation. Thus, Roman Catholics believe that Christ is physically present during the Lord's Supper, while the bread and wine retain their appearance and taste.
By partaking in the Lord's Supper, believers enter a union with Christ and are therefore part of the true church.
(B) Lutheranism
Luther's view is sometimes called consubstantiation (but he did not use that term). He felt that the presence of Christ does join the bread and wine of communion in a "glorified body". No priestly input is needed.
He rejected the term "transubstantiation" (as it came from Greek philosophy) and argued that Christian faith should be separate from reason (i.e. Aristotle's philosophy). He also argued that any attempt to deny Christ's physical presence is to overwrite His actual words "This is my body."
Institutes of Christian Religion by John Calvin |
(C) Zwinglianism
Zwingli's view is often called memorialism. Zwingli argued that Christ was present symbolically, rather than physically in the bread and wine. Therefore Christ's presence is already present by partaking in faith, so Christ did not need to be particularly present during the Holy Communion. The bread and wine symbolises spiritual assets.
(D) Calvinism
Calvin takes a position that Christ is present spiritually but not physically. Sometimes called virtualism or receptionism, The Body and Blood of Christ are thus sacraments or vehicles of grace to allow believers to participate in the body of Christ.
Conclusion
Regardless of your church's tradition, remember to take the Holy Communion seriously, and in remembrance of Christ's love and sacrifice for us.
For more information:
Simply Put
Inview
Two Pilgrims