Eucharistic theologies contrasted
| This article is in need of attention. |
| Please improve this article. |
Ecclesial communities contrasted in relation to Eucharistic theology:
- Orthodox Christianity
- primary theological development from early Church Fathers, esp. the Eastern Fathers
- Eucharistic theology:
- see Cappadocian Fathers, John Chrysostom
- Roman Catholic Church:
- primary theological development derived from Thomism, ca. 1270 A.D.
- Eucharistic theology: Transubstantiation
- "For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God ... the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus." St. Justin Martyr ([1])
- see Thomas Aquinas
- Lutheran
- ca. A.D. 1530
- Eucharistic theology: Real Presence
- "Lutherans believe that Christ's body and blood are truly present in the Lord's Supper, but they do not believe, with Catholics, that the bread and wine, are permanently 'changed into' Christ's body and blood [transubstantiation]." [2]
- see Martin Luther
- Calvinist
- ca. A.D. 1540
- Eucharistic theology: spiritual presence
- "Presbyterians say it is not about a physical presence — it is about a spiritual presence. Not all reality is physical. The Roman, Lutheran and Anabaptist viewpoints all get stuck on the notion that molecules of Jesus have to be there in order for him to be physically present — and so they argue for or against the presence of molecules of flesh and blood." [3]
- see John Calvin
- Anglican
- ca. A.D. 1540
- Eucharistic theology: 'after a heavenly and spiritual manner'
- "Of course, the range of possible meaning (including receptionism and virtualism) is all within a basic Reformed Catholic mindset and never includes the rejected medieval doctrines of the sacrifice of the Mass & transubstantiation." [4] "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." [5]
- Baptist
- ca. A.D. late 1500s
- Eucharistic theology: symbolism/memorialism
- "The bread and cup that symbolize the broken body and shed blood offered by Christ remind us today of God's great love for us..." [6]
- see Huldrych Zwingli
- Quaker
- ca. A.D. 1650
- Eucharistic theology: suspension
- "The bread and wine remind us of Jesus' body and blood." [7]
- see George Fox
- Methodist
- ca. A.D. 1736
- Eucharistic theology: 'after a heavenly and spiritual manner'
- "Sacraments ordained of Christ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they are certain signs of grace, and God's good will toward us, by which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm, our faith in him...The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death; insomuch that, to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ...The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith."- from the Methodist Articles of Religion
- see John Wesley, Open communion