ITT We Discuss Theology

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

For the bolded do you mean the idea of the Real Presence? And you have a incredibly wide range of views in the Anglican Communion, though the 39 Articles do reject transubstantiation. But not all members of the Communion still follow the 39 Articles of Religion.

Yes, that's what I mean. And yes, on this topic, the 39 Articles reflect more of a Reformed understanding.

I think that broadly speaking, one could say that approaches to the Eucharist/Communion/the Lord's Supper fall into two main categories -- a Real Presence category and a memorialist (or Zwinglian or "No Presence") category.

In the memorialist view, the bread and wine are viewed as symbols only and Jesus is considered to be present in a way no different from his presence "whenever two or three are gathered" in his name. In my experience, this is the view shared by most if not all Baptists as well as many other evangelical Protestants.

In the Real Presence view, the consecrated bread and wine are viewed as more than symbols and Christ is believed to be present in a unique way, with communicants truly feeding on his body and blood. Where the groups that hold to some kind of Real Presence belief will differ is in their understanding of exactly what happens to the bread and wine (or how they are more than symbols) and how Christ is uniquely present. Transubstantiation is the way the Roman Catholic Church defines and describes the Real Presence (and many Anglo-Catholics will hold this view as well), while the Lutheran and Presbyterian/Reformed traditions will affirm the Real Presence but not transubstantiation -- they understand the Real Presence differently. But as I said, I have known people who hold to the memorialist view for whom the distinctions between Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed understandings blur and all amount to pretty much the same thing.

The Wiki actually has a good summary-type article about it: Real Presence.