four major views of holy communion
In an earlier post someone asked about the different views of holy communion in the Church. Here is a brief explanation of four major views in the spectrum:
Transubstantiation is one of these major views. In this view, when the properly ordained priest consecrates the elements of bread and wine, it an actual transformation takes place, though unseen by human eye, and the bread and wine, in essence, becomes changed into the Lord’s flesh and blood respectively. It still looks and tastes like bread and wine, but essentially, it has changed, and the participant then literally take the physical body and blood of Christ into themselves. In addition the eucharist is a real sacrifice offered by Christ (in the same sense the crucifixion was) on behalf of the worshipers. It atones for venial sins but not for mortal sins. This is the view held by the Roman Catholics.
The Lutheran view has been termed as consubstantiation. Luther believed that the body and blood of Christ are somehow concurrently present “in, with, and under” the consecrated bread and wine. The bread and wine are not transformed into the body and blood of Christ, but the body and blood of Christ is somehow present in the bread and wine. Luther believed there were real benefits of forgiveness of sins and strengthening of faith that the participant experiences.
The third major view of holy communion is the Reformed view. They too reject the Catholic notion of a physical or bodily presence in the bread and wine. Their view is not far from the Lutheran view. They regard the presence of Christ in the bread and wine as spiritual and dynamic. Calvin uses the analogy of the sun to explain this. The sun remains in the heavens, but yet it’s light and warmth is present on earth. Similarly, the Lord Jesus is physically present at the right hand of God, but it is by the Holy Spirit on earth that Christ dwells in us by faith (Romans 8:9-11), and by the same Spirit participants are brought into communion with the living Christ, and into appropriation of the benefits of Christ’s death. They are spiritually nourished and vitalized because the Spirit mediates the benefits to them as they take the bread and wine.
On the opposite end of the spectrum from the Catholic view, there are those who hold that the holy communion is just a commemoration or remembrance of Christ’s death and its efficacy on our behalf. There is no special presence of Christ; as he is present everywhere and his presence in the elements is no greater than his presence among the worshipers. It’s benefits is similar to the benefits one gains from listening to a sermon: it blesses you if you receive the message by faith. So the participant who receives the bread and wine by faith receives its benefits. The holy communion is seen as another form of proclamation, though one that can be seen, touched and smelt and tasted. Those with an Anabaptist background hold to this view.
Where does your church stand with respect to these views?
(source: Christian Theology by Millard J. Erikson pgs 1109 -1127)
13 comments May 19th, 2008
