View source for Transubstantiation

{{Short description|Catholic sacramental doctrine}}
{{Eucharist|expanded=Theology}}
[[File:Transubstantiation Eucharistic Adoration at St Thomas Aquinas Cathedral in Reno NV USA.jpg|thumb|The Eucharist, which the Catholic Church teaches to be the [[Real presence of Christ in the Eucharist|real presence]] of [[Christ]], exposed for [[Eucharistic Adoration|adoration]] at [[Saint Thomas Aquinas Cathedral]] in [[Reno, Nevada|Reno]], [[Nevada]]]]
'''Transubstantiation''' ({{Langx|la|transubstantiatio}}; {{langx|el|μετουσίωσις|translit=[[metousiosis]]}}) is, according to the teaching of the [[Catholic Church]], "the change of the whole substance of [[sacramental bread|bread]] into the substance of the [[Body of Christ]] and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of the [[Blood of Christ]]".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html |website=vatican.va}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=The Eucharist: What is the Eucharist? |url=https://www.usccb.org/eucharist |access-date=March 17, 2023 |website=www.usccb.org}}</ref> This change is brought about in the [[Eucharist|eucharistic prayer]] through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the [[Holy Spirit in Christianity|Holy Spirit]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Liturgy of the Eucharist: Eucharistic Prayer |url=https://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist |access-date=March 17, 2023 |website=www.usccb.org}}</ref> However, "the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the 'eucharistic species', remain unaltered".<ref name=":1" /> In this teaching, the notions of "substance" and "transubstantiation" are not linked with any particular theory of [[metaphysics]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=McNamara |first=Edward |title=Liturgy Q & A: On Transubstantiation |url=https://zenit.org/2016/04/19/liturgy-q-a-on-transubstantiation/ |access-date=March 17, 2023 |website=www.zenit.org|date=19 April 2016 }}</ref>

The Catholic Church teaches that, in the Eucharistic offering, bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Fay |first=William |date=2001 |title=The Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist: Basic Questions and Answers |url=http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/the-real-presence-of-jesus-christ-in-the-sacrament-of-the-eucharist-basic-questions-and-answers.cfm |access-date=13 December 2015 |website=United States Conference of Catholic Bishops |quote=the Catholic Church professes that, in the celebration of the Eucharist, bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Ghost and the instrumentality of the priest.}}</ref><ref>Wilfried Apfalter, "Science, Law, and Transubstantiation", ''Theology and Science'' 22:1 (2024) 172–183.</ref> The affirmation of this doctrine on the [[real presence of Christ in the Eucharist]] was expressed, using the word "transubstantiate", by the [[Fourth Council of the Lateran]] in 1215.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Internet History Sourcebooks Project |url=https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/lateran4.asp |website=sourcebooks.fordham.edu}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Lateran Council &#124; Roman Catholicism |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lateran-Council-Roman-Catholicism |website=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> It was later challenged by various 14th-century reformers, [[John Wycliffe]] in particular.<ref name="OEOR">{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Transubstantiation |encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195064933.001.0001/acref-9780195064933-e-1414 |access-date=2017-05-30 |date=2005 |editor-last=Hillebrand |editor-first=Hans J. |isbn=978-0-19-506493-3}}</ref> 

The manner in which the change occurs, the Catholic Church teaches, is a mystery: "The signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ."<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – The sacrament of the Eucharist, 1333. |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200204020023/https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm |archive-date=2020-02-04 |access-date=2020-01-05 |website=vatican.va}}</ref> In [[Lutheranism]], the terminology used regarding the real presence is the doctrine of the [[sacramental union]], in which the "very body and blood of Christ" is received.<ref name="MattoxRoeber2012">{{cite book |last1=Mattox |first1=Mickey L. |last2=Roeber |first2=A. G. |title=Changing Churches: An Orthodox, Catholic, and Lutheran Theological Conversation |date=27 February 2012 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing |isbn=978-0-8028-6694-3 |page=54 |language=en |quote=In this "sacramental union," Lutherans taught, the body and blood of Christ are so truly united to the bread and wine of the Holy Communion so that the two may be identified. They are at the same time body and blood, bread and wine. This divine food is given, more-over, not just for the strengthening of faith, nor only as a sign of our unity in faith, nor merely as an assurance of the forgiveness of sin. Even more, in this sacrament the Lutheran Christian receives the very body and blood of Christ for the strengthening of the union of faith. The "real presence" of Christ in the Holy Sacrament is the means by which the union of faith, effected by God's Word and the sacrament of baptism, is strengthened and maintained.}}</ref><ref name="Voigt1917">{{cite book |last1=Voigt |first1=A. G. |title=Biblical Dogmatics |date=1917 |publisher=Press of Lutheran Board of Publication |page=215 |language=en}}</ref> In the [[Greek Orthodox Church]], the doctrine has been discussed under the term of ''[[metousiosis]]'', coined as a direct loan-translation of ''transubstantiatio'' in the 17th century. In [[Eastern Orthodoxy]] in general, the [[Sacred mysteries#Eastern Orthodoxy|Sacred Mystery]] (Sacrament) of the Eucharist is more commonly discussed using alternative terms such as "trans-elementation" ({{Lang|el|μεταστοιχείωσις}}, {{translit|el|metastoicheiosis}}), "re-ordination" ({{Lang|el|μεταρρύθμισις}}, {{translit|el|metarrhythmisis}}), or simply "change" ({{Lang|el|μεταβολή}}, {{translit|el|metabole}}).{{citation needed|date=July 2025}}

In the [[Reformed Christianity|Reformed]] tradition, a [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology|real spiritual presence]] is taught; this view is held in [[Anglicanism]], especially by those of the Evangelical-Reformed tradition, though others including those of the High Church tradition hold to a corporeal presence.<ref name="González1987">{{cite book |last1=González |first1=Justo L. |title=A History of Christian Thought: From the Protestant Reformation to the twentieth century |date=1987 |publisher=Abingdon Press |isbn=978-0-687-17184-2 |language=en|quote=It is clear that, in rejecting Roman Catholic doctrine on this point, Cranmer has also rejected Luther's views and adopted Calvin's position. The sacrament is not merely a symbol of what takes place in the heart, but neither is it the physical eating of the body of Christ. This must be so, because the body of Christ is in heaven and therefore our participation in it can only be spiritual. Only the believers are the true partakers of the body and blood of Christ, for the unbelievers eat and drink no more than bread and wine—and condemnation upon themseves, for the profanation of the Lord's Table. These views are reflected in the Thirty-nine articles, of which the twenty-eighth says that "the Body of the Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavently and spiritual manner. The next article says of the wicked that "in no wise are they partakers of Christ," although "to their condemnation [they] do eat and rink the sign or Sacrament of so great a thing." This marked Calvinistic influence would prove very significant for the history of Christianity in England during the seventeenth century}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Bradshaw |first=Paul F. |title=The Eucharistic liturgies : their evolution and interpretation |date=2012 |others=Maxwell E. Johnson |isbn=978-0-8146-6266-3 |publisher = [[Liturgical Press]] |location=Collegeville, Minn. |oclc=957998003 |quote=The Catholic Mass expects God to work a transformation, a change of the elements of bread and wine into the very presence of Christ. The Anglican prayers do not demand this objective change in the elements: they ask merely that the bread and wine should now take on new significance for us, as symbols of His Body and Blood. In fact, the Anglican formulae will bear interpretation either way. This is a deliberate policy, and part of the genius of Anglicanism, its ability to accommodate contradictory doctrines under the same outward form of words.}}</ref>

==History==
===Patristic period===
The early [[Church Fathers]] used strongly [[Real presence of Christ in the Eucharist|realist language about the Eucharist]] while showing limited interest in defining the precise mode of Christ's presence, often leaving the manner of the change a mystery.<ref>Adair, J., & Svigel, M. J. (2020). ''Urban legends of church history: 40 common misconceptions''. B&H Publishing Group. Chapter 4. "Though the early church fathers had a very high view of the Lord's Supper (or "Eucharist") and it held a central place in corporate worship from the beginning, they did not teach "transubstantiation" per se. Jaroslav Pelikan notes that [[Pope Alexander III]] "was the first to speak of 'transubstantiation,' in a work prepared about 1140." However, earlier Fathers did often closely associate the real presence of Christ with the bread and wine of the Eucharist, but not with dogmatic insistance that the invisible substance ofthe elements miraculously transformed into the actual body and blood of the God-man. Earlier Fathers were content simply calling the bread and wine the "body and blood" of Christ and leaving its power and profundity a mystery." (p. 26).</ref> Specifically during the period c. 100–325 AD, the doctrine of the [[Eucharist|Lord's Supper]] "remained indefinite and obscure", with the ancient church prioritizing "worthy participation" over logical definition and making it unhistorical to impose later theories onto this era.<ref>[[Philip Schaff|Schaff, P.]] (1882). ''History of the Christian Church'' (Vol. 2: Ante-Nicene Christianity from 100 to 325). Charles Scribner's Sons. "The doctrine concerning the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, not coming into special discussion, remained indefinite and obscure. The ancient church made more account of the worthy participation of the ordinance than of the logical apprehension of it. She looked upon it as the holiest mystery of the Christian worship, and accordingly celebrated it with the deepest devotion, without inquiring into the mode of Christ’s presence, nor into the relation of the sensible signs to his flesh and blood. It is unhistorical to carry any of the later theories back into this age; although it has been done frequently in the apologetic and polemic discussion of this subject." (p. 151).</ref>

The doctrine of transubstantiation in the technical sense is regarded as a late development in [[Catholic theology]], with the term appearing from the twelfth century, receiving conciliar expression at the [[Fourth Council of the Lateran|Fourth Lateran Council]] (1215), and being given a full scholastic exposition in [[Thomas Aquinas]]'s ''[[Summa Theologica|Summa theologiae]]''.<ref>Van der Leer, T. (2023). ''Looking in the other direction: The story of the Believers Church Conferences''. Pickwick Publications. "[[Everett Ferguson]], in his broad overview from the early church to the medieval period, emphasizes that the doctrine of transubstantiation in the technical sense is "a latecomer" to Catholic theology. The first uses of transubstantiation occurred about 1140 and received official approval at the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and full theological justification and philosophical explanation in the Summatheologiae of Thomas Aquinas (and during this same period the words of consecration were fixed)." (p. 247).</ref> [[Gregg R. Allison]] likewise characterizes early church [[Eucharistic theology]] as understanding "the Lord's Supper in a variety of ways", thereby distinguishing later Catholic doctrine from diverse patristic approaches.<ref>Allison, G. R. (2011). The Lord's Supper. In ''Historical theology: An introduction to Christian doctrine'' (Chapter 29). Zondervan. "The Catholic Church celebrates the Eucharist according to a view called transubstantiation .... The observation of the Lord's Supper by evangelicals is as varied as the above diversity presents, though they all have rejected the Catholic view of transubstantiation .... The early church understood the Lord's Supper in a variety of ways"</ref>

Transubstantiation is a Eucharistic doctrine that explains the change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of the risen Christ in terms of a change of "substance" while the "accidents" (outward appearances) remain, medieval scholastic theology commonly articulated this using [[Aristotelian physics|Aristotelian]] metaphysics.<ref>[[Jaroslav Pelikan|Pelikan, J.]] (1971). The Christian tradition: A history of the development of doctrine: Vol. 1. The emergence of the Catholic tradition (100-600). University of Chicago Press. pp. 44-45.</ref><ref>Espín, O. O., & Nickoloff, J. B. (Eds.). (2007). ''An introductory dictionary of theology and religious studies''. Liturgical Press. p. 1399.</ref>

[[William Jurgens|William A. Jurgens]] reads [[Irenaeus]]' Eucharistic teaching as more indicative of an "[[impanation]] mentality" than of later transubstantiation and notes that Irenaeus does not attempt to explain how Christ is present in the elements.<ref>Jurgens, W. A. (Ed.). (1970). ''The faith of the early fathers: Vol. 1''. Liturgical Press.  p. 104.</ref> Bradley G. Green suggests that, in light of later Western developments, it is "appropriate to recognize a hope of transubstantiation in Irenaeus".<ref>Green, B. G. (Ed.). (2010). ''Shapers of Christian orthodoxy: Engaging with early and medieval theologians''. IVP Academic. "Such a position was popular in early-church sacramental theology through Augustine and into medieval Christianity, although we cannot be sure how influential the individual Irenaeus was to that process. In fact, one should beware of appropriating metaphorical language into literal reality among the fathers, but in the case of later eucharistic beliefs in the West, it seems appropriate to recognize a hope of transubstantiation in Irenaeus."</ref>

During the patristic period a "symbol" was commonly understood as a participating presence rather than a mere sign, so the Fathers could call the Eucharist both Christ's body and its "figure", "type", or "symbol" without contradiction. Later "realist" versus "symbolist" labels impose anachronistic categories on this [[Platonism|Platonist]] sacramental worldview.<ref>Salkeld, B., & Root, M. (2019). ''Transubstantiation: Theology, history, and Christian unity''. Baker Academic. "In the patristic age, 'symbol' did not carry the implication of less-than-fully-real that it carries today.""a symbol participates in that which it represents, so that it can almost be said to be that which it represents""the symbol is the presence of that which it represents and mediates participation in that reality""the unselfconscious oscillation between calling the Eucharist 'the body of Christ' and a 'figure,' 'type,' or 'symbol' of the body of Christ indicates that the Fathers saw no contradiction in these two types of statements""Symbol and reality were not, in the patristic period, competing doctrines of eucharistic"</ref>

==== Catholic readings of patristic quotes ====
The ''[[Didache]]'', an early Christian church order, says: "Let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for ... 'Give not that which is holy to the dogs'."<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Didache |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref> Kelly notes that the work calls the Eucharist a Christian "sacrifice" and describes the bread and wine as "holy" spiritual food and drink communicating immortal life.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |location=London |pages=196–198}}</ref> On this basis, Catholic theologians read the ''Didache'' as early evidence that the Eucharist was understood as more than a memorial and as part of the tradition later articulated in doctrines of Real Presence and transubstantiation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Papandrea |first=James L. |title=Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea |publisher=Paulist Press |year=2012 |location=New York |pages=36–40}}</ref><ref name="PohleRealPresence">{{cite web |last=Pohle |first=J. |title=The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist |website=The Catholic Encyclopedia |publisher=Robert Appleton Company |year=1909 |url=https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm}}</ref>

[[Ignatius of Antioch]], writing around the year 106, says: "I desire the bread of God, ... the bread of life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ ...; and I desire the drink of God, ... His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ignatius to the Romans |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-romans-roberts.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref> In his [[Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans|letter to the Smyrnaeans]] he warns that "heretics" "abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again."<ref name="suffer122">{{Cite web |title=Church Fathers: Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-smyrnaeans-roberts.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref> Kelly, Papandrea and Pohle argue that these texts present Eucharistic realism as a boundary of orthodoxy, a stance later Catholic teaching on transubstantiation develops conceptually rather than replaces.<ref>{{cite book |last=Papandrea |first=James L. |title=Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea |publisher=Paulist Press |year=2012 |pages=64–68}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=197–198}}</ref><ref name="PohleRealPresence" /><ref>{{cite book |last=Salkeld |first=Brett |title=Transubstantiation: Theology, History, and Christian Unity |publisher=Baker Academic |year=2019 |chapter=2}}</ref>

In about 150, [[Justin Martyr]], referring to the Eucharist, wrote: "Not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but ... we have been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Saint Justin Martyr: First Apology (Roberts-Donaldson) |url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html |access-date=2017-11-12 |website=earlychristianwritings.com}}</ref> Ferguson and Kelly note Justin's insistence that the consecrated food "is the flesh and blood" of the incarnate Jesus and "not common bread and common drink," seeing in this an early testimony to a real change of the bread and wine. Catholic authors regard scholastic transubstantiation as a later attempt to explicate, rather than replace, this inherited realism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ferguson |first=Everett |title=Early Christians Speak: Faith and Life in the First Three Centuries |publisher=ACU Press |year=1999 |edition=2nd |pages=107–109}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=197–201}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Salkeld |first=Brett |title=Transubstantiation: Theology, History, and Christian Unity |publisher=Baker Academic |year=2019 |location=Grand Rapids |chapter=2}}</ref>

[[Clement of Alexandria]] (c. 150 – c. 215), who uses the word "symbol" concerning the Eucharist, is quoted as an exception,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Willis |first=Wendell |title=Eucharist and Ecclesiology: Essays in Honor of Dr. Everett Ferguson |publisher=Wipf and Stock |year=2017 |pages=48–49}}</ref> although this interpretation is disputed on the basis of [[Alexandrian school|Alexandrian]] overlaps of symbology and literalism. Kelly and Ferguson note that Clement calls wine a "mystical symbol" of Christ's blood and reads [[John 6]] "through symbols" and "allegories," yet can also speak of the Eucharistic wine as a mingling of the Logos with material substance that sanctifies body and soul; Catholic theologians therefore treat his "symbol" language as an instance of participatory symbolic realism rather than a denial of real presence, and as compatible with later transubstantiation understood as a metaphysical clarification of this participatory symbolism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=212–214}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Salkeld |first=Brett |title=Transubstantiation: Theology, History, and Christian Unity |publisher=Baker Academic |year=2019 |chapter=2}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Ferguson |first=Everett |title=Eucharist and Ecclesiology |publisher=Wipf and Stock |year=2017 |editor=Wendell Willis |pages=48–50}}</ref>

Around 200, [[Tertullian]] wrote: "A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. ... If, however, (as Marcion might say) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Church Fathers: Against Marcion, Book IV (Tertullian) |url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm |website=newadvent.org}}</ref> Kelly and Papandrea stress that, in ancient symbolic realism, "figure" and "symbol" can "make present" what they signify; Catholic interpreters therefore read Tertullian's language as compatible with a real, sacramental presence and as an early attempt to reconcile the confession that the elements are Christ's body and blood with the empirical fact that they still appear as bread and wine.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=209–212}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Papandrea |first=James L. |title=Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea |publisher=Paulist Press |year=2012 |pages=212–213}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Salkeld |first=Brett |title=Transubstantiation: Theology, History, and Christian Unity |publisher=Baker Academic |year=2019 |chapter=2}}</ref>[[File:Eucharistic bread.jpg|thumb|right|A 3rd-century fresco in the [[Catacomb of Callixtus]], which [[Joseph Wilpert]] interprets as depicting Christ’s multiplication of the loaves and fishes on the left (a symbol of Eucharistic consecration) and, on the right, the deceased attaining eternal happiness through participation in the Eucharist.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catholic Encyclopedia: Early Symbols of the Eucharist |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05590a.htm |access-date=2017-05-31}}</ref>]]

The ''[[Apostolic Constitutions]]'' (compiled {{circa|380}}) says: "Let the bishop give the oblation, saying, The body of Christ; and let him that receiveth say, Amen. And let the deacon take the cup; and when he gives it, say, The blood of Christ, the cup of life; and let him that drinketh say, Amen."<ref>{{Cite web |title=ANF07. Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries: Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily – Christian Classics Ethereal Library |url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.ix.ix.ii.html |website=ccel.org}}</ref> Kelly situates this formula within a fourth-century Eastern tradition that speaks of the elements as having undergone a "change" (''metabolē'') or "transelementation" (''metastoicheiōsis'') into Christ's body and blood.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=440–444}}</ref> Catholic theologians take such liturgical language as evidence that, by this period, a real conversion of the bread and wine was presupposed, even though the philosophical term "transubstantiation" would only appear centuries later.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Appiah-Kubi |first=Francis |year=2021 |title=Theology of the Holy Eucharist and the Doctrine of Transubstantiation |journal=E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies |volume=7 |issue=6 |pages=81–84}}</ref>

On [[Ambrose|Ambrose of Milan]], a fourth-century Latin father, Willis remarks that he "expressed a literal change in the elements when the words of consecration were spoken", citing Ambrose's statement: "This bread is bread before the words of the sacraments. When consecration has been added, from bread it becomes the body of Christ ...".<ref>{{cite book |last=Willis |first=Wendell |title=Eucharist and Ecclesiology: Essays in Honor of Dr. Everett Ferguson |publisher=Wipf and Stock |year=2017 |pages=48–49}}</ref> Kelly and Papandrea describe Ambrose as the classic Western exponent of a doctrine of "conversion" of the elements: he can say that the bread and wine are "figures" and that the bread "signifies" Christ's body, yet insists that the consecratory word "changes the species of the elements" (''species mutet elementorum'') into what they previously were not, a pattern McCormick and other Catholic scholars read as a patristic antecedent to later teaching on transubstantiation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=447–448}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Papandrea |first=James L. |title=Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea |publisher=Paulist Press |year=2012 |pages=459–460}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=McCormick |first=Marcus |year=2015 |title=Platonism and the Eucharist: Transubstantiation in the Second to Fourth Century |journal=Tenor of Our Times |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=91–92}}</ref>

[[Cyril of Jerusalem]] explicitly urges communicants to trust Christ's words that the elements have been "changed" despite their appearances, while [[Gregory of Nyssa]] and [[John Chrysostom|Chrysostom]] speak of the bread and wine being "transelemented" and "refashioned", Catholic theology sees in this shared vocabulary an early language of real conversion which later conciliar teaching expresses with the technical term "transubstantiation".<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=
rev. |pages=443–444}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Salkeld |first=Brett |title=Transubstantiation: Theology, History, and Christian Unity |publisher=Baker Academic |year=2019 |chapter=2}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Appiah-Kubi |first=Francis |year=2021 |title=Theology of the Holy Eucharist and the Doctrine of Transubstantiation |journal=E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies |volume=7 |issue=6 |pages=81–83}}</ref>

[[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]] declared that the bread consecrated in the Eucharist actually "becomes" the Body of Christ: "The faithful know what I'm talking about; they know Christ in the breaking of bread. It isn't every loaf of bread, you see, but the one receiving Christ's blessing, that becomes the body of Christ."<ref>Augustine. (1993). ''Sermons (230–272B) on the liturgical seasons'' (E. Hill, Trans.; J. E. Rotelle, Ed.). New City Press.</ref> Kelly and Ferguson judge that, despite Augustine's frequent use of sign and symbol language, he "accepted the current realism," distinguishing between the visible sacramental sign and the ''res'' or invisible gift; Catholic interpreters therefore see his position as compatible with, and often presupposed by, later doctrinal formulations of a real but sacramental presence expressed by the term transubstantiation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kelly |first=J. N. D. |title=Early Christian Doctrines |publisher=A & C Black |year=1977 |edition=rev. |pages=447–448}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Ferguson |first=Everett |title=Eucharist and Ecclesiology |publisher=Wipf and Stock |year=2017 |editor=Wendell Willis |pages=48–50}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Ratzinger |first=Joseph |title=The Spirit of the Liturgy |publisher=Ignatius Press |year=2000 |pages=86–89}}</ref>

===Middle Ages===
[[File:Codex Bruchsal 1 28r.jpg|thumb|upright|The [[Last Supper]] (upper image) and preparatory washing of feet (lower image) in a 1220 manuscript in the [[Baden State Library]], [[Karlsruhe]], Germany]]

[[Paschasius Radbertus]] (785–865) was a Carolingian theologian, and the abbot of [[Corbie Abbey|Corbie]], whose most well-known and influential work is an exposition on the nature of the Eucharist written around 831, entitled ''De Corpore et Sanguine Domini''. In it, Paschasius agrees with [[Ambrose]] in affirming that the Eucharist contains the true, historical body of Jesus Christ. According to Paschasius, God is truth itself, and therefore, his words and actions must be true. Christ's proclamation at the [[Last Supper]] that the bread and wine were his body and blood must be taken literally, since God is truth.<ref>Chazelle, p. 9</ref>{{Full citation needed|date=March 2024}} He thus believes that the change of the substances of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ offered in the Eucharist really occurs. Only if the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ can a Christian know it is salvific.<ref>Chazelle, p. 10</ref>{{Full citation needed|date=March 2024}}

In the 11th century, [[Berengar of Tours]] stirred up opposition when he denied that any material change in the elements was needed to explain the fact of the Real Presence. His position was never diametrically opposed to that of his critics, and he was probably never excommunicated, but the controversies that he aroused (see [[Stercoranism]]) forced people to clarify the doctrine of the Eucharist.<ref>Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005 {{ISBN|978-0-19-280290-3}}), article ''Berengar of Tours''</ref>

The earliest known use of the term ''transubstantiation'' to describe the change from bread and wine to body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist was by [[Hildebert de Lavardin]], Archbishop of Tours, in the 11th century.<ref>[[John Hedley (bishop)|John Cuthbert Hedley]], ''Holy Eucharist'' (1907), p. 37.
[https://archive.org/details/miltonreligiousc0000king/page/134 <!-- quote=transubstantiation Hildebert. --> John N. King, ''Milton and Religious Controversy'' (Cambridge University Press 2000] {{ISBN|978-0-52177198-6}}), p. 134</ref> By the end of the 12th century the term was in widespread use.<ref name=ODCC/>

The [[Fourth Council of the Lateran]] in 1215 spoke of the bread and wine as "transubstantiated" into the body and blood of Christ: "His body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread and wine having been transubstantiated, by God's power, into his body and blood".<ref>{{Catholic|prescript=|wstitle=Fourth Lateran Council (1215)}}.
[http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum12-2.htm#Confession of Faith ''Fourth Lateran Council: 1215''], 1. Confession of Faith, retrieved 2010-03-13.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/lateran4.asp|title=Internet History Sourcebooks Project|website=sourcebooks.fordham.edu}}</ref> Catholic scholars and clergy have noted numerous reports of [[Eucharistic miracle]]s contemporary with the council, and at least one such report was discussed at the council.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Councils of Faith: Lateran IV (1215)| year = 2013| url=https://www.english.op.org/godzdogz/councils-of-faith-lateran-iv-1215/ | last=Javis|first=Matthew|website = Dominican Friars}}</ref><ref>Ryan, S. and Shanahan, A. (2018) How to communicate Lateran IV in 13th century Ireland: lessons from the Liber Examplorum (c. 1275). Religions 9(3): 75; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel9030075</ref> It was not until later in the 13th century that [[Aristotelian metaphysics]] was accepted and a philosophical elaboration in line with that metaphysics was developed, which found classic formulation in the teaching of [[Thomas Aquinas]]<ref name="ODCC">Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005 {{ISBN|978-0-19-280290-3}}), article ''Transubstantiation''</ref> and in the theories of later Catholic theologians in the medieval period ([[Robert Grosseteste]],<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Leonard E.|last1=Boyle|author-link=Leonard Boyle|url=https://academic.oup.com/jts/article-abstract/XXX/2/512/1649099?redirectedFrom=fulltext|title=Robert Grosseteste and the Transubstantiation|journal=[[The Journal of Theological Studies]]|volume=XXX|issue=2|date=October 1, 1979|page=512|doi=10.1093/jts/XXX.2.512|publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|url-access=subscription}}</ref> [[Giles of Rome]], [[Duns Scotus]] and [[William of Ockham]]).<ref>{{Cite book |last=Adams |first=Marylin |title=Some later medieval theories of the Eucharist: Thomas Aquinas, Gilles of Rome, Duns Scotus, and William Ockham |date=2012 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780199658169}}</ref><ref>Stephen E. Lahey, "[http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1126&context=classicsfacpubReview of Adams, ''Some later medieval theories ...'']" in ''The Journal of Ecclesiastical History'', vol. 63, issue 1 (January 2012)]</ref>

===Reformation===
During the [[Protestant Reformation]], the doctrine of transubstantiation was heavily criticised as an Aristotelian "[[pseudophilosophy]]"<ref>Luther, M. ''The Babylonian Captivity of the Christian Church''. 1520. Quoted in, McGrath, A. 1998. ''Historical Theology, An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought''. Blackwell Publishers: Oxford. p. 198.</ref> imported into Christian teaching and jettisoned in favor of [[Martin Luther]]'s doctrine of [[sacramental union]], or in favor, per [[Huldrych Zwingli]], of the Eucharist as memorial.<ref>McGrath, op.cit. pp. 198–99</ref>

[[File:De-captivitate-Babylonica.jpg|thumb|upright|Title page of [[Martin Luther]]'s ''[[On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church|De Captivitate Babylonica Ecclesiae]]'']]
In the Reformation, the doctrine of transubstantiation became a matter of much controversy. Martin Luther held that "It is not the doctrine of transubstantiation which is to be believed, but simply that Christ really is present at the Eucharist".<ref>McGrath, op.cit., p. 197.</ref> In his ''[[On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church]]'' (published on 6 October 1520) Luther wrote:

{{Quote|Therefore, it is an absurd and unheard-of juggling with words, to understand "bread" to mean "the form, or accidents of bread", and "wine" to mean "the form, or accidents of wine". Why do they not also understand all other things to mean their forms, or accidents? Even if this might be done with all other things, it would yet not be right thus to emasculate the words of God and arbitrarily to empty them of their meaning.

Moreover, the Church had the true faith for more than twelve hundred years, during which time the holy Fathers never once mentioned this transubstantiation – certainly, a monstrous word for a monstrous idea – until the pseudo-philosophy of Aristotle became rampant in the Church these last three hundred years. During these centuries many other things have been wrongly defined, for example, that the Divine essence neither is begotten nor begets, that the soul is the substantial form of the human body, and the like assertions, which are made without reason or sense, as the [[Pierre d'Ailly|Cardinal of Cambray]] himself admits.<ref>{{Cite web |title=A Prelude by Martin Luther on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, 2:26 & 2:27 |url=http://www.ctsfw.edu/etext/luther/babylonian/babylonian.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090618075035/http://www.ctsfw.edu/etext/luther/babylonian/babylonian.htm |archive-date=2009-06-18}}</ref>|author=|title=|source=}}

In his 1528 ''[[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]'', he wrote:
{{Quote|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body", even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union", because Christ's body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref>''Weimar Ausgabe'' 26, 442; ''Luther's Works'' 37, 299–300.</ref>}}

What Luther thus called a "sacramental union" is often erroneously called "[[consubstantiation]]" by non-Lutherans. In ''On the Babylonian Captivity'', Luther upheld belief in the Real Presence of Jesus and, in his 1523 treatise ''[[The Adoration of the Sacrament]]'', defended adoration of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist.

In England, the [[Six Articles (1539)|Six Articles of 1539]] prescribed the death penalty for any who denied transubstantiation. This was changed under [[Elizabeth I|Elizabeth&nbsp;I]]. In the [[Thirty-nine Articles]] of 1563, the [[Church of England]] declared: "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".<ref>[[Thirty-Nine Articles]], article 28</ref> Laws were enacted against participation in Catholic worship, which [[recusancy|remained illegal]] until 1791.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Penal Laws &#124; British and Irish history |url=https://www.britannica.com/event/Penal-Laws |website=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=September 13, 2010 |title=Factbox: Catholicism in Britain |newspaper=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-britain-catholics-idUSTRE68C1R420100913 |via=reuters.com}}</ref>

For a century and half – 1672 to 1828 – transubstantiation had an important role, in a negative way, in British political and social life. Under the [[Test Act]], the holding of any public office was made conditional upon explicitly denying Transubstantiation. Any aspirant to public office had to repeat the formula set out by the law: "I, ''N'', do declare that I do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or in the elements of the [[Sacrament|bread and wine]], at or after the [[consecration]] thereof by any person whatsoever."

====Council of Trent====
In 1551, the [[Council of Trent]] declared that the doctrine of transubstantiation is a [[dogma#Catholicism and Eastern Christianity|dogma]] of faith<ref>{{cite web| url = https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html| title = The Council of Trent, Thirteenth Session, canon 1: "If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema."}}</ref> and stated that "by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."<ref name=CT13/> In its 13th session ending 11 October 1551, the Council defined transubstantiation as "that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood – the [[species (Christianity)|species]] only of the bread and wine remaining – which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation".<ref name="CT13">{{Cite web |editor1-first=J. |editor1-last=Waterworth |others=Scanned by Hanover College students in 1995 |title=The Council of Trent – The Thirteenth Session |url=https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html |publisher=Dolman |location=London |edition=1848}}</ref> This council officially approved use of the term "transubstantiation" to express the Catholic Church's teaching on the subject of the conversion of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, with the aim of safeguarding Christ's presence as a literal truth, while emphasizing the fact that there is no change in the empirical appearances of the bread and wine.<ref name="britannica">{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Transubstantiation |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |date=21 September 2023 |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/603196/transubstantiation}}</ref> It did not however impose the Aristotelian theory of substance and accidents: it spoke only of the species (the appearances), not the philosophical term "accidents", and the word "substance" was in ecclesiastical use for many centuries before Aristotelian philosophy was adopted in the West,<ref name="Sophia">{{Cite journal |last=Davis |first=Charles |date=April 1, 1964 |title=The theology of transubstantiation |journal=Sophia |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=12–24 |doi=10.1007/BF02785911 |s2cid=170618935}}</ref> as shown for instance by its use in the [[Nicene Creed]] which speaks of Christ having the same "{{Lang|el|οὐσία}}" (Greek) or "{{Lang|la|substantia}}" (Latin) as the [[God the Father|Father]].

=== Since the Second Vatican Council ===
{{Annotated image
| image = Cathedral Fribourg vitrail Eucharistie 01.jpg
| image-width = 1000
| image-left = -80
| image-top = -660
| width = 220
| height = 250
| caption =Monstrance with transparent host (detail from the Eucharist window by J. Mehoffer in the Cathedral of St Nicholas in [[Fribourg]], Switzerland)
}}
The ''[[Catechism of the Catholic Church]]'' states the Church's teaching on transubstantiation twice.

It repeats what it calls the Council of Trent's summary of the Catholic faith on "the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood [by which] Christ becomes present in this sacrament", faith "in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion": "[B]y the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM |website=vatican.va}}</ref>

As part of its own summary ("In brief") of the ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' on the sacrament of the Eucharist, it states: "By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is brought about. Under the consecrated species of bread and wine Christ himself, living and glorious, is present in a true, real, and substantial manner: his Body and his Blood, with his soul and his divinity (cf. Council of Trent: DS 1640; 1651)."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P44.HTM|title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText|website=www.vatican.va}}</ref>

The Church's teaching is given in the ''[[Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church]]'' in question and answer form:
{{Quote|283. What is the meaning of ''transubstantiation''?
''Transubstantiation'' means the change of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the Body of Christ and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Blood. This change is brought about in the eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the "eucharistic species", remain unaltered.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html#The+Seven+Sacraments+of+the+Church |website=vatican.va}}</ref>}}

The Anglican–Roman Catholic Joint Preparatory Commission stated in 1971 in their common declaration on Eucharistic doctrine: "The word transubstantiation is commonly used in the Roman Catholic Church to indicate that God acting in the eucharist effects a change in the inner reality of the elements."<ref name="ARCIC">{{Cite web |year=1971 |url=https://www.anglicancommunion.org/media/105215/ARCIC_I_Agreed_Statement_on_Eucharistic_Doctrine.pdf |publisher=Anglican – Roman Catholic Joint Preparatory Commission |title=Agreed Statement on Eucharistic Doctrine 1971}}</ref>

==== Opinions of some individuals (not necessarily typical) ====
In 2017 Irish Augustinian Gabriel Daly said that the Council of Trent approved use of the term "transubstantiation" as suitable and proper, but did not make it obligatory, and he suggested that its continued use is partly to blame for lack of progress towards sharing of the Eucharist between [[Protestantism|Protestants]] and Catholics.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catholics should 'stop talking' of transubstantiation |url=https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/7581/catholics-should-stop-talking-of-transubstantiation |access-date=2019-12-31 |website=The Tablet |language=en |archive-date=2019-12-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191231221606/https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/7581/catholics-should-stop-talking-of-transubstantiation |url-status=dead }}</ref>

[[Traditionalist Catholicism|Traditionalist Catholic]] Paolo Pasqualucci said that the absence of the term in the [[Second Vatican Council]]'s constitution on the liturgy ''[[Sacrosanctum Concilium]]'' means that it presents the [[Catholic Mass]] "in the manner of the Protestants". To this [[Dave Armstrong (Catholic apologist)|Dave Armstrong]] replied that "the {{em|word}} may not be present; but the {{em|concept}} is".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2019-07-22 |title=Vs. Pasqualucci Re Vatican II #11: SC & Sacrifice of the Mass |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2019/07/vs-pasqualucci-re-vatican-ii-11-sc-sacrifice-of-the-mass.html |access-date=2019-12-31 |website=Biblical Evidence for Catholicism |language=en}}</ref> For instance, the document ''[[Gaudium et spes]]'' refers to the "sacrament of faith where natural elements refined by man are gloriously changed into His Body and Blood, providing a meal of brotherly solidarity and a foretaste of the heavenly banquet" (Chapter 3).<ref>{{Cite web |title=Vatican II and the Eucharist |url=http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/vat/a4.html |access-date=2020-01-03 |website=therealpresence.org}}</ref>

[[Thomas J. Reese]] commented that "using Aristotelian concepts to explain Catholic mysteries in the 21st century is a fool's errand", while Timothy O'Malley remarked that "it is possible to teach the doctrine of transubstantiation without using the words 'substance' and 'accidents'. If the word 'substance' scares people off, you can say, 'what it really is', and that is what substance is. What it really is, what it absolutely is at its heart is Christ's body and blood".<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Real Presence: What do Catholics believe and how can the Church respond? {{!}} Southern Cross Online Edition |url=https://www.archbalt.org/the-real-presence-what-do-catholics-believe-and-how-church-can-respond/ |access-date=2020-01-02 |website=southerncross.diosav.org|date=25 August 2019 }}</ref>

==== General belief and doctrine knowledge among Catholics ====
A [[Georgetown University]] CARA poll of United States Catholics<ref>{{cite web| url = https://cara.georgetown.edu/CARAServices/CCPMethods.html| title = CARA Catholic Poll Methods| access-date = 2020-04-13| archive-date = 2022-08-17| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220817055738/https://cara.georgetown.edu/CARAServices/CCPMethods.html| url-status = dead}}</ref> in 2008 showed that 57% said they believed that Jesus Christ is really present in the Eucharist in 2008 and nearly 43% said that they believed the wine and bread are symbols of Jesus. Of those attending Mass weekly or more often, 91% believed in the Real Presence, as did 65% of those who merely attended at least once a month, and 40% of those who attended at most a few times a year.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://cara.georgetown.edu/masseucharist.pdf| title = CARA Catholic Poll: "Sacraments Today: Belief and Practice among U.S. Catholics", p. 54}}{{Dead link|date=May 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

Among Catholics attending Mass at least once a month, the percentage of belief in the Real Presence was 86% for pre–Vatican II Catholics, 74% for Vatican II Catholics, 75% for post-Vatican II Catholics, and 85% for Millennials.<ref>[https://cara.georgetown.edu/masseucharist.pdf CARA Catholic Poll: "Sacraments Today: Belief and Practice among U.S. Catholics", p. 55]{{Dead link|date=May 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}: "Among Catholics attending Mass at least once a month, Millennial Generation Catholics are just as likely as Pre-Vatican II Catholics to agree that Jesus is really present in the Eucharist (85 percent compared to 86 percent). Vatican II and Post-Vatican II Generation Catholics are about 10 percentage points less likely to believe that Christ is really present in the Eucharist (74 and 75 percent, respectively)." Indicated also in the diagram on the same page.</ref>

A 2019 Pew Research Report found that 69% of United States Catholics believed that in the Eucharist the bread and wine "are {{em|symbols}} of the body and blood of Jesus Christ", and only 31% believed that, "during Catholic Mass, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus". Of the latter group, most (28% of all US Catholics) said they knew that this is what the Church teaches, while the remaining 3% said they did not know it. Of the 69% who said the bread and wine are {{em|symbols}}, almost two-thirds (43% of all Catholics) said that what they believed is the Church's teaching, 22% said that they believed it in spite of knowing that the Church teaches that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ. Among United States Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week, the most observant group, 63% accepted that the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ; the other 37% saw the bread and wine as {{em|symbols}}, most of them (23%) not knowing that the Church, so the survey stated, teaches that the elements actually become the body and blood of Christ, while the remaining 14% rejected what was given as the Church's teaching.<ref name="Pew Report">{{Cite web |date=August 5, 2019 |title=Just one-third of U.S. Catholics agree with their church that Eucharist is body, blood of Christ. |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/05/transubstantiation-eucharist-u-s-catholics/ |access-date=2020-01-01 |website=Pew Research Center |language=en-US}}</ref> The Pew Report presented "the understanding that the bread and wine used in Communion are {{em|symbols}} of the body and blood of Jesus Christ" as contradicting belief that, "during Catholic Mass, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus".<ref name="Pew Report" /> The Catholic Church itself speaks of the bread and wine used in Communion {{em|both}} as "signs" {{em|and}} as "becoming" Christ's body and blood: "[...] the signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText |url=http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3Z.HTM |access-date=2020-09-18 |website=vatican.va}}</ref>

In a comment on the Pew Research Report, Greg Erlandson drew attention to the difference between the formulation in the CARA survey, in which the choice was between "Jesus Christ is really present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist" and "the bread and wine are symbols of Jesus, but Jesus is not really present", and the Pew Research choice between "during Catholic Mass, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus" and "the bread wine are {{em|symbols}} of the body and blood of Jesus Christ". He quotes an observation by Mark Gray that the word "actually" makes it sound like "something that could be analyzed under a microscope or empirically observed", while what the Church teaches is that the "substance" of the bread and wine are changed at consecration, but the "accidents" or appearances of bread and wine remain. Erlandson commented further: "Catholics may not be able to articulately define the 'Real Presence', and the {{Sic|phrase}} 'transubstantiation' may be obscure to them, but in their reverence and demeanor, they demonstrate their belief that this is not just a symbol".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Do we really believe in the Real Presence? |url=https://www.thebostonpilot.com/Opinion/article.asp?ID=185694 |access-date=2020-01-01 |website=The Boston Pilot}}</ref>

==Theology==
{{Further|Eucharistic theology|Real presence of Christ in the Eucharist}}
{{Further|Substance theory}}

===Catholic Church===
[[File:Disputa del Sacramento (Rafael).jpg|thumb|The ''[[Disputation of the Holy Sacrament]]'' in the [[Vatican City|Vatican]] (by [[Raphael]] 1509–1510) depicts theologians debating Transubstantiation, including four [[Doctors of the Church]], with [[Pope Gregory I|Pope Gregory&nbsp;I]] and [[Jerome]] seated to the left of the altar and [[Augustine]] and [[Ambrose]] to the right, [[Pope Julius II]], [[Pope Sixtus IV]], [[Savonarola]] and the poet [[Dante Alighieri]].<ref>Adams, ''Italian Renaissance Art'', pp. 345f.</ref>]]
While the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation in relation to the Eucharist can be viewed in terms of the Aristotelian distinction between [[substance theory|substance and accident]], Catholic theologians generally hold that, "in referring to the Eucharist, the Church does not use the terms substance and accident in their philosophical contexts but in the common and ordinary sense in which they were first used many centuries ago. The dogma of transubstantiation does not embrace any philosophical theory in particular."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur571.htm|first1=Edward |last1=McNamara |title=On Transubstantiation |agency=[[ZENIT]] |via=[[EWTN]] |date=19 April 2016 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20190319234146/http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur571.htm |archivedate=19 March 2019 |url-status=dead}}</ref> This ambiguity was recognized also by then-[[Lutheranism|Lutheran]] theologian [[Jaroslav Pelikan]],{{efn|Pelikan later converted to [[Eastern Orthodoxy]].}} who, while himself interpreting the terms as Aristotelian, states that "the application of the term 'substance' to the discussion of the Eucharistic presence antedates the rediscovery of Aristotle. [...] Even 'transubstantiation' was used during the twelfth century in a nontechnical sense. Such evidence lends credence to the argument that the doctrine of transubstantiation, as codified by the decrees of the [[Fourth Lateran Council|Fourth Lateran]] and [[Tridentine Council|Tridentine councils]], did not canonize Aristotelian philosophy as indispensable to Christian doctrine. But whether it did so or not in principle, it has certainly done so in effect".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Pelikan |first=Jaroslav |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9fbZOR6USiwC&q=Pelikan+Aristotelian&pg=PA44 |title=The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, Volume 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100–600) |date=1971 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0226653716 |via=Google Books}}</ref>

The view that the distinction is independent of any philosophical theory has been expressed as follows: "The distinction between substance and accidents is real, not just imaginary. In the case of the person, the distinction between the person and his or her accidental features is after all real. Therefore, even though the notion of substance and accidents originated from [[Aristotelian philosophy]], the distinction between substance and accidents is also independent of philosophical and scientific development."<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=Q-2CRzlijgwC&pg=PA92 Paul Haffner, ''The Sacramental Mystery'' (Gracewing Publishing 1999] {{ISBN|978-0852444764}}), p. 92</ref> "Substance" here means what something is in itself: take some concrete object – e.g. your own hat. The shape is not the object itself, nor is its color, size, softness to the touch, nor anything else about it perceptible to the senses. The object itself (the "substance") ''has'' the shape, the color, the size, the softness and the other appearances, but is distinct from them. While the appearances are perceptible to the senses, the substance is not.<ref>{{Cite web |year=1934 |title=Catholic Evidence Training Outlines |via =Google Books |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4cU9AAAAIAAJ&q=hat}}</ref>

The philosophical term "accidents" does not appear in the teaching of the Council of Trent on transubstantiation, which is repeated in the ''[[Catechism of the Catholic Church]]''.<ref>There were two editions of the ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' in the 1990s. The first was issued in French in 1992, the second in Latin in 1997. Each was soon translated into English.</ref> For what the Council distinguishes from the "substance" of the bread and wine it uses the term ''species'':

{{Quote|The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – The sacrament of the Eucharist |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm |website=vatican.va}}</ref>}}

The ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' cites the Council of Trent also in regard to the mode of the [[real presence of Christ in the Eucharist]]:

{{Quote|In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained." (Council of Trent (1551): DS 1651)  "This presence is called 'real' – by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be 'real' too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present." (Paul VI, MF 39).<ref name="P41">{{Cite book |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church |publisher=Libreria Editrice Vaticana |chapter=V. The Sacramental Sacrifice Thanksgiving, Memorial, Presence |chapter-url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM}}</ref>{{rp|1374}}|sign=|source=}}

The Catholic Church holds that the same change of the substance of the bread and of the wine at the Last Supper continues to occur at the consecration of the Eucharist<ref name="P41" />{{rp|1377}}<ref>{{Cite web |last=Dulles |first=Avery |title=Christ's Presence in the Eucharist: True, Real and Substantial |date=15 April 2005 |url=https://adoremus.org/2005/04/15/Christs-Presence-in-the-Eucharist/ |access-date=31 May 2017 |archive-date=9 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170709041218/https://adoremus.org/2005/04/15/Christs-Presence-in-the-Eucharist/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> when the [[Words of Institution|words]] are spoken ''[[in persona Christi]]'' "This is my body ... this is my blood." In Orthodox confessions, the change is said to start during the [[Words of Institution|Dominical or Lord's Words or Institution Narrative]] and be completed during the [[Epiklesis]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Kappes |first=Christiaan |title=The Epiclesis Debate: Mark of Ephesus and John Torquemada, OP, at the Council of Florence 1439 |journal=University of Notre Dame Press |year=2017 |url=https://www.academia.edu/7686304}}</ref>{{page needed|date=February 2022}}

Teaching that Christ is risen from the dead and is alive, the Catholic Church holds, in addition to the doctrine of transubstantiation, that when the bread is changed into his body, not only his body is present, but Christ as a whole is present ("the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity"). The same holds when the wine is transubstantiated into the blood of Christ.<ref name="P41" /> This is known as the doctrine of [[concomitance (doctrine)|concomitance]].

In accordance with the dogmatic teaching that Christ is really, truly and substantially present under the appearances of bread and wine, and continues to be present as long as those appearances remain, the Catholic Church preserves the consecrated elements, generally in a [[church tabernacle]], for administering Holy Communion to the sick and dying.

In the arguments which characterised the relationship between Catholicism and Protestantism in the 16th century, the [[Council of Trent]] declared subject to the ecclesiastical penalty of [[Anathema#Roman Catholic Church|anathema]] anyone who

{{Quote|denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue [... and anyone who] saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood – the species only of the bread and wine remaining – which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation, let him be anathema.|Council of Trent, quoted in J. Waterworth (ed.), ''The Council of Trent: The Thirteenth Session''<ref name=CT13/>}}

The Catholic Church asserts that the consecrated bread and wine are not merely "symbols" of the body and blood of Christ: they ''are'' the body and blood of Christ.<ref name="USCCB">{{Cite web |title=The Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist: Basic Questions and Answers |url=http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/the-real-presence-of-jesus-christ-in-the-sacrament-of-the-eucharist-basic-questions-and-answers.cfm |website=usccb.org}}</ref> It also declares that, although the bread and wine completely cease to be bread and wine (having become the body and blood of Christ), the appearances (the "species" or look) remain unchanged, and the properties of the appearances also remain (one can be drunk with the appearance of wine despite it only being an appearance). They are still the appearances of bread and wine, not of Christ, and do not inhere in the substance of Christ. They can be felt and tasted as before, and are subject to change and can be destroyed. If the appearance of bread is lost by turning to dust or the appearance of wine is lost by turning to vinegar, Christ is no longer present.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Tour of the Summa {{!}} Precis of the Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas {{!}} Msgr P Glenn |url=http://www.catholictheology.info/summa-theologica/summa-part3.php?q=518 |access-date=2019-09-25 |website=catholictheology.info}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Summa Theologiae: The accidents which remain in this sacrament (Tertia Pars, Q. 77) |url=http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4077.htm |access-date=2019-09-25 |website=newadvent.org}}</ref>

The essential signs of the Eucharistic sacrament are wheat bread and grape wine, on which the blessing of the Holy Spirit is invoked and the priest pronounces the words of consecration spoken by Jesus during the Last Supper: "This is my body which will be given up for you.&nbsp;... This is the cup of my blood&nbsp;..."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText |url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P44.HTM |access-date=2019-09-25 |website=vatican.va}}</ref> When the signs cease to exist, so does the sacrament.<ref>"[I]f the change be so great that the substance of the bread or wine would have been corrupted, then Christ's body and blood do not remain under this sacrament; and this either on the part of the qualities, as when the color, savor, and other qualities of the bread and wine are so altered as to be incompatible with the nature of bread or of wine; or else on the part of the quantity, as, for instance, if the bread be reduced to fine particles, or the wine divided into such tiny drops that the species of bread or wine no longer remain" ([http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4077.htm#article4 Thomas Aquinas, ''Summa Theologica'', III, q. 77, art. 4]).</ref>

According to Catholic teaching, the whole of Christ, body and blood, soul and divinity, is really, truly and substantially in the sacrament, under each of the appearances of bread and wine, but he is not in the sacrament as in a place and is not moved when the sacrament is moved. He is perceptible neither by the sense nor by the imagination, but only by the [[nous|intellectual eye]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Summa Theologica: TREATISE ON THE SACRAMENTS (QQ[60]-90): Question. 76 – OF THE WAY IN WHICH CHRIST IS IN THIS SACRAMENT (EIGHT ARTICLES) |url=https://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum528.htm |access-date=2019-09-25 |website=sacred-texts.com}}</ref>

[[St Thomas Aquinas]] gave poetic expression to this perception in the devotional hymn ''[[Adoro te devote]]'':

{{poemquote|Godhead here in hiding, whom I do adore,
Masked by these bare shadows, shape and nothing more,
See, Lord, at thy service low lies here a heart
Lost, all lost in wonder at the God thou art.

Seeing, touching, tasting are in thee deceived:
How says trusty hearing? that shall be believed.
What God's Son has told me, take for truth I do;
Truth himself speaks truly or there's nothing true.|[http://www.chantcd.com/lyrics/godhead_here_hiding.htm English translation of Adoro Te Devote]}}

An official statement from the [[Anglican–Roman Catholic International Commission]] titled ''Eucharistic Doctrine'', published in 1971, states that "the word ''transubstantiation'' is commonly used in the Catholic Church to indicate that God acting in the Eucharist effects a change in the inner reality of the elements. The term should be seen as affirming the ''fact'' of Christ's presence and of the mysterious and radical change which takes place. In Catholic theology it is not understood as explaining ''how'' the change takes place."<ref name="Douglas2015">{{Cite book |last=Douglas |first=Brian |title=The Eucharistic Theology of Edward Bouverie Pusey: Sources, Context and Doctrine within the Oxford Movement and Beyond |date=2015 |publisher=Brill |isbn=978-9004304598 |page=139 |language=en}}</ref> In the smallest particle of the [[Sacramental bread|host]] or the smallest droplet from the [[chalice]] Jesus Christ himself is present: "Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ."<ref>[https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P41.HTM ''Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1356–1381,'' number '''1377'''], cf. [[Council of Trent]]: DS 1641: "Nor should it be forgotten that Christ, whole and entire, is contained not only under either species, but also in each particle of either species.  'Each,' says St. Augustine, 'receives Christ the Lord, and He is entire in each portion.  He is not diminished by being given to many, but gives Himself whole and entire to each.{{'"}} (Quoted in Gratian, p. 3, dist. ii. c. 77; Ambrosian Mass, Preface for Fifth Sunday after Epiph.) ''[[Roman Catechism|The Catechism of the Council of Trent]] for Parish Priests, issued by order of Pope Pius V, translated into English with Notes by John A. McHugh, O.P., S.T.M., Litt. D., and Charles J. Callan, O.P., S.T.M., Litt. D.'', (1982) TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., Rockford, Ill. {{ISBN|978-0-89555-185-6}}. p. 249 "Christ Whole and Entire Present in Every Part of Each Species".</ref>

===Eastern Christianity===
{{Main|Metousiosis}}

{{more citations needed section|date=November 2016}}
As the ''[[Disputation of the Holy Sacrament]]'' took place in the Western Church after the [[East–West Schism|Great Schism]], the Eastern Churches remained largely unaffected by it. The debate on the nature of "transubstantiation" in Greek Orthodoxy begins in the 17th century, with [[Cyril Lucaris]], whose ''The Eastern Confession of the Orthodox Faith'' was published in Latin in 1629.
The Greek term ''[[metousiosis]]'' ({{lang|grc|μετουσίωσις}}) is first used as the translation of Latin {{Lang|la|transubstantiatio}} in the Greek edition of the work, published in 1633.

The [[Eastern Rite Catholic Churches|Eastern Catholic]], [[Oriental Orthodoxy|Oriental Orthodox]] and [[Eastern Orthodox Church]]es, along with the [[Assyrian Church of the East]], agree that in a valid [[Divine Liturgy]] bread and wine truly and actually become the body and blood of Christ.
In Orthodox confessions, the change is said to start during the [[Liturgy of Preparation]] and be completed during the [[Epiklesis]]. However, there are official church documents that speak of a "change" (in [[Greek language|Greek]] {{lang|grc|μεταβολή}}) or "[[metousiosis]]" ({{lang|grc|μετουσίωσις}}) of the bread and wine. "Μετ-ουσί-ωσις" (''met-ousi-osis'') is the Greek word used to represent the Latin word ''"trans-substanti-atio"'',<ref>{{Cite web |title=Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical notes. Volume I. The History of Creeds. – Christian Classics Ethereal Library |url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds1.v.vii.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171114175340/http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds1.v.vii.html |archive-date=2017-11-14 |access-date=2010-09-06 |website=ccel.org}}</ref><ref>"The Holy Orthodox Church at the Synod of Jerusalem (date 1643 A.D.) used the word metousiosis&mdash;a change of ousia&mdash;to translate the Latin Transsubstantiatio" ([http://anglicanhistory.org/england/cps/black.html Transubstantiation and the Black Rubric).]</ref> as Greek "μετα-μόρφ-ωσις" (''meta-morph-osis'') corresponds to Latin ''"trans-figur-atio"''. Examples of official documents of the Eastern Orthodox Church that use the term "μετουσίωσις" or "transubstantiation" are the ''Longer Catechism of The Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church'' (question 340)<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Longer Catechism of The Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church|url=http://www.pravoslavieto.com/docs/eng/Orthodox_Catechism_of_Philaret.htm |access-date=2020-06-04 |website=pravoslavieto.com}}</ref> and the declaration by the Eastern Orthodox [[Synod of Jerusalem (1672)|Synod of Jerusalem of 1672]]:

{{Quote|In the celebration of [the Eucharist] we believe the Lord Jesus Christ to be present. He is not present typically, nor figuratively, nor by superabundant grace, as in the other Mysteries, nor by a bare presence, as some of the Fathers have said concerning Baptism, or by [[impanation]], so that the Divinity of the Word is united to the set forth bread of the Eucharist hypostatically, as the followers of Luther most ignorantly and wretchedly suppose. But [he is present] truly and really, so that after the consecration of the bread and of the wine, the bread is ''transmuted, transubstantiated, converted and transformed'' into the true Body Itself of the Lord, Which was born in Bethlehem of the ever-Virgin, was baptized in the Jordan, suffered, was buried, rose again, was received up, sits at the right hand of the God and Father, and is to come again in the clouds of Heaven; and the wine is converted and transubstantiated into the true Blood Itself of the Lord, Which as He hung upon the Cross, was poured out for the life of the world.<ref>[http://www.cresourcei.org/creeddositheus.html Confession of Dositheus] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090221201226/http://www.cresourcei.org/creeddositheus.html |date=2009-02-21 }} (emphasis added) The Greek text is quoted in an [http://www.constantinosa.gr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=149:2010-06-04-10-24-07&catid=2:2010-05-27-14-43-36&Itemid=8 online extract] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110721075450/http://www.constantinosa.gr/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=149:2010-06-04-10-24-07&catid=2:2010-05-27-14-43-36&Itemid=8 |date=2011-07-21 }} from the 1915 book "Μελέται περί των Θείων Μυστηρίων" (Studies on the Divine Mysteries/Sacraments) by Saint Nektarios.</ref>}}

The way in which the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ has never been dogmatically defined by the Eastern Orthodox Churches. However, St Theodore the Studite writes in his treatise "On the Holy Icons": "for we confess that the faithful receive the very body and blood of Christ, according to the voice of God himself."<ref>[Catharine Roth, St. Theodore the Studite, On the Holy Icons, Crestwood 1981, 30.]</ref> This was a refutation of the iconoclasts, who insisted that the eucharist was the only true icon of Christ. Thus, it can be argued that by being part of the dogmatic "horos" against the iconoclast heresy, the teaching on the "real presence" of Christ in the eucharist is indeed a dogma of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

===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 |publisher=United States Conference of Catholic Bishops}}</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=Project Canterbury}}</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 |publisher=Centro Pro Unione}}</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 |publisher=Centro Pro Unione}}</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 |publisher=Church of England}}</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 |work=Firebrand Magazine |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=en |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>

==See also==
{{Columns-list|colwidth=30em|
* [[Concomitance (doctrine)]]
* [[Eucharistic miracle]]
* [[Host desecration]]
* [[Memorialism]]
* [[Mysterium fidei (encyclical)]]
* [[New Covenant]]
* [[Nominalism]]
* [[Transignification]]
* [[Utraquism]]
}}

==References==
'''Footnotes'''
{{notelist}}

'''Notes'''
{{Reflist|30em}}

'''Bibliography'''
* Wilfried Apfalter, [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14746700.2023.2293620 "Science, Law, and Transubstantiation."], ''Theology and Science'' 22:1 (2024) 172-183.
* Burckhardt Neunheuser, "Transsubstantiation." ''Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche'', vol. 10, cols. 311–314.
* Miri Rubin, ''Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval Culture'' (1991), pp.&nbsp;369–419.
* Otto Semmelroth, ''Eucharistische Wandlung: Transsubstantation, Transfinalisation, Transsignifikation'' (Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1967).
* Richard J. Utz and Christine Batz, "Transubstantiation in Medieval and Early Modern Culture and Literature: An Introductory Bibliography of Critical Studies", in: ''Translation, Transformation, and Transubstantiation'', ed. Carol Poster and Richard Utz (Evanston: IL: Northwestern University Press, 1998), pp.&nbsp;223–256."

==External links==
{{wiktionary|transubstantiation}}
{{Wikiquote}}
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm#3 "Transubstantiation" in ''Catholic Encyclopedia'']
*[https://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_03091965_mysterium_en.html Pope Paul VI: Encyclical ''Mysterium fidei'']
*[http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/p6credo.htm Pope Paul VI: ''Credo of the People of God'']
*[http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num31.htm Eastern Orthodox Church statements on transubstantiation/metousiosis]
*[http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1192 The Antiquity of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation]

{{Christian theology|collapsed}}
{{History of Catholic theology|collapsed}}
{{Real_presence|collapsed}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Christian terminology]]
[[Category:Christology]]
[[Category:Eucharist in the Catholic Church]]
[[Category:Metamorphosis in folklore]]
[[Category:Blood of Christ]]