Church & Sacraments The Lord's Supper

When Christians take Communion, is Jesus actually in the bread and wine?

At his last meal Jesus said of the bread, “This is my body.” The views split over what that makes the bread and wine: his body in place of bread, his body together with the bread, a means by which faith receives him, or signs that call him to mind. A fifth view, from early writers, calls it his body plainly and never asks how.

The 5 views side by side

The bread becomes his bodyTransubstantiation	His body with the breadReal bodily presence	Received spiritually, by faithReal spiritual presence	A sign to remember himMemorialism	His body, without asking how
What are the bread and wine?
Christ’s body and blood. Only the look and taste of bread and wine remain. From Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham	Real bread and wine, and also truly his body and blood. From Martin Luther	Bread and wine, unchanged. Through them Christ is truly given to those who believe. From John Owen, Second London Baptist Confession, Westminster Confession, John Calvin	Signs that stand for his body and blood. From Huldrych Zwingli, John MacArthur, Charles Grandison Finney	His body and blood, said plainly, with no account of how. From John Chrysostom, Irenaeus of Lyons, Basil the Great
What it rests on
The Church’s definition. Scotus and Ockham grant that Jesus’ words alone don’t rule out other readings. From John Duns Scotus, William of Ockham	Jesus said “This is my body,” and Luther won’t read it as less. God’s word “is not false, nor does it lie.” From Martin Luther	Christ’s body is a real human body, so it can’t be in the bread. The Spirit joins believers to him in heaven. From John Calvin, John Owen, R.C. Sproul	“This is my body” is a figure of speech, like calling the Passover lamb “the passover.” The command is to remember. From Huldrych Zwingli, Michael S. Heiser	They state it as plain fact. How it happens wasn’t yet being asked; that debate came centuries later. From John Chrysostom, Irenaeus of Lyons, Basil the Great
Where they differ among themselves
How it’s argued. Aquinas gave the classic account; Ockham doesn’t think the text alone establishes it. From Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham	Melanchthon later rewrote his own article and dropped its condemnation of other views. Schaff says he came close to Calvin. From Philip Melanchthon	How much they say. Calvin and Westminster insist the presence is real; Edwards and Wesley speak of grace received, not of presence. From John Calvin, Westminster Confession, Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley	Whether anything more happens. MacArthur adds “an actual communion with the risen Christ”; Heiser says nothing more. From John MacArthur, Michael S. Heiser	Very little. A letter under Basil’s name reads the same words spiritually, but who wrote it is disputed. From Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, Irenaeus of Lyons
Key passage
Matthew 26:26	1 Corinthians 10:16	Acts 3:21	1 Corinthians 11:23-26	John 6:54
In their own words
Nobody holding this view is quoted on this map yet. Their positions are summarised from secondary sources; open one below to see why.	“Of the Sacrament of the Altar we hold that bread and wine in the Supper are the true body and blood of Christ, and are given and received not only by the godly, but also by wicked Christians.” Martin Luther, Smalcald Articles III.vi.1 (Triglot, Bente & Dau trans.)PRIMARY SOURCE	“Q. Do the elements remain bread and wine still, after the blessing of them? A. Yes; all the spiritual change is wrought by the faith of the receiver, not the words of the giver: to them that believe, they are the body and blood of Christ.” John Owen, The Greater Catechism (1645), ch. 24, Q. 7 (Works, vol. 1, Goold ed.)PRIMARY SOURCE	“the purpose of the Lord's Supper is really simple: to remember the Lord's death until he comes and proclaim that death (the gospel) to any onlookers. You don't need any mystical presence for that, so I marvel at how so many other ideas have accrued to this simple command.” Michael S. Heiser, Naked Bible 15PRIMARY SOURCE	“For what he says is this: 'This which is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and of that do we partake.'... For what is the bread? The Body of Christ.” John Chrysostom, Homily 24 on 1 Corinthians, on 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 (NPNF1-12)PRIMARY SOURCE
On this map
3 figures	2 figures	9 figures	4 figures	3 figures

Who holds which view

The bread becomes his bodyHis body with the breadReceived spiritually, by faithA sign to remember himHis body, without asking howNo stance

28 OF 36 FIGURES · 17 QUOTED · 7 WITHOUT A STANCE

8 other figures on the map have no entry on this doctrine. That means nobody has assessed them on it — not that they hold no view.

The bread becomes his body

The elements become Christ's body and blood

John Duns Scotusc. 1266 – 1308AFFIRMS°STANDARD ACCOUNT Thomas Aquinas1225 – 1274AFFIRMS°STANDARD ACCOUNT William of Ockhamc. 1287 – 1347AFFIRMS°STANDARD ACCOUNT

His body with the bread

True bodily presence in, with, and under the elements

Martin Luther1483 – 1546AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Philip Melanchthon1497 – 1560CONTESTEDDISPUTED READING❝ QUOTED

Received spiritually, by faith

Real but spiritual presence, received by faith

Augustine of Hippo354 – 430CONTESTED°DISPUTED READING John Calvin1509 – 1564AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED John Owen1616 – 1683AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Jonathan Edwards1703 – 1758AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Second London Baptist Confession1689AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Westminster Confession1646AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED John Wesley1703 – 1791LEANS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED R.C. Sproul1939 – 2017AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Tim Keller1950 – 2023AFFIRMS°STANDARD ACCOUNT

A sign to remember him

A memorial and sign; no presence in the elements

Huldrych Zwingli1484 – 1531AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Charles Grandison Finney1792 – 1875LEANSPRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED John MacArthur1939 – 2025AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED Michael S. Heiser1963 – 2023LEANS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED

His body, without asking how

Truly the body and blood, with no account of the mode

Basil the Greatc.330 – 379CONTESTED°DISPUTED READING❝ QUOTED Irenaeus of Lyonsc.130 – c.202AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED John Chrysostomc.347 – 407AFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE❝ QUOTED

Figures who hold no stance here

These are not gaps in the table. Each group below says which kind of blank it is — searched and not found, held open on purpose, never framed in these terms, or deliberately unassigned because no stance fits.

NO STANCE FITS1 FIGURE

Researched, and deliberately unassigned — every available stance would misdescribe the figure.

The Church of Eleven22 Statement of FaithUNDATED (READ 2026) · DOCUMENTPRIMARY SOURCENO FIT

QUESTION NOT FRAMED1 FIGURE

Never posed in the terms this locus uses. Foreign to the figure, not unanswered.

Nicaea I325 · DOCUMENTPRIMARY SOURCENOT FRAMED“ QUOTED

NO POSITION FOUND5 FIGURES

Searched and not located. An honest gap in the map.

AthanasiusC.296 – 373NOT LOCATEDNOT FOUND°George Whitefield1714 – 1770NOT LOCATEDNOT FOUND Billy Graham1918 – 2018NOT LOCATEDNOT FOUND Josh HowertonLIVINGNOT LOCATEDNOT FOUND°Justin PetersLIVINGNOT LOCATEDNOT FOUND°

How to read a cell — sourcing tiers, blanks, and why some figures are never quoted

PRIMARY SOURCEread in a primary source

STANDARD ACCOUNTstandard scholarly account

DISPUTED READINGdisputed among scholars

NOT LOCATEDnot located in a source

A cell marked quoted carries the figure's own words — 359 of 518of them, about 69%. Where there is no quotation the claim is still sourced, and the tier says how far. 3 figures carry no quotation at all, for reasons that differ: a living author cannot be quoted at length under copyright where Calvin can, and a figure at the standard account tier has simply had no primary-source pass yet. 3 of them state their own reason on their page.

A state label ending in ° was read from the stance, tier and note rather than stated on the map. See themethodology.

Basil the Great

C.330 – 379 · GREEK FATHER

INTERNALLY CONTESTEDDISPUTED AMONG SCHOLARS

His body, without asking how

Letter 93 treats the elements realistically and without qualification: communicating every day is good and beneficial because it is partaking of the holy body and blood of Christ, grounded on John 6:54. He reports communicating four times a week, and records that the solitaries in the desert, and most of the laity in Alexandria and Egypt, keep the sacrament at home and take it themselves, "participating in it each time as entire" — which presupposes that what is reserved is still what it was when the priest gave it. He offers no account of how that is so, and gives no sign of thinking one is owed.

See the full position →

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

It is good and beneficial to communicate every day, and to partake of the holy body and blood of Christ.

Letter 93, to the Patrician Caesaria, concerning Communion (NPNF2-08)

WORTH CORRECTING

Contested because of Basil, not because of the grid. Letter 8 reads the same John 6 language in a markedly non-sacramental direction — "we eat His flesh, and drink His blood, being made through His incarnation and His visible life partakers of His Word and of His Wisdom" — and the NPNF editor flags the passage as Basil's view of the spiritual meaning of eating the flesh. Letter 8's authorship is widely disputed and often reassigned to Evagrius Ponticus, which New Advent does not note. Weigh the two letters before quoting either.

SCRIPTURE

John 6:54