Real presence of Christ in the Eucharist

=== Anglican ===
{{main|Anglican eucharistic theology}}
[[File:BishopJimAdams.jpg|thumb|Eucharist in an Episcopal church]]
[[Anglicanism|Anglican]]s prefer a view of objective presence that maintains a definitive change, but allows how that change occurs to remain a mystery.<ref name="Losch2002"/><ref name=Martini/> Likewise, [[Methodism|Methodist]]s postulate a ''par excellence'' presence as being a "Holy Mystery".<ref name="Neal2014">{{cite book|last=Neal|first=Gregory S.|title=Sacramental Theology and the Christian Life|date=19 December 2014|publisher=WestBow Press|isbn=9781490860077|page=111|quote=For Anglicans and Methodists the reality of the presence of Jesus as received through the sacramental elements is not in question. Real presence is simply accepted as being true, its mysterious nature being affirmed and even lauded in official statements like ''This Holy Mystery: A United Methodist Understanding of Holy Communion''.}}</ref> Anglicans generally and officially believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but the specific forms of that belief range from a [[Anglican eucharistic theology#Real objective presence|corporeal presence]] (real objective presence), sometimes even with [[Eucharistic adoration]] (mainly [[high church]] [[Anglo-Catholicism|Anglo-Catholics]]),<ref name="Lears1981"/><ref name="HerbertStowe1932"/> to belief in a [[Eucharistic theology#Pneumatic presence|pneumatic presence]] (mainly [[low church]] Reformed Anglicans).<ref>{{cite book|last1=Farris|first1=Joshua R. |last2=Hamilton|first2=S. Mark |last3=Spiegel|first3=James S. |title=Idealism and Christian Theology: Idealism and Christianity, Volume 1|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qWQ8CwAAQBAJ&q=pneumatic+presence+Reformed+Anglican&pg=PT184|date=25 February 2016|publisher=[[Bloomsbury Publishing]]|language=en|isbn=978-1628924039|quote=Advocates of the ''pneumatic presence'' might point to the efficacy of the Holy Spirit as somehow applying the virtues or power of the body of Christ to the faithful. Some within this camp might emphasize an instrumental manner by which the Holy Spirit uses the elements as a means of communicating the efficacy of the body of Christ. This view might be best associated with John Calvin. Others within this camp focus on a parallelism by which as the mouth feeds on the consecrated elements so does the heart feed on the body of Christ. This seems to be the emphasis of the Anglican divine Thomas Cranmer.}}</ref>

In [[Anglican Communion|Anglican]] theology, a sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace. In the Eucharist, the outward and visible sign is that of bread and wine, while the inward and spiritual grace is that of the Body and Blood of Christ. The classic Anglican aphorism with regard to the debate on the Eucharist is the poem by [[John Donne]] (1572–1631): "He was the Word that spake it; He took the bread and brake it; And what that Word did make it; I do believe and take it" (''Divine Poems. On the Sacrament'').<ref>{{Cite web |title=Quotes - Donne |url=https://www.classicsnetwork.com/quotes/authors/Donne |access-date=2023-05-18 |website=www.classicsnetwork.com}}</ref>

During the [[English Reformation]] the doctrine of the [[Church of England]] was strongly influenced by Continental Reformed theologians whom Cranmer had invited to England to aid with the reforms. Among these were [[Martin Bucer]], [[Peter Martyr Vermigli]], [[Bernardino Ochino]], [[Paul Fagius]], and [[Jan Łaski]]. [[John Calvin]] was also urged to come to England by Cranmer, but declined, saying that he was too involved in the Swiss reforms. Consequently, early on, the Church of England has a strong Reformed, if not particularly Calvinistic influence. The view of the real presence, as taught in the ''[[Thirty-Nine Articles]]'' therefore bears much resemblance to the doctrine of the pneumatic presence of Christ in the Eucharist, held by Bucer, Martyr and Calvin.

The Anglican ''Thirty-Nine Articles'' of Religion contends that:
{{quote|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 body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the means whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith.|Article XXVIII}}
For many Anglicans, whose mysticism is intensely incarnational, it is extremely important that God has used the mundane and temporal as a means of giving people the transcendent and eternal. Some have extended this view to include the idea of a presence that is in the realm of spirit and eternity, and not to be about corporeal-fleshiness.

During the [[Oxford Movement]] of the 19th century, [[Tractarians]] advanced a belief in the real objective presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but maintained that the details of how He is present remain a [[mystery of faith]],<ref name="HerbertStowe1932">{{cite web|last1=Herbert Stowe|first1=Walter|title=Anglo-Catholicism: What It Is Not and What It Is|url=http://anglicanhistory.org/usa/whstowe/what1932.html|publisher=Church Literature Association|year=1932|quote=How the bread and wine of the Eucharist become the Body and Blood of Christ after a special, sacramental and heavenly manner and still remain bread and wine, and how our Lord is really present (real as being the presence of a reality), is a mystery which no human mind can satisfactorily explain. It is a mystery of the same order as how the divine Logos could take upon himself human nature and become man without ceasing to be divine. It is a mystery of the Faith, and we were never promised that all the mysteries would be solved in this life. The plain man (and some not so plain) is wisest in sticking to the oft-quoted lines ascribed to Queen Elizabeth, but probably written by John Donne: 'Christ was the Word that spake it; He took the bread and brake it; And what the Word did make it, That I believe and take it.' The mysteries of the Eucharist are three: The mystery of identification, the mystery of conversion, the mystery of presence. The first and primary mystery is that of identification; the other two are inferences from it. The ancient Fathers were free from Eucharistic controversy because they took their stand on the first and primary mystery—that of identification—and accepted our Lord's words, 'This is my Body', 'This is my Blood', as the pledge of the blessings which this Sacrament conveys. We have since the early Middle Ages lost their peace because we have insisted on trying to explain unexplainable mysteries. But let it be repeated, Anglo-Catholics are not committed to the doctrine of Transubstantiation; they are committed to the doctrine of the Real Presence.}}</ref><ref name="Lears1981" /> a view also held by the Orthodox Church and Methodist Church.<ref name="Losch2002"/><ref name="Neal2014"/> Indeed, one of the oldest [[Anglo-catholicism|Anglo-Catholic]] devotional societies, the [[Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament]], was founded largely to promote belief in the real objective presence of Christ in the Eucharist.<ref>{{cite book|editor=B. Talbot Rogers|title=The Works of the Rt. Rev. Charles C. Grafton|volume=7|year=1914|publisher=[[Longman]]|pages=296–300|quote=Instances of this service, and also of carrying the Blessed Sacrament in procession, are brought up to arouse the prejudice of party spirit that is opposed to belief in the Real Objective Presence. It is, therefore, my judgment, poor as it may be, that it would be wise to cease these two forms of devotion. We cannot claim for Benediction that it was a pre-Reformation service, to which we have inherited a right, and there is no legal ground on which to stand in favor of its introduction.|work=Addresses to the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament}}</ref>

From some Anglican perspectives, the real presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist does not imply that Jesus Christ is present materially or locally. This is in accord with the standard Roman Catholic view as expressed, for instance by St. Thomas Aquinas, who, while saying that ''the whole Christ'' is present in the sacrament, also said that this presence was not "as in a place".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Summa Theologica |url=https://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/TP/TP076.html |access-date=2023-05-18 |website=www.ccel.org}}</ref> ''Real'' does not mean material: the lack of the latter does not imply the absence of the former. The Eucharist is not intrinsic to Christ as a body part is to a body, but extrinsic as his instrument to convey Divine Grace. Some Anglicans see this understanding as compatible with different theories of Christ's presence—a corporeal presence, consubstantation, or pneumatic presence—without getting involved in the mechanics of "change" or trying to explain a mystery of God's own doing.<ref name="Vogan1871">{{cite book|last=Vogan|first=Thomas Stuart Lyle|title=The True Doctrine of the Eucharist|year=1871|publisher=Longmans, Green |page=54}}</ref><ref name="Lears1981">{{cite book|last=Lears|first=T. J. Jackson|title=Antimodernism and the Transformation of American Culture, 1880–1920|year=1981|publisher=University of Chicago Press|isbn=9780226469706|page=202|quote=Many folk tale enthusiasts remained vicarious participants in a vague supernaturalism; Anglo-Catholics wanted not Wonderland but heaven, and they sought it through their sacraments, especially the Eucharist. Though they stopped short of transubstantiation, Anglo-Catholics insisted that the consecrated bread and wine contained the 'Real Objective Presence' of God.}}</ref>

Anglican and Roman Catholic theologians participating in the first [[Anglican—Roman Catholic International Commission]] (ARCIC I) declared that they had "reached substantial agreement on the doctrine of the Eucharist".<ref>See [http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/arcic/doc/e_arcic_eucharist.html "Windsor Statement on Eucharistic Doctrine from the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission"] and [http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/arcic/doc/e_arcic_elucid_euch.html "Elucidation of the ARCIC Windsor Statement"]. Accessed 15 October 2007.</ref> This claim was accepted by the 1988 [[Lambeth Conferences|Lambeth Conference]] of Anglican Bishops (Resolution 8), but firmly questioned in the ''Official Roman Catholic Response to the Final Report of ARCIC I'' of 1991.<ref>Hill, Christopher and Yarnold, Edward (eds), ''Anglicans and Roman Catholics: The Search for Unity'', London SPCK/CTS, 1994, pp.18–28; pp.153–155 and pp.156–166</ref><ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/angl-comm-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_1991_catholic-response-arcici_en.html |title = The Catholic Church's Response to the Final Report of the ARCIC I, 1991|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151030234344/https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/angl-comm-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_1991_catholic-response-arcici_en.html|archive-date=2015-10-30}}</ref>

{{anchor|Methodist}}