Controversies about the Lord’s Supper
In comparing Roman Catholicism, Zwingli, and Calvinism there were understandings and practices of the Lord’s Supper in the 16th Century that differed within their beliefs, customs and rituals. These doctrines would help define the different customs being practiced by Christians.
During the sixteenth century, the Reformation period, there were many controversies that surrounded the Lord’s Supper. However, in discussing Roman Catholicism, Zwingli and Calvin Eucharist theologies. The uniqueness of each person or theology; where these beliefs continue to be studied and debated among theologians and Christians. These beliefs and customs continue to be exercised throughout the Christian communities around the world.
…show more content…
The definition of transubstantiation, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church is the change of substance by which the bread and the wine offered in the sacrifice of the sacrament of the Eucharist during the Mass, become, in reality, the body and blood of Jesus the Christ. We discussed transubstantiation during class and we mentioned the blood and flesh of Christ being literally eaten during the Lord’s supper. One of the goals was to unify the people in the body of Christ. However, this unification should occur by the spirit of Christ. Christians being labeled as partakers of flesh and blood would not signify the true message the Lord is sharing. The doctrine of transubstantiation was able to be debated by theologians and Christians in an uncertain manner, and leave the opportunity for the Lord’s Supper to be questioned. If the flesh of Jesus is being eaten during communion; Christianity would have a difficult time bringing new converts to