—-when He says, “This is my body.”\u00a0 Well?\u00a0 Surprise surprise—we find ourselves aligning with Calvin’s understanding.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
From J.I. Packer: On the second question, all the Reformers insisted that at the table we give thanks to Christ for his finished and accepted work of atonement, rather than repeat, renew, reoffer, re-present, or reactivate it, as the Roman Catholic doctrine of the mass affirms.<\/p>\n (see more of this article\/bible study HERE<\/a>)<\/p>\n
\nAt the time of the Reformation, questions about the nature of Christ\u2019s presence in the Supper and the relation of the rite to his atoning death were centers of stormy controversy. On the first question, the Roman Catholic church affirmed (as it still affirms) transubstantiation, defined by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. Transubstantiation means that the substance of the bread and wine are miraculously transformed into the substance of Christ\u2019s body and blood so that they are no longer bread and wine, though they appear to be. Luther modified this, affirming what was later called \u201cconsubstantiation\u201d (a term that Luther did not favor), namely, that Christ\u2019s body and blood come to be present in, with, and under the form of the bread and wine, which thus become more than bread and wine though not less. The Eastern Orthodox churches and some Anglicans say much the same. Zwingli denied that the glorified Christ, now in heaven, is present in any way that the words bodily, physically, or locally would fit. Calvin held that though the bread and wine remained unchanged (he agreed with Zwingli that the is of \u201cthis is my body… my blood\u201d means \u201crepresents,\u201d not \u201cconstitutes\u201d), Christ through the Spirit grants worshippers true enjoyment of his personal presence, drawing them into fellowship with himself in heaven (Heb. 12:22-24) in a way that is glorious and very real, though indescribable.<\/strong><\/p>\n