Exploring the Catholic Perspective on the Eucharist in Relation to the Anglican Catholic Church
- Dan Oberg
- May 30
- 6 min read
A Shared Mystery, A Different Language
Few doctrines in Christian history carry as much weight as the Eucharist. It sits at the center of Catholic worship, shapes the identity of Anglican communities, and remains one of the most debated and cherished teachings in the Western Church. For the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC), the Eucharist is not a peripheral concern. It is the beating heart of its liturgical and spiritual life.
Yet despite deep shared convictions about the Eucharist, the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Catholic Church speak about it in different ways. Understanding what unites them and what separates them reveals something profound about how Christians wrestle with mystery, tradition, and the real presence of Christ.
What the Catholic Church Teaches
The Roman Catholic position on the Eucharist is built on one foundational claim: at the moment of consecration during the Mass, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Not symbolically. Not spiritually in a vague sense. Truly, really, and substantially.
The Church calls this transformation transubstantiation. The term draws on Aristotelian philosophy: the substance of bread and wine, the essential reality of what they are, changes entirely into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood. The outward appearances, such as the taste, texture, and smell, remain. But what those appearances belong to has changed completely.
This teaching was formally defined at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 and reaffirmed with greater precision at the Council of Trent in 1551, specifically in response to Protestant reformers who rejected it. For Catholics, the Eucharist is not a memorial meal or a spiritual metaphor. It is the whole Christ, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, present on the altar.
Because of this, the consecrated host is treated with the highest form of respect. Eucharistic adoration, processions, and the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament in tabernacles are all expressions of the same conviction: what is present is not bread. It is God.
The Anglican Catholic Church and the Eucharist
The Anglican Catholic Church formed in 1977 at the Congress of St. Louis. Clergy and laity who had broken from the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada over the ordination of women and changes to the 1928 Book of Common Prayer came together to form a church that would hold firmly to what they understood as the authentic Catholic and Anglican inheritance.
The foundational document of this movement, the Affirmation of St. Louis, describes the Eucharist as "the sacrifice which unites us to the all-sufficient Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross" and the sacrament in which Christ "feeds us with His Body and Blood." This is not the language of a symbolic meal. It is the language of real, objective presence.
Where we in the ACC diverge from Rome is in how we explain the mechanics of that presence. The Thirty-Nine Articles of classical Anglicanism, which the ACC inherits, reject the specific Aristotelian language of transubstantiation as "repugnant to the plain words of Scripture." The ACC does not deny the reality of Christ's presence. Some even affirm transubstantiation when properly understood. Though most of us refuse to bind a metaphysical formula to the reality of the Real Presence.
Instead, the ACC speaks of the Eucharist as a "Holy Mystery," a phrase that resonates more with Eastern Orthodox theology than with scholastic Latin categories. Christ is truly present in the elements. How that presence works at a metaphysical level is left, intentionally, as a matter of reverence rather than definition.
Practically speaking, the ACC's liturgical life reflects its high eucharistic theology. Eucharistic adoration is practiced and not shunned as is the case with some other Anglican camps. In fact, we, like our Roman and Eastern brethren do, honor the consecrated Body and Blood with the utmost respect! The Reserved Sacrament is honored. The Mass is understood as a sacrifice. Not as multiple sacrifices, but rather a re-presentation of the one and final sacrifice. In this sense, the daily worship of an ACC parish looks and feels remarkably similar to a Roman Catholic or Eastern liturgy.
Where the Two Traditions Meet and Where They Part
The most significant point of agreement is this: both traditions affirm that the Eucharist is not merely a symbol. Christ is genuinely present. The bread and wine are not props for a memorial service. They are vehicles of divine reality.
That shared conviction is not small. Across much of Protestant Christianity, the Eucharist is understood as a memorial, a powerful reminder of what Christ did on the cross, but nothing more. Both the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Catholic Church stand apart from that view.
The divergence lies in certainty and authority. Roman Catholicism, backed by the Magisterium and centuries of conciliar definition, insists that transubstantiation is the correct and binding explanation. The ACC holds the reality without claiming to fully explain the mechanism. Though again, many ACC members to hold to transubstantiation which is fine, when properly understood. Both positions reflect something honest about the nature of sacramental theology: one prioritizes doctrinal precision, the other prioritizes reverent mystery.
The Jewish Roots That Both Traditions Share
One of the most illuminating ways to understand the Eucharist, across both traditions, is to approach it through the lens of its Jewish origins. The Eucharist did not emerge from a vacuum. Jesus instituted it at a Passover meal, in the context of a people shaped by centuries of covenant, sacrifice, and temple worship.
This is exactly what scholar Brant Pitre explores in his groundbreaking book, and it is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand why the Eucharist means what it means.
Recommended Reading
Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist by Brant Pitre
If you want to understand the Eucharist at a deeper level, this book is the place to start. Biblical scholar Brant Pitre traces the Last Supper back through the Jewish scriptures to show that what Jesus did in the upper room was not a break from Judaism. It was its fulfillment.
Pitre explores three ancient Jewish types that point directly to the Eucharist: the Passover lamb, whose sacrifice was only complete when eaten; the manna in the desert, which Jewish tradition expected the Messiah to restore; and the Bread of the Presence in the Temple, lifted by priests before pilgrims as a sign of God's covenant love.
His analysis of the "fourth cup" of the Passover, the one Jesus chose not to drink at the Last Supper and instead completed on the cross, is alone worth reading the entire book. It reframes the crucifixion as the completion of a Passover liturgy that began in the upper room.
For members of the Anglican Catholic Church and Roman Catholics alike, this book grounds eucharistic theology not in abstract philosophy but in the concrete, historical world of first-century Judaism. It makes the Real Presence feel not only credible but inevitable.
Why This Matters for Anglican Catholics
For those in the Anglican Catholic Church, Pitre's work offers something especially valuable. The ACC's refusal to reduce the Eucharist to mere symbol is not a medieval holdover or an eccentric theological preference. It is a position rooted in the very way Jesus spoke at the Last Supper and the way his Jewish audience would have understood him.
When Jesus said "This is my Body," his disciples were not hearing a metaphor. They were hearing the language of sacrifice, of Passover, of covenant. A people formed by Exodus would have known that the lamb had to be eaten for the Passover to be complete. Jesus, presenting himself as that lamb, was not speaking abstractly.
This is why the ACC's high eucharistic theology, whatever language it uses to explain the presence, stands on solid historical and scriptural ground. The mystery the Church affirms is not invented. It is inherited, from Israel, from the apostles, and from the earliest Christian communities who gathered weekly to "break bread" in ways their Jewish neighbors would have recognized as profoundly covenantal.
Common Ground Worth Building On
The relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Catholic Church remains complicated. Questions of valid orders, apostolic succession, and papal authority are not easily resolved. But on the Eucharist itself, both traditions share a conviction that puts them far closer to each other than to much of the Protestant world. We may even add the Orthodox circles to this conversation as well. This is probably the one thing we all have in common. Objective Real Presence.
Both believe Christ is truly present. Both celebrate the Eucharist as a sacrifice. Both practice adoration and reverence before the reserved sacrament. Both trace their eucharistic faith back through the Church Fathers to the apostles themselves.
The disagreement over how to explain that presence, whether through the language of transubstantiation or the language of holy mystery, is real. But it is a disagreement within a shared orbit of faith, not a chasm between belief and unbelief. This is really not so much of a disagreement but one may say a refusal to define such a mystery.
For Christians in both traditions, the table is where Christ meets his people. The bread broken, the cup poured out. Whatever theological vocabulary surrounds that moment, the act itself points to the same reality: a God who gives himself, entirely, for those he loves.
With love in Christ, Subdeacon Dan
Comments