Communion: Remembering Christ Through Bread and Wine

Communion—also known as the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper—stands at the heart of Christian worship. This simple ritual of sharing bread and wine, instituted by Jesus on the night before his crucifixion, has been observed by Christians for two millennia. Yet this seemingly simple practice carries profound theological meaning and has generated significant theological controversy.

The word “communion” comes from the Latin communio, meaning “sharing” or “fellowship.” The Greek equivalent, koinonia, conveys participation, partnership, and intimate sharing. In communion, Christians participate in the body and blood of Christ, share fellowship with one another as Christ’s body, and commune with the risen Christ who is spiritually present with His people.

The term “Eucharist” comes from the Greek eucharistia, meaning “thanksgiving.” It emphasizes gratitude to God for Christ’s sacrifice and the meal’s nature as thanksgiving offering. “Lord’s Supper” simply identifies it as the meal belonging to the Lord Jesus, instituted by Him and focused on Him.

Different Christian traditions understand and practice communion in varying ways—from Catholic belief in transubstantiation (the bread and wine literally become Christ’s body and blood) to Protestant memorial views (the elements symbolize Christ’s body and blood). Yet all Christians agree that this meal is central to Christian identity and worship, a practice commanded by Jesus Himself and faithfully observed by His church ever since.

The Institution of the Lord’s Supper

The Last Supper Context

Jesus instituted communion at the Last Supper, His final meal with His disciples before His crucifixion. This meal took place during Passover (in the Synoptic Gospels’ chronology) or just before Passover (in John’s chronology), deliberately connecting the Lord’s Supper to Israel’s great festival of deliverance from Egypt.

Just as Passover commemorated God’s redemption of Israel from slavery—when lambs were sacrificed and their blood protected Israelites from judgment—Jesus presents Himself as the true Passover Lamb whose blood delivers humanity from sin and death. Paul makes this explicit: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Corinthians 5:7).

The Words of Institution

The Synoptic Gospels record Jesus’ actions and words:

Matthew 26:26-29: “While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, ‘Take and eat; this is my body.’ Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.’”

Luke 22:19-20: “And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.’”

These words establish several crucial elements:

1. Jesus’ body and blood: The bread represents (or is, depending on interpretation) Jesus’ body; the wine His blood
2. Sacrificial giving: His body is “given for you,” His blood “poured out for many”
3. Covenant establishment: This is “the blood of the covenant” or “the new covenant in my blood”
4. Forgiveness of sins: The blood is “poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew)
5. Command to repeat: “Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke)
6. Eschatological hope: Jesus will not drink wine again “until that day” in the Father’s kingdom

The Johannine Perspective

While John’s Gospel doesn’t narrate the institution of communion at the Last Supper, it provides crucial theological commentary in John 6, often called the “Bread of Life Discourse.” After feeding the five thousand, Jesus declares:

“I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty” (John 6:35).

He becomes more explicit:

“Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them” (John 6:53-56).

This language shocked Jesus’ listeners (many disciples left Him over it), and it has generated intense debate throughout church history about what “eating His flesh and drinking His blood” means. Is it metaphorical for believing in Him? Is it sacramental, referring to communion? Most Christians see this discourse as preparation for understanding the Eucharist, though they interpret the nature of that “eating and drinking” differently.

Paul’s Account and Instructions

The Apostle Paul provides the earliest written account of the Lord’s Supper, written before the Gospels were composed:

“For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, ‘This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26).

Paul emphasizes that he received this tradition directly from the Lord—either through the other apostles or by direct revelation. He stresses the memorial aspect (“in remembrance of me”) and the proclamatory nature of the meal (“you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes”). Communion is both backward-looking (remembering Christ’s death) and forward-looking (anticipating His return).

The Early Church’s Practice

Regular Observance

The earliest Christians observed communion regularly, apparently every Lord’s Day (Sunday). Acts records, “On the first day of the week we came together to break bread” (Acts 20:7). This wasn’t merely a common meal but a sacred observance central to Christian worship.

Acts 2:42 describes the earliest Christian community: “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” The “breaking of bread” likely refers specifically to communion, though it may have been celebrated as part of a larger fellowship meal (an “agape feast” or love feast).

Meal Context

Initially, communion was celebrated in the context of an actual meal. Christians would gather for a fellowship supper, during which they would observe the Lord’s Supper. However, Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians reveals problems with this practice: some were getting drunk, others were going hungry because wealthier members didn’t share, and divisions marred what should have been a symbol of unity (1 Corinthians 11:17-22).

Paul rebukes them severely and instructs them to examine themselves before partaking, warning that those who eat and drink “without discerning the body of Christ” bring judgment on themselves (1 Corinthians 11:27-29). This doesn’t necessarily mean they need to be perfectly sinless, but they must come in genuine repentance, faith, and awareness of what they’re doing—participating in Christ’s sacrifice and the unity of His body, the church.

Over time, most Christian communities separated the communion service from the common meal, celebrating it as a distinct liturgical act, though the symbolism of fellowship and unity remained central.

Early Christian Theology

Early Christian writings show deep reverence for the Eucharist. Ignatius of Antioch (early 2nd century) called it “the medicine of immortality, the antidote that we should not die.” Justin Martyr (mid-2nd century) described it as food “over which thanksgiving has been offered” and explained that Christians believe it is “the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”

The Didache, an early Christian manual (late 1st or early 2nd century), provides liturgical prayers for communion and specifies that only baptized believers should partake: “Let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist unless they have been baptized in the name of the Lord.”

From the earliest period, communion was treated as sacred, restricted to baptized Christians, and understood as somehow connecting participants to Christ’s actual body and blood—though exactly how remained debated.

Major Theological Interpretations

Catholic: Transubstantiation

The Roman Catholic Church teaches transubstantiation—the doctrine that the bread and wine are transformed into the actual body and blood of Christ, though the outward appearances (what Aristotelian philosophy calls “accidents”) remain unchanged. The substance changes; the appearance doesn’t.

This doctrine was formally defined at the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and reaffirmed at the Council of Trent (1545-1563). Catholics believe that through the words of consecration spoken by the priest, the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine in their essence and become Christ’s body and blood. Christ is believed to be truly, really, and substantially present—not symbolically but actually.

This understanding is rooted in Jesus’ words “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” interpreted literally. John 6’s language about eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking His blood is seen as supporting this literal understanding. The Eucharist is thus a reenactment or re-presentation (not a new sacrifice, but making present) of Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice on the cross.

Catholics also believe in Eucharistic adoration—worshiping Christ present in the consecrated elements, which are preserved in a tabernacle and displayed in a monstrance for veneration. Because the elements are Christ Himself, they deserve worship.

Orthodox: Real Presence Mystery

Eastern Orthodox Christianity also affirms the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist but avoids defining precisely how this occurs. Orthodoxy rejects the term “transubstantiation” as overly rationalistic (imposing Aristotelian categories on divine mystery) but agrees with Catholics that the bread and wine truly become Christ’s body and blood.

Orthodox theology emphasizes mystery (mysterion). The transformation occurs through the invocation of the Holy Spirit (epiclesis) and the words of institution, but exactly how this happens is beyond human comprehension and shouldn’t be subjected to philosophical analysis. The faithful should simply receive in faith and awe.

The Orthodox Divine Liturgy presents the Eucharist as participation in the heavenly worship, where heaven and earth meet. Communicants partake of divine life, experiencing theosis (deification or participation in God’s nature). The Eucharist is central to Orthodox spirituality—not merely a memorial or symbol, but a profound mystical encounter with the risen Christ.

Lutheran: Sacramental Union

Martin Luther rejected transubstantiation while maintaining Christ’s real presence. His doctrine of “sacramental union” (or “consubstantiation,” though Luther didn’t use that term) teaches that Christ’s body and blood are truly present “in, with, and under” the bread and wine.

The bread remains bread, and the wine remains wine, but Christ’s body and blood are genuinely present along with them. Luther insisted on literal reading of “This is my body”—when Jesus says “is,” He means “is,” not “represents” or “symbolizes.” Yet he didn’t accept the Catholic explanation of how this occurs.

Lutherans believe that all communicants—believers and unbelievers alike—receive Christ’s body and blood, but unbelievers receive it to their judgment rather than blessing (based on 1 Corinthians 11:27-29). The sacrament is powerful regardless of the recipient’s faith, though only believers receive it beneficially.

Reformed/Calvinist: Spiritual Presence

John Calvin and the Reformed tradition developed a “spiritual presence” view. Calvin rejected transubstantiation and Luther’s sacramental union but also rejected a merely symbolic understanding. For Calvin, the bread and wine remain bread and wine, but believers truly receive Christ—not physically but spiritually, by faith, through the Holy Spirit’s power.

When believers receive the elements in faith, the Holy Spirit lifts them up to commune with the risen Christ in heaven. It’s not that Christ’s body comes down into the elements, but that believers are spiritually transported to feast on Him. The communion is real and supernatural, not merely mental or symbolic, but it’s spiritual rather than physical.

This view emphasizes faith’s necessity. Unbelievers receive only bread and wine; believers receive Christ Himself spiritually. The sacrament is a means of grace, not magical or mechanical, but effective for those who receive in faith.

Zwinglian/Memorial: Symbolic Remembrance

Ulrich Zwingli, a Swiss Reformer contemporary with Luther, proposed a purely memorial view. The bread and wine are symbols that help believers remember Christ’s death. “This is my body” means “This represents my body,” just as “I am the door” (John 10:9) doesn’t mean Jesus is literally a wooden door but uses metaphor.

Communion is important as an act of obedience to Christ’s command and as a means of remembering His sacrifice, but nothing supernatural occurs. Christ is not physically or spiritually present in any special way beyond His general presence with all believers. The value lies entirely in the believer’s mental act of remembrance and the community’s public proclamation of Christ’s death.

Many Baptist, evangelical, and low-church Protestant traditions hold some version of this memorial view, though most would insist it’s not “merely” symbolic—the act carries profound meaning even if no miraculous transformation occurs.

Middle Positions

Many Protestant traditions hold positions between these extremes. Some Anglicans accept “real presence” without defining the mechanism. Some Methodists speak of Christ’s “real spiritual presence.” Many evangelicals affirm something more than bare symbolism but less than Luther’s or Calvin’s views.

Practical Elements and Practices

Elements Used

Traditionally, Christians use bread (or unleavened wafers) and wine. The bread recalls Jesus’ body; the wine His blood. Western churches often use unleavened bread (following the Passover connection and Last Supper timing), while Orthodox churches typically use leavened bread.

Wine has been standard throughout most of church history, though some Protestant denominations in the 19th and 20th centuries switched to unfermented grape juice, partly due to temperance movement influence and concern about serving alcohol to recovering alcoholics or children.

Frequency

Catholic and Orthodox Christians celebrate the Eucharist at every worship service—daily in many Catholic parishes, weekly in most Orthodox parishes. For these traditions, the Eucharist is the center and summit of Christian worship; a service without it feels incomplete.

Protestants vary widely. Some Anglicans and Lutherans celebrate weekly. Many evangelical and Reformed churches observe monthly or quarterly communion. Some argue that less frequent communion preserves its special character and prevents it from becoming routine; others argue that frequent communion was the early church’s practice and that familiarity need not breed contempt if approached rightly.

Who May Receive?

All Christian traditions restrict communion to baptized Christians, following the early church’s practice. Beyond this, traditions differ:

• Catholics practice “closed communion,” permitting only Catholics in a state of grace (having confessed mortal sins) to receive. Exceptions are occasionally made for Orthodox Christians and in extraordinary circumstances.
• Orthodox also practice closed communion, generally limiting it to Orthodox Christians who have properly prepared through confession and fasting.
• Lutherans traditionally practiced closed communion but vary today—some practice close communion (members and members of churches in fellowship), others open communion (all baptized Christians who believe in Christ’s real presence).
• Reformed and evangelical churches generally practice open communion, welcoming all who profess faith in Christ and are baptized, regardless of denomination.

The question of who should receive has practical pastoral significance. How should churches balance the meal’s sacred character (protecting the unworthy from judgment, per 1 Corinthians 11:27-29) with its welcoming, grace-filled character?

Self-Examination

Paul’s instruction to “examine yourself” (1 Corinthians 11:28) before partaking has been emphasized differently across traditions. Catholics formalized it through required confession before communion for those conscious of mortal sin. Protestants generally teach that individuals should examine their own hearts for unconfessed sin, lack of faith, or unrepentant attitudes.

The examination isn’t meant to keep sincere believers away (perfectionism) but to ensure they come in faith and repentance, aware of what they’re doing and Whom they’re encountering.

Theological Significance

Memorial and Proclamation

All Christians agree communion is a memorial—Jesus said, “Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19). The ritual helps believers remember Christ’s death, keeping the cross central to Christian consciousness. Regular communion prevents the gospel from becoming abstract; it’s a tangible, sensory reminder of Christ’s physical, historical sacrifice.

Paul adds that communion is proclamation: “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Corinthians 11:26). The meal isn’t merely private piety but public witness. It proclaims the gospel non-verbally, declaring that Jesus died for sins and will return.

Covenant Renewal

Jesus’ words about “the new covenant in my blood” connect communion to covenant theology. Just as the old covenant at Sinai was ratified with blood (Exodus 24:8), the new covenant is established through Christ’s blood. Each time Christians share communion, they reaffirm their participation in this covenant—God’s gracious pledge to forgive sins and write His law on hearts, and the believer’s pledge of allegiance to Christ.

Communion with Christ

Paul speaks of communion as “participation” (koinonia) in Christ’s body and blood: “Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Corinthians 10:16).

Whether understood physically (Catholic/Orthodox), sacramentally (Lutheran), or spiritually (Reformed), Christians believe that in communion they genuinely encounter and commune with Christ. It’s not just mental remembrance but relational connection. Christ is host; believers are guests at His table.

Unity of the Church

Paul immediately follows the above statement with: “Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf” (1 Corinthians 10:17). Communion expresses and creates Christian unity. All believers share the one Christ; therefore, they are one body.

Tragically, communion has also been a point of division. Christians who can’t agree on its meaning often can’t share the table together. This contradicts the meal’s purpose—expressing unity—and grieves many who long for the day when all who confess Christ can break bread together.

Anticipation of the Feast to Come

Jesus’ words about not drinking wine again “until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom” (Matthew 26:29) give communion an eschatological dimension. It anticipates the messianic banquet, the wedding supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19:9), when Christ and His bride (the church) will feast together in glory.

Every communion is thus a taste of heaven, a foretaste of the eternal joy and fellowship believers will experience in God’s kingdom. It’s already/not yet—we commune with Christ now, but await fuller communion when He returns.

Communion and Jewish Passover

Structural Parallels

Jesus deliberately instituted communion during (or near) Passover, creating permanent links between the two meals. Both involve:

• Ritual foods with symbolic meaning (matzah/bread, wine)
• Remembrance of deliverance (from Egypt/from sin)
• Covenant renewal (Sinai covenant/new covenant)
• Past event made present through ritual reenactment
• Anticipation of future redemption

The Passover Seder includes four cups of wine and three pieces of matzah, each with specific meanings. Jesus’ words over “the cup” and “the bread” may have referred to specific elements within the Passover ritual, though scholars debate which ones.

Fulfillment Themes

Christians understand communion as fulfilling what Passover foreshadowed. Just as the Passover lamb’s blood protected Israelites from judgment, Christ the Passover Lamb’s blood delivers believers from sin’s judgment. Just as Passover commemorates physical deliverance from slavery, communion commemorates spiritual deliverance from sin’s slavery.

Yet Christians don’t abandon Passover’s meaning but see it fulfilled and deepened in Christ. The exodus from Egypt points to the greater exodus from sin. The old covenant gives way to the new covenant, not by being destroyed but by being completed.

Islamic Perspective

Islam has no parallel practice to communion. There are no sacramental meals in Islamic worship. Muslims reject the Christian doctrine that Christ died as a sacrifice for sin (most Muslims believe someone else was crucified in Jesus’ place, per Quran 4:157), so a meal commemorating that death would be meaningless.

Islamic worship centers on prayer (salat), Quran recitation, and prostration before Allah—not on sacramental rituals involving physical elements. The closest parallel might be the communal aspect of breaking fast together during Ramadan, but this carries no sacramental or sacrificial meaning.

From an Islamic perspective, Christian practices like communion represent departures from pure monotheism—venerating created things (bread and wine), claiming God became incarnate and died, believing material elements mediate grace. Islam insists on direct relationship with Allah without mediating rituals or sacraments.

Contemporary Challenges and Questions

Reconciling Divided Interpretations

How can Christians recover unity when they disagree so profoundly about communion? Should they pursue theological convergence, accepting that mystery allows for multiple interpretations? Should they practice “Eucharistic hospitality,” welcoming Christians of other traditions despite disagreements? Or must doctrinal unity precede shared communion?

Ecumenical dialogues have made progress. Catholics and Lutherans, for instance, have found significant common ground. But full communion fellowship across all Christian traditions remains elusive.

Individualism vs. Community

Modern Western individualism can distort communion. If it becomes merely private devotion—“me and Jesus”—the communal dimension is lost. Paul’s rebuke of Corinthian individualism (some getting drunk while others go hungry) remains relevant. Communion should build community, not just personal piety.

Yet overly collectivist understandings risk losing the personal encounter with Christ. Balance is needed: communion is intensely personal (Christ and the individual soul) and inherently communal (the body of Christ sharing one loaf).

Accessibility Questions

Who should be permitted to receive communion? Should unbaptized seekers be welcome? Children? Those living in unrepentant sin? Each tradition balances access and protection differently, but all wrestle with being simultaneously welcoming and holy.

Similarly, how should churches handle online communion during pandemics or for shut-ins? Can communion be validly celebrated via video call, or must believers be physically present?

Significance

Communion stands at the intersection of Christian theology and practice, combining profound doctrine with simple ritual. In bread and wine, Christians encounter the mystery of Christ’s presence, the power of His sacrifice, and the unity of His body.

This meal provides assurance: Christ died for me. His body was broken; His blood was shed—for the forgiveness of sins. When doubts assail, when feelings fade, the bread and wine remain tangible reminders of objective gospel truth.

It provides nourishment: Whether physical, sacramental, or spiritual (depending on one’s theology), Christ feeds His people in communion. We come hungry; we leave satisfied. We come weak; we leave strengthened. We come as individuals; we leave as one body.

It provides hope: “Until he comes” reminds us that this present order is temporary. We await the great feast when faith becomes sight, when the sign gives way to the reality, when we see our Lord face to face and feast with Him forever.

For two millennia, Christians in every tradition, every culture, every century have gathered to break bread and share wine, obeying the Lord’s command: “Do this in remembrance of me.” In catacombs and cathedrals, in house churches and megachurches, in persecution and prosperity, the church has remembered. And in remembering, encountered. And in encountering, been transformed.

“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Corinthians 10:16, ESV).