Communion

When Luke records Jesus' words at the Last Supper, he highlights the simplicity of the Lord's intent: "Do this in remembrance of Me" (Luke 22:19). Paul, in his instructions to the Corinthians, confirms this same purpose, repeating twice that the bread and cup are to be taken "in remembrance" of Christ (I Corinthians 11:24-25). The central focus is not on the elements themselves but on the act of remembering Jesus' death until He comes again. In its original form, the Lord's Supper was a straightforward memorial meal, connecting believers to the sacrifice of Christ through faith and proclamation.

The Early Simplicity

The early church gathered to break bread regularly (Acts 2:42), practicing the Supper as both a communal expression of fellowship and a visible reminder of Christ's saving work. Their emphasis remained on remembrance and proclamation. The bread symbolized His body given, the cup His blood poured out–the meaning anchored in memory and witness rather than in mystical transformation.

The Rise of Sacramental Theology

By the second and third centuries, however, the church began to shift in its understanding. In an effort to underscore the sacredness of the Supper and guard against irreverence, church leaders employed increasingly lofty language. Over time, symbolic remembrance gave way to a belief in real spiritual effects imparted through the elements. The bread and wine were no longer simply symbols pointing to Christ's death but were thought to carry divine grace in themselves. This trajectory culminated in the medieval doctrine of transubstantiation, officially defined at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. According to this teaching, the bread and wine are transformed in their essence into the actual body and blood of Christ, though they retain the outward appearance of bread and wine. The Mass became not just a memorial but a re-presentation of Christ's sacrifice on the cross, offered repeatedly by the priest for the forgiveness of sins.

The Protestant Reformation's Response

The Reformers of the 16th century pushed back against the Catholic view, though they did not all agree with one another.

• Martin Luther rejected transubstantiation but taught consubstantiation, the belief that Christ's body and blood are truly present "in, with, and under" the bread and wine. For Luther, the Supper imparted grace because Christ was really present in the elements, though without the metaphysical transformation of substance.
• Ulrich Zwingli, the Swiss reformer, returned most closely to the original "remembrance" purpose. He saw the Lord's Supper as a symbolic act of obedience and proclamation–nothing more. The bread and wine are signs pointing to Christ's body and blood, but they do not contain or convey them in any mystical way.
• John Calvin occupied a middle ground. He denied a physical presence of Christ in the elements but affirmed a spiritual presence. For Calvin, believers are lifted by the Spirit into communion with the risen Christ in heaven during the Supper, receiving spiritual nourishment by faith.

Later Protestant Variations

Anglicans/Episcopalians maintained a sacramental view but allowed for different interpretations of how Christ is present. - Baptists and many evangelical groups emphasize the Supper as purely symbolic–a memorial ordinance without sacramental grace. - Methodists and some Reformed traditions affirm a spiritual presence similar to Calvin's view, combining remembrance with spiritual participation.

Restorationist Teaching

The Restoration Movement, from which churches of Christ emerge, has consistently emphasized a return to the New Testament pattern of simple remembrance. For these congregations, the Lord's Supper is observed each first day of the week (Acts 20:7), and its meaning is strictly memorial. The bread and cup symbolize Christ's body and blood and serve as a weekly proclamation of His death until He comes again (I Corinthians 11:26). Churches of Christ reject sacramental or mystical interpretations, affirming instead that communion strengthens faith through obedience and remembrance rather than through any change in the elements themselves. In this way, the practice mirrors the clarity and simplicity of Luke and Paul's original teaching: a meal of remembrance, unity, and proclamation.

Back to the Beginning

From Luke's account to Paul's correction of the Corinthians, the original purpose of the Lord's Supper was clear: it is a remembrance of Christ's death and a proclamation of His return. The church's later history demonstrates how easily simple acts of faith can be layered over with philosophical speculation and ritualistic elaboration. While the intent to honor the sacredness of communion is understandable, the danger lies in obscuring the clarity of Jesus' command: "Do this in remembrance of Me." In the end, whatever theological nuances one may hold, the heart of communion remains the same. It is not bread or wine that saves, nor the manner of their administration, but the One whom they recall–the crucified and risen Christ. Returning to this remembrance keeps the Supper what Jesus intended it to be: a living memorial that sustains faith, unites the church, and points us forward to His return.