Cloud of Witnesses Radio

5 Minutes On Communion (Lord's Supper) & How Protestants Cannot Agree! | Response to Dillon Baker

• Cloud of Witnesses cast and crew

Share episode

The question seems simple: did Protestants ever agree on the Lord’s Supper? The answer, drawn from history and confessions, is messy. The early church spoke with one voice about a true, real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, a conviction shared across geography and centuries. Then the Reformation fractured that consensus. Luther defended real presence with fire, appealing to Christ’s words as plain and binding; Calvin insisted on a true spiritual presence without a change of substance; Zwingli argued for a powerful memorial devoid of presence in the elements. These are not minor tweaks; they are different maps of reality, worship, and church. The implications ripple through how we pray, preach, and gather.  Special episode for our brother  @theprotestantgentleman Dillon Baker.

Luther’s stance, preserved in the Augsburg Confession, reads with startling clarity: the body and blood of Christ are truly present and distributed to those who partake. For him, the promise of Christ anchored the sacrament; God acts, we receive. This wasn’t speculative metaphysics; it was pastoral assurance built on Christ’s words. Yet even within that stance, Luther rejected philosophical explanations he considered overly rationalistic, choosing instead to guard the mystery. For many today seeking historical Protestant roots, that text offers a bold continuity with the ancient church’s devotion, placing emphasis on Christ’s promise rather than human mood or memory.

Calvin pushed in another direction. The Westminster Confession, reflecting Reformed insight, rejects any change in the substance of bread and wine. Christ is truly received, they say, but not by the mouth; He is given to faith by the Spirit. This attempt to safeguard both biblical language and philosophical coherence introduced a careful distinction: presence without material change. It aimed to avoid what they saw as superstition while retaining sacramental grace. Yet the same document criticizes views it considers contrary to Scripture and even to common sense, sharpening lines against both Roman Catholic teaching and Luther’s insistence. The Reformed vision sought transcendence through the Word, Spirit, and faith rather than in the elements themselves.

Zwingli’s memorial view drew still sharper boundaries: the Supper is a sign and remembrance, a communal pledge of loyalty and gratitude. Here, the focus shifts from divine action in the elements to the church’s act of obedience and memory. The table becomes a proclamation of the gospel rather than a locus of Christ’s bodily presence. This view resonated with those wary of idolatry and eager to stress the sufficiency of faith. Yet critics asked whether such symbolism thins the mystery and reduces sacrament to lecture, exchanging presence for reminder and gift for gesture.

Why the divergence? One claim in the conversation is that sola scriptura, untethered from a living interpretive authority, multiplies interpretations. The Reformers shared a high view of Scripture but not a shared hermeneutic about sacramental language. When “This is my body” meets different commitments about sign, substance, and promise, meanings diverge. The result is denominational lines drawn at the table itself. Confessions not only teach; they exclude. Augsburg rejects contrary teachings. Westminster calls other views repugnant. Such language reflects the stakes: worship sits at the center of identity, and the Supper is worship in its most intimate form.



Questions about Orthodoxy? Please check out our friends at Ghost of Byzantium Discord server: https://discord.gg/JDJDQw6tdh

Please prayerfully consider supporting Cloud of Witnesses: https://www.patreon.com/c/CloudofWitnesses

Find Cloud of Witnesses on Instagram, X.com, Facebook, and TikTok.

Please leave a comment with your thoughts!

SPEAKER_01:

Have Protestants ever agreed on the Lord's Supper? The real presence of God in some way that the early church devoted themselves to this.

SPEAKER_00:

I believe there's a true presence, and I hope that we shift back into a historical Protestant view. Martin Luther, who started the Protestant Reformation, actually believed in real presence.

SPEAKER_01:

Now that is true. Martin Luther absolutely defended the real presence, and I'll even quote here, you can get it straight from the Augsburg Confession. Article 10 on the Lord's Supper. Of the supper of the Lord, they teach that the body and blood of Christ is truly present and are distributed. Um, who eat of the supper of the Lord. And by the way, notice they reject those who teach otherwise.

SPEAKER_00:

John Calvin, who was the most renowned theologian of the Protestant Reformation, he believed in a true present.

SPEAKER_01:

Okay, now gotta stop you there. John Calvin softened things, he did not agree with Luther. And this I would again challenge you, my brother. You want to go back to the historic Reformed position or the historic, right, Protestant position as if there is one historic Protestant position. But I would call your attention to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is the confession of faith for the Calvinist position. Um, it is to this very day. And you can read here again on the Lord's Supper the body and blood of Christ, albeit in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only the bread and wine as they were before. In other words, they are not changed whatsoever. You are not partaking of the body and blood of Christ. The doctrine they go on, the doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ's body. In other words, from their perspective, they're talking about the historic Orthodox or Roman Catholic view and Luther's position. What do they say, Dylan? They say by consecration of priests, etc., is repugnant not to scripture alone, but even to common sense. They're saying even commonsensically that it's repugnant. Um, and they even go so far as to say that it's a cause of manifold superstitions and gross idolatries. Dylan, you cannot gloss this stuff, okay? Because then you we can haven't even talked about Ulrich Zwingli, who comes in with the third major position to come out of the Reformation. And Zwingli disagreed with Calvin and he disagreed with Luther. He believed, and it was completely symbolic. So my point is, Dylan, you're looking for the historic faith, you're looking for true Christianity. I see it, I hear it in your videos, and I'm urging you, and I'm I'm trying to save you a lot of time. If you go, even if you go to the Lutheran position, if you go to the Calvinist position, if you go to a Reformed Presbyterian, or you go to a Reformed Baptist, or you go some more, some Zwinglian position, you're still in the same boat. Because why? Because there's disagreement, and one denomination is not going to agree with the other. You see it right here in the West Finish or Confession of Faith. They're calling the Lutheran position repugnant, the Roman Catholic position, the Orthodox position repugnant. What did the Lutherans say in theirs? They say they reject anyone who teaches otherwise. They're drawing the lines of denominationalism. And this is right here in the beginning. It's right here at the inception of the Protestant Reformation. So I will leave you with this. Ask yourself why. Why did the church, even with the great schism with Rome, why did it always have one view of the Eucharist for 1,500 years across geographies, across church, you name it, they all believe in the real true presence of Jesus Christ in the body and blood, in the bread and the wine. And it wasn't until the Protestant Reformation, and all of a sudden nobody can agree with each other, Dylan. Why? What's different? It comes down to sola scriptura. They're all coming to their own interpretations. The Lutherans came out this way with their interpretation, the Calvinists came out this way with their interpretations, the Zwinglians came out with their interpretations, the Anabaptists, the Wesleans, and so forth and so forth and so forth.

SPEAKER_00:

So it's not just a Catholic view, it's not just an Orthodox view, it's actually a historical Protestant view that there is some type of real presence in communion, and I think we should bring it back.

SPEAKER_01:

So, Dylan, I hope that you can see from this video there is no view to bring back. They lost it. God bless you, Godspeed. And please, for those of you listening right now, find an Orthodox church near you today. Get away from the madness.