While a faithful Roman Catholic who believes in Transubstantiation, Oscar Lawson was surprisingly nuanced in his approach to the history of the Eucharist. He noted that, both before and after 1215 (the Fourth Lateran Council), “consubstantiation” was a view that existed among a number of theologians:
This concept [Transubstantiation] was not
without controversy. Other theologians proposed alternative views, such as consubstantiation,
which suggested that the body and blood of Christ coexisted with the substance of
the bread and wine, or a more symbolic interpretation, focusing on the
Eucharist as a sign rather than a literal transformation. These theological positions
were not mere intellectual exercises, but formed the basis for religious
identity and, at times, conflict. The nature of Christ’s presence in the
Eucharist would later become a central issue in the Reformation, but it was in
the medieval period that these foundational ideas were first rigorously developed
and debated. (Oscar Lawson, The Medieval Scholastic Views on the Holy
Eucharist [2024], 7, comment in square brackets added for clarification)
The doctrine of transubstantiation emerged as
the dominant explanation of the Real Presence within the Catholic Church.
However, alternative interpretations of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist
persisted alongside transubstantiation, both within and beyond medieval
Catholicism. The most notable of these alternatives is consubstantiation,
a view that Christ’s body and blood coexist with the bread and wine rather than
replacing their substance. This interpretation, while never officially endorsed
by the Catholic Church, gained traction among certain theologians and later
became prominent within the Protestant Reformation. (Oscar Lawson, The
Medieval Scholastic Views on the Holy Eucharist [2024], 102)
