Most churches I’ve attended in my life celebrate the Eucharist weekly. It’s generally using tawny port and baked unleavened bread, but sometimes leavened bread or wafers. Episcopalians believe in consubstantiation, which means that while it’s still bread and wine when we consume it, it’s also the literal flesh and blood of Christ.

Removed by mod

In France the catholics eat wafers (the thin thing) but only the priest drinks wine.

Also it’s white wine and not red because it gets a special color in a golden calice. It’s both literal and symbolic at the time but I can’t remember the explanation.

We’re Presbyterian and like most mainline Protestants, our official theology is “real presence”, which is kind of an updated term for consubstantiation. We believe the Eucharist is not purely symbolic. Christ is “spiritually present” in the elements.

One significant difference between Presbyterians and some other Protestants is that our denomination doesn’t mandate communion at each worship service, although it is very strongly encouraged. Our church celebrates communion monthly.

Personally, this is one of the only major gripes I have with our church because I believe communion is central to Christian worship and every church service without it feels incomplete to me. I’m fixing to pitch a fit about it because it’s become more frustrating as time has gone on.

Yes, as a protestant and a Catholic. Listen, I don’t agree with a lot of Church dogma, ad that’s not unique to those of us who didn’t cede personal responsibility and reflection to the ever-changing whims of governing bodies. In Catholicism, we just follow our personal callings and only confess to what violates our authenticity of faith (I’m not practicing Catholicism, for many moons, now), and protestantism is as varied as the visible and invisible light spectrums.

So for me, symbolic, even as a Catholic. While I believe Jesus was one of the most powerful mages for authentically standing in his teachings (literal existence is a whole other discussion), I most certainly do not bide by his advocacy of cannibalism (his rebuke to being tempted in the desert). Moreover, we could make that claim for Ceres* and Bacchus, another whole other discussion.

For myself, the symbolism is, for physical sustanenance, other living beings suffered and died so I can live. The Christ suffered and died that my spiritual relationship with a higher consciousness can not only live, but like my body, grow and thrive.

*A bane on autocorrect, and while I’m at it, AI.

Eta: I’ve had both wine and juice. Jesus didn’t turn water to juice, but for not tempting people with alcoholism, I’m ok with either. I’ve had both leavened and unleavened bread. Since the sacrament commemorates a passover occurance, wine and unleavened bread, matzah is probably more biblically accurate, but I’m not keen on getting hung up on the act as much as the significance.

I don’t currently attend, because I don’t have my own transportation, and I can’t abide the blind leaving the blind into a ditch. If I did attend again, it would have to be an extremely liberal Catholic congregation, but preferably UU. But that’s me. We start where we are, not where we’re going.