Britannica Sources used in this answer

How did the Council of Trent differ from Martin Luther on transubstantiation?

Created from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.

Title page of a 1568 Welsh Christian doctrine book by Morys Clynnog, featuring Welsh text and a woodcut illustration of the crucifixion of Jesus at the center. — Counter-Reformation Title page of *Athravaeth Gristnogavl* (1568; “Christian Doctrine”), a Roman Catholic catechism translated into Welsh by Morys Clynnog as part of the church's Counter-Reformation efforts.

The Council of Trent and Martin Luther held fundamentally different views regarding the Eucharist.

The Council of Trent formally reaffirmed the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. This teaching asserts that at the moment of consecration, the entire substance of the bread and wine is changed into the substance of the body and blood of Christ, while only the outward appearances (accidents) of the original elements remain.12

In contrast, Martin Luther rejected transubstantiation, arguing it was a medieval theological development not supported by Scripture. Instead, he taught a doctrine often referred to as consubstantiation—though he did not use that term himself—which maintains that the body and blood of Christ are physically present "in, with, and under" the elements of bread and wine. For Luther, the bread and wine do not lose their substance, and there is no miracle in which a priest alters the elements. The Council of Trent explicitly defined its position on transubstantiation in opposition to this Lutheran view.321