"For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since JesusChrist our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God ... the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus." St. Justin Martyr ([1]), ca A.D. 150.
"Lutherans believe that Christ's body and blood are truly present in the Lord's Supper, but they do not believe, with Catholics, that the bread and wine, are permanently 'changed into' Christ's body and blood [transubstantiation]." [2]
"Presbyterians say it is not about a physical presence — it is about a spiritual presence. Not all reality is physical. The Roman, Lutheran and Anabaptist viewpoints all get stuck on the notion that molecules of Jesus have to be there in order for him to be physically present — and so they argue for or against the presence of molecules of flesh and blood." [3]
Eucharistic theology: 'after a heavenly and spiritual manner'
"Of course, the range of possible meaning (including receptionism and virtualism) is all within a basic Reformed Catholic mindset and never includes the rejected medieval doctrines of the sacrifice of the Mass & transubstantiation." [4] "Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of The Lord cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions." [5]
Eucharistic theology: 'after a heavenly and spiritual manner'
"Transubstantiation, or the change of the substance of bread and wine in the Supper of our Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions." [8]