WHOA!!! Where did you ever get the idea that Luther stopped believing in "the presence of Christ in the Eucharist"? He never did! In fact, I would even rephrase what you say in a stronger way that can leave no doubt about what is meant by "the presence of Christ": "What is the Sacrament of the Altar? It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . ." And that's a quote from Luther's Small Catechism!
There is hardly anything stronger or clearer in all of Luther's theology than his teaching on the Sacrament of Our Lord's Body and Blood, particularly against the Zwinglian/Reformed representational view--and this was after what you call his "split" from Rome. (Actually, Luther didn't "split" from the Church. It was Rome that had been "splitting" from the catholic faith for centuries, and it was the Pope who kicked out Luther in 1520.) Luther's most extensive writing on the real presence of Christ's true body and blood in the Sacrament came in the mid-to-late 1520s.
I believe that part of the problem is protestants "leap frog" as Stephen Ray says, from the Apostles to the reformation, and completely ignore 1500 years of Christian history and teaching.
Lutherans--I mean, authentic, confessional Lutherans--are not "protestants" in that regard. We don't play leapfrog. In fact, if you read our confessions (The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church), we contend we are teaching nothing new but rather what has always been taught in the church catholic. We frequently cite the Fathers who taught the same thing.
The Rev. Charles Henrickson
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod
Maybe you can help me out here, isnt Luthers teaching one of 'co or consubstatiation'? and not transubstantiation?
You are right, I chose my words too hastily, Luther was thrown out, and I believe rightly so, although there were certainly some shenanigans going on in the church.
Thanks for your reply.