[GonzoII]

"Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive, and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of his death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.

But this doesn't square with St Paul who is quite clear on the bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist....

1Cor:10:16: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? (KJV)

A friendly objection.........

[topcat54]

But this doesn't square with St Paul who is quite clear on the bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist....

1Cor:10:16: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? (KJV)

Paul uses the term koinonia (fellowship, communion) to describe the relationship between the cup/bread and the blood/body of Christ. There is no necessary assertion of bodily presence in the elements in that relationship.

Paul’s words denote a sacramental union between the sign and the thing signified and nothing more. "There is, in every sacrament, a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, between the sign and the thing signified: whence it comes to pass, that the names and effects of the one are attributed to the other." (Westminster Confession of Faith, 27:2)