Communion and "Real Presence"

Please discuss how the following terms either comply or oppose official Episcopal teachings on the eucharist: transubstantiation, consubstantiation, real presence, and receptionism. 

I know many folks that are still trying to figure this out. I think that throughout the Episcopal Church you will find people all over the map with regard to what they believe about the Eucharist. As far as official? I think that “Real Presence” describes it best. See https://www.episcopalchurch.org/glossary  

Transubstantiation - The belief that the substance (essence) of Christ's body and blood replaces the substance of the eucharistic bread and wine, although the appearances (known as “accidents” or “species”) of the bread and wine continue outwardly unchanged. This eucharistic theology is based on the philosophical categories of Aristotle, elaborated at length by medieval Latin theologians, and regarded as definitive in the Roman Catholic tradition. The term is derived from the Latin trans “across” or “over,” and substantia, “substance.” The classical explanation of transubstantiation was presented by Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica. Transubstantiation was also defended by the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Trent (1545-1563). Article XXVIII of the Articles of Religion rejects transubstantiation as “repugnant” and unscriptural, asserting instead that Christ is present in the eucharist in a “heavenly and spiritual manner” (BCP, p. 873). The English Test Act of 1673 required a Declaration Against Transubstantiation by all persons holding civil or military office. Some nineteenth-century Tractarians, such as John Henry Newman, found transubstantiation compatible with their understanding of the Eucharist. But the concept of transubstantiation has generally been avoided and excluded from Anglican theologies of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the eucharist.

Consubstantiation - Doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist associated with the theology of Martin Luther. It teaches that after the consecration, the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ and the substance of the bread and wine coexist in union with each other. The doctrine was formulated in opposition to the doctrine of transubstantiation, which held that the substance of the consecrated bread and wine no longer existed, but their accidents (external form) were sacramentally united to the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ. This doctrine was condemned by Luther in The Babylonian Captivity. Transubstantiation was believed by the Reformers generally to overthrow the nature of a sacrament by denying the reality of the external sign. 

Real Presence – Discussed Above.

Receptionism - The belief that the eucharistic elements of bread and wine are unchanged during the prayer of consecration but that the faithful believer receives the body and blood of Christ in receiving communion. This was the prevailing eucharistic theology in the Reformation era of Anglicanism. The Articles of Religion state that the bread and wine of the eucharist are the body and blood of Christ “to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same. . . .” Article XXVIII, Of the Lord's Supper (BCP, p. 873). Thomas Cranmer held a receptionist understanding of the eucharist, which informed his work on the 1549 and 1552 Prayer Books. This historic receptionistic language is still retained in Eucharistic Prayer I of Rite 1. However, Anglican eucharistic theology has tended to hold in balance both an objective change of some kind in the eucharistic elements to become the body and blood of Christ and the subjective faith of the believer who receives the sacrament. The words of administration of the 1559 Prayer Book joined language from the 1549 BCP that identified the sacrament as the body and blood of Christ with more receptionistic language from the 1552 BCP that urged the communicant to receive the sacrament “in remembrance” of Christ's sacrifice. This combination was continued in the 1662 BCP, and in subsequent American Prayer Books (see BCP, p. 338). The balance of objective and subjective theologies of the eucharist is also presented by the Catechism, which states that “The inward and spiritual grace in the Holy Communion is the Body and Blood of Christ given to his people, and received by faith” (BCP, p. 859). The receptionistic language of Eucharistic Prayer I in Rite 1 is not found in the other eucharistic prayers of the BCP.