Figure 1

Screenshot from 2019 Pew Research Center's survey on Catholic Beliefs

Note. Less than one third of all Catholic fully believe one of the most fundamental teachings of the religion.

In 2019, Pew Research Center (2019) found that a majority of U.S. Catholics (69% precisely) misunderstand or reject the teaching of transubstantiation, a theological term that is one of the most fundamental to the entire tradition (n.p.). Transubstantiation is the Catholic doctrine or belief that in the Eucharist, the substance of bread and wine is converted into the substance of Christ’s Body and Blood, even while the appearances (taste, color, shape) remain those of bread and wine (Labanca, 2019). In layman's terms, the Catholic Church believes that Jesus sacrifices each time the priest performs this miracle, and consuming his Body and Blood nourishes the soul. While the word transubstantiation does not roll off the tongue and while the belief is an extraordinary one, Pew’s finding has been a wake-up call for Catholic educators. It prompted renewed efforts in teacher training and faith formation, with an emphasis on moving beyond just explaining the doctrine to helping students genuinely believe and value it (Vermont Catholic, 2022, n.p.).

During the duration of this paper, I will explore how the teaching of transubstantiation can be examined through and enhanced by interpretative methods. In order to do that, I will begin by providing an overview of transubstantiation, define pre-existing interpretive theological frameworks currently deployed, introduce practical examples of its multi-modal instruction, and analyze it further via interpretative approaches. Admittedly, I am not a Catholic educator, just a Catholic interested in educational frameworks, and I recognize the unfortunate reality that many of my fellow Catholics do not embrace a central understanding of our shared faith. When I stumbled upon transposition, in Cope et. al’s work, I thought of transubstantiation. These words share a common Latin word, despite their dissimilarly in academic and everyday parlance. What unites these words, transubstantiation and transposition, are their use and exposition of multiple means and forms.

Figure 2

Leonardo's 15th Century painting, titled, "The Last Supper"

Note. Catholics (should) believe that Jesus recreates the final meal prior to his death and resurrection at the Mass.

Transubstantiation embodies this complexity, though this theological term primarily explains a shared meal between believer and God. The idea of bread and wine turning into body and blood stems from the words of Jesus at the Last Supper (as depicted by Leonardo above), though this exact concept and teaching developed over centuries. Early Christians affirmed the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist including Didache, a first-century theologian who refers to the Eucharistic meal as a true sacrifice (Milavec, 2003, p.64). The term “transubstantiation” itself was first used in the 13th century over one thousand years after Jesus’ original instruction. It was then later refined by St. Thomas Aquinas to mean “very precisely a change of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of [the] Body and Blood of Christ” (Nelson, n.d., n.p.). Aquinas’s explanation became the norm, and the Council of Trent--an authoritative meeting of Catholic leaders--echoed his phrasing almost verbatim in the 16th century (Nelson, n.d.,n.p).

Taking a step back, the Eucharist is the life source for Catholics. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, a foundational reference text for Catholics, acknowledges that this mystery is critical to Catholic identity. The Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life” (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) and thus provides the backdrop for how it is approached pedagogically in Catholic schools (n.d., p.1324). Failing to understand its significance fails to understand one of the most cherished mysteries of the faith, one likely necessary for salvation.

Video 1

Bishop Barron on transubstantiation The Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist - Barron, R. (2020, February 24). The real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist // Bishop Barron at 2020 Religious Education Congress [Video]. YouTube.

Note. While this video provides a comprehensive history of the Church's belief on this teaching, at 8:50, Bishop Barron directly addresses the mandate Catholic educators have in teaching this belief.

While the mystery ultimately surpasses human understanding, “transubstantiation” is the most apt concept Catholics have for it​ (Nelson, n.p., n.d.). Catholic theology holds that the Eucharist is not a mere symbol, but truly Christ present in a substantial way (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, n.d.b., n.p.). Bishop Robert Barron, a prominent American Catholic apologist, quotes Flannery O'Connor, who says, "If it's only a symbol, to Hell with it" (6:00). This nuanced understanding means that symbol and reality are not opposed: the outward signs point to and contain the inward reality​ (Nelson, n.d., n.p.). Grasping this paradox—that what appears as bread and wine is in reality Christ—is challenging and has been a central task in Catholic education.

At the time of the Reformation, misunderstandings about what exactly changed in the Eucharist led to disputes: some thought Catholics were claiming a physical transformation (a charge of cannibalism), or conversely, that it was merely symbolic (McGowan, 1994, p.413). Aquinas’s clarification avoided extremes like consubstantiation (bread and wine remaining alongside Christ’s presence) or “annihilation” (the substance of bread/wine destroyed entirely), in favor of a total conversion at the level of essence​ (Hannon, 2023, p.226). The Catholic position thus navigates a middle path: affirming a mystical reality beyond empirical observation. Even taking this middle path of explanation led to mass division in the Church, and a failure to properly comprehend this mystery is a leading cause for the various Christian denominations from the 16th century to today. In other words, Catholic theology and therefore Catholic education in its broadest sense had failed the congregation by not properly conveying this. How do Catholic educators, building on centuries of theology but also aware of the division the term has sparked, approach transubstantiation?

Figure 3

ChatGPT prompt: Can you generate a simple graphic explaining hermeneutics and phenomenology?

Note. In this section, I use hermeneutics and phenomenology as guiding interpretive approaches to transubstantiation education.

Teaching such a profound mystery to K–12 students requires more than rote learning; it demands an interpretive approach that connects doctrine with lived experience. Catholic educators often draw on hermeneutics (the art of interpretation) and phenomenology (the study of lived experience), which, as Yanow (2009) argues, are two approaches designated as “interpretive” (p.32). Hermeneutics and phenomenology help bridge the gap between abstract theology and the student’s world. Didier Pollefyt (2020), a religious education theorist, describes this bridge as opening a “hermeneutical space” for learners (p.115). According to Pollefyt, the idea is that each student comes with a “fragile hermeneutical space”--an openness to finding meaning. The role of education then is to allow them to discover and interpret religious truth within their own context (p.117). Rather than presenting doctrine as a list of propositions to memorize, a hermeneutical pedagogy invites students to engage with Scripture, tradition, and their personal experiences in dialogue.

Catholic educators, when instructing on transubstantiation, often start from the text. In the Gospels, Jesus states, “This is my body… this is my blood” (Luke 22:19-20) and “I am the bread of life” (John 6:35). The Catechism claims that “the whole substance of the bread [becomes] the substance of the body of Christ, and the whole substance of the wine [that of] his blood. This change the Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation”​ (United States, n.d., p.1373-1375). For example, a teacher creating a hermeneutical space might have students read John 6 and reflect on what Jesus’ words could mean, encouraging them to ask questions and make connections. This often means helping students interpret sacramental rituals so that they become personally meaningful and not just externally observed or learned.

Researchers have proposed hermeneutic-communicative models for Catholic education that emphasize both the integrity of the Christian message and the student’s active interpretation. As Pollefyt (2020) explains, the educator’s starting point is rooted in the faith tradition, but students are invited to interpret that tradition and relate it to their own lives, a process that requires authentic dialogue and openness (p.118). In practical terms, this might involve class discussions on “What does it mean for bread to become Jesus’ body?” and allowing students to express doubts or analogies, guiding them gently toward deeper insight.

Phenomenology complements this type of hermeneutical approach by focusing on experience. A phenomenological approach to teaching religion, as advocated by scholars like Ninian Smart, suggests that students should learn about religious phenomena, such as the Eucharist, by encountering and describing what believers experience, rather than only hearing explanations in the abstract (Acquah, n.d., p.7). In a Catholic school, a phenomenological lesson on transubstantiation might start by inviting students to describe what they see, hear, and feel during Mass: the taste of the host, the smell of incense, the sound of the prayers. Such an approach validates the embodied and sensory dimension of Eucharistic worship as a key to understanding its spiritual significance​ (Bales, 2005, p.6). In other words, the theology of “Real Presence” is not taught only as an intellectual puzzle, but as a mystery that engages the “spatial, temporal, corporeal, and communal dimensions,” explains Christina Gschwandtner (2019, p.12). The below image, that of a High Mass, embodies the sensual dimensions of the tradition. 

Figure 4

Grandeur of a High Mass

Note. Besides the striking visuals, the act of transubstantiation would also be accompanied by Latin chants and incense. 

Students likewise come to understand transubstantiation more deeply when they connect it to the ritual context of Mass--kneeling, singing, eating and drinking together--which provides a fuller human experience of the mystery​ (Gschwandtner 2019, p.12). By reflecting on their own participation in the liturgy, students engage in what one theologian called “eucharistic hermeneutics,” learning to see the Mass as an event that “speaks” to them and invites their personal response​ (p.2).

Critically, teachers in this interpretive paradigm act less as lecturers and more as facilitators and witnesses. They bring their own faith experience into play by sharing personal stories and testimony. For instance, a teacher might recount what receiving the Eucharist means in their life, thereby modeling how to integrate belief with lived reality. This is in line with the hermeneutic-communicative model’s emphasis on the importance of the teacher having “something to say about the Christian tradition and the way he has integrated it in his own life”​ (Pollefyt, 2020, p.115). Such authenticity helps students see that transubstantiation is not just a wild idea from a textbook, but a mystery that deeply affects real people’s lives. It creates a classroom climate where students feel comfortable voicing their thoughts and where their own life stories can interface with the story of the Eucharist.

As Bill Cope and Mary Kalantzis (2012) note, meaning-making is fundamentally social and contextual: understanding grows through interaction, dialogue, and the exchange of perspectives​ (p. 9). In an interpretive classroom, a teacher might encourage students to empathize with the disciples at the Last Supper, or with someone kneeling in adoration, thereby cultivating an imaginative entry into the religious experience. Kalantzis and Cope (2020) describe this as a “transposition of self and other,” essentially an empathetic leap into another’s viewpoint (p.227). This could mean asking a student to empathize with a medieval believer hearing about transubstantiation for the first time, or even a non-Catholic friend trying to understand the doctrine today. Through this empathetic, dialogical process, teachers and students co-create meaning. In other words, the class arrives together at a richer understanding of the Eucharist than anyone might have alone​. Such interpretive and phenomenological methods require patience and openness but are well-suited for illuminating complex sacred mysteries that cannot be fully grasped by definition alone.

Figure 5

Dall-E’s interpretation of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist

Note. This image embodies the Catholic belief that the Last Supper is re-created in its fullest sense each time a priest performs the Mass.

Qualitative research on how students and teachers actually experience Eucharistic teaching offers insightful, and sometimes humbling, perspectives. Susan Ridgely’s ethnography When I Was a Child: Children’s Interpretations of First Communion provides a child-eye view of learning about the Eucharist. Ridgely followed elementary-age students in Catholic parishes as they prepared for First Holy Communion, collecting their words, drawings, and actions to see how they made sense of the ritual. Significantly, she found that the “official Church account” of First Communion (as a straightforward initiation into the sacrament) often differs from what the rite actually means to children (Ridgley, 2005, p.2). By letting children speak in their own voice and through creative media, her study “stresses the importance of rehearsal, the centrality of sensory experiences, and the impact of expectations” on how young communicants interpret the Eucharist (p.31). 

For example, children often focus on the tangible elements as carrying deep meaning for them, sometimes more so than the textual doctrine. One child might explain that Jesus is present because “the bread comes from church” (connecting holiness with the sacred space), while another might zero in on how receiving communion makes them feel happy or grown-up (Ridgley, 2005, p.45) Ridgely’s work shows that children are active meaning-makers: they don’t simply parrot back transubstantiation but form their own analogies and narratives around what the Eucharist is. These interpretations are often imaginative and “dramatically shift our understanding of [the] ritual when seen from the children’s perspective,” giving new contours to a familiar sacrament (p.45). Such findings underscore the value of listening phenomenologically to learners. Since Catholicism is still a dogmatic tradition, educators must ensure that these interpretations are still consistent with the mystery. By attending to how students describe their religious experiences, teachers can better understand where clarification or deeper formation is needed.

Video 2

Analogy video of the Eucharist The Eucharist Analogy That Blew My Mind - YouTube

Note. YouTube influencers attempt to make the mystery of the Eucharist understandable, even while citing St. Thomas Aquinas. Additionally, since this is a YouTube short, the video cannot be properly embedded.

Teachers, for their part, have reported both challenges and rewards in conveying Eucharistic theology. An initial challenge is assessing students’ developmental readiness. Young children are typically black-and-white thinkers; as one catechist observed, it is difficult to teach the Real Presence to a second-grader with purely theological language since “children tend to think very concretely… or have a ‘magical’ way of thinking” (Vermont Catholic, n.d., n.p.). Catechists often employ analogies or activities to explain transubstantiation. When I was a young student in Catholic school, my religion teacher compared the Eucharist’s transformation to that of a butterfly. Analogies must be used carefully: if over-simplified, they risk children later interpreting the Eucharist as “just a symbol” or “just magic” rather than a unique sacrament (Vermont Catholic, n.d., n.p.). Some teachers describe aha moments when a student begins to grasp that the Mass is a sacrifice and a meal. Other catechists note that regular participation in Mass is crucial. As one article put it, “the Mass and Eucharistic Adoration teach on their own” through the reverential actions and atmosphere​ (n.p.). In other words, the lived liturgy itself catechizes the student in a way classroom instruction alone cannot. Teachers should then emphasize inviting children to “open their hearts and experience for themselves Christ’s sacrifice” as a complement to doctrine (n.p.). This might involve taking students on a church tour to get familiar with the altar, tabernacle, chalice, etc., or having them practice the postures and responses of the Mass so that they feel a part of the ritual.

Robert J. Starrat’s research found that when students are given roles in the liturgy such as altar servers, their sense of the Eucharist’s significance increases​. In his qualitative study on Catholic high school students’ faith, teens who had been Eucharistic ministers or choir members reported a more personal connection to the Mass, often describing it as something we do together rather than something the priest does alone (Starrat, 2000, p.58). Such experiences echo the theological point that the faith of the community is integral to the Eucharist​ Students learn that their belief and participation matter. By their faith in Jesus, they make him present in their midst” notes Starrat (p.59). This aligns with the Church hierarchy’s understanding that a “full, conscious, and active participation” is the expectation to the Mass, not the exception (Second Vatican Council, 1963, p.14). The Eucharist is inherently a sacrament that is best understood, then, as a shared event requiring shared meaning and participation.

Considering that transubstantiation and its subsequent ways of instruction are more than one-dimensional entities, I want to explore how an additional interpretive method can help educators and students approach this phenomenon.

One lens to enact interpretative methods, exploring multimodal meaning, can offer insights for teaching complex theological concepts like the Eucharist and transubstantiation. Multimodal theory, as popularized by education scholars Kalantzis and Cope (2020), holds that meaning is made through multiple modes of communication, not just through written or spoken language (p.72). In other words, and as depicted in Figure 7 below, people learn and express ideas via multimodal forms i.e. images, sounds, physical movement, spatial design, and so on, in addition to words (p.19). In its fullest state, these forms intersect with meaning functions, which include reference, agency, structure, context, and interest. This intersection of form and function, argue Kalantzis and Cope, emphasizes the human experience of learning. These interwoven concepts are fluid, or “transpositional,” and the ways we understand meaning are regularly in flux and changing (p.73). A first century Christian approaches the Eucharist in all of these forms and functions almost entirely different than a 21st century American educator. However, the goal remains to connect to the human experience of the sacred, and a foundational element of the human experience is multi-modal connections.

The Eucharist itself can be seen as a multimodal artifact: it involves ritual words (the prayers), material elements (bread, wine, water), gestures (kneeling, genuflecting, elevating the host), music (hymns, acclamations), spatial arrangement (altar, aisles for procession), visuals (vestments, chalice, candles) and even taste and smell. Each of these modes contributes to the overall meaning of the sacrament. A multimodal analysis of a Mass, for example, would note that the body language of the congregation (standing, bowing) communicates reverence and unity, the imagery in stained glass or icons communicates theological stories, the soundscape of bells and song creates an atmosphere of worship, and the spoken words convey doctrine and narrative. Crucially, these modes work in unison. “Barely ever does one form of meaning happen without one or more of the others” in human communication​, argues Cope and Kalantzis (n.d., n.p.). In the liturgy, this convergence of modes is deliberate: together they speak to the whole person. For students, then, learning about the Eucharist should likewise engage multiple modes of learning, reflecting the multimodal nature of the subject itself.

Figure 7

Cope and Kalantzis graphic on multimodal learning

Note. These meaning forms provide teachers myriad ways to engage a singular topic.

Multimodal learning in this context might include visual, auditory, and kinesthetic teaching tools. For instance, a teacher might use sacred art such as Da Vinci’s Last Supper (whose who is showcased in Figure 1) to visually convey meaning. Or they might play a recording of Eucharistic hymns to engage auditory learners and even engage students in a small reenactment of the Last Supper to get them physically involved. These are not gimmicks but are grounded in the idea that each mode can reveal a facet of Eucharistic meaning that words alone might not. “Meanings are transposable across forms – the same meaning can be expressed in multiple forms, argues Kalantzis and Cope (2020, p.33). One could draw a parallel with Kalantzis and Cope’s grammar of multimodal meaning. Just as their framework identifies forms of meaning (text, image, space, object, body, sound, speech), a teacher might intentionally incorporate each form in a unit on the Eucharist (Transpositional Grammar, n.p.). For example:

• Text: reading biblical and liturgical texts about the Eucharist
• Image: examining paintings of the Last Supper
• Space: arranging the classroom to resemble a banquet table or visiting the church space
• Object: handling unconsecrated hosts or a chalice to feel the material aspect
• Body: teaching the sign of the cross, kneeling, or other gestures as a language of prayer
• Sound: listening to or singing Eucharistic hymns
• Speech: having students articulate in their own words what the Eucharist means.

By incorporating even some of these things, students learn through multiple channels, which can deepen their understanding and retention.

Students can also become “designers of meaning” who can re-represent what they have learned in various modes (Cope and Kalantzis, 1997, p.470). For a lesson on transubstantiation, a teacher might invite students to draw a comic strip of the Last Supper, or compose a short poem or song about the Eucharist, or create a digital presentation with images and narration explaining the Mass. These multimodal artifacts not only allow teachers to assess factual recalls but also the depth of the student’s interpretive engagement. Such activities also resonate with students’ diverse learning styles. As one Catholic school curriculum guide put it, “Finding God (a textbook series) incorporates multimodal learning and utilizes multimedia to reinforce faith concepts, connect students with content, and enhance the learning process” (St. Susanna Parish School, n.d., n.p.) This acknowledgment by a U.S. Catholic school highlights how intentional the use of various media has become in religion classes. Ultimately, multimodal pedagogy in Catholic religious education should serve hermeneutical ends: it provides multiple entry points for understanding and interpretation. 

The contemporary approach to teaching transubstantiation in Catholic K-12 education is richly interpretive: it builds on solid theological foundations and history yet welcomes the interpretive insights of hermeneutics and phenomenology to connect with students’ lived experience. It also embraces multimodal pedagogy, using everything from music to digital media and ritual participation as conveyors of meaning. This comprehensive, interpretative approach helps young learners not only understand what transubstantiation means in doctrine but also appreciate why it matters, how they can encounter the mystery of the Eucharist in their own lives, and how they can share that mystery with others.