Transubstantiation was especially offensive to 16th century Protestants because the Roman Catholic dogma stands opposed to what the Bible teaches. Protestants knew that, to uphold transubstantiation, they also would have to construct a view of clergy and dress them up as sacrificing priests in the exalted Old Testament sense, and to view that Christ is re-sacrificed in every mass.

Reformation Anglicans knew that Jesus was the one and only Great High Priest (Hebrews 4-5), and the only mediator between God and his people (1 Timothy 2:5). They knew that he was sacrificed once-and-for-all for our sins, a death that doesn't in any sense needs to be repeated because it is completely sufficient to cover the sins of the world (Hebrews 7:25-27).

And most offensive of all to the 16th century English reformers, transubstantiation taught that what was in their mouths at Communion was the very same flesh that walked with the disciples those thirty years, who hung on the cross, and who now sits at the right hand of the Father in heaven.

Transubstantiation taught that, following the consecration prayer, "there remaineth neither bread to be eaten, nor wine to be drunken" (Cranmer, The True and Catholic Doctrine). Protestants felt that this is a small view and that transubstantiation limits God and God's power to make his real presence known to God's people.

Many Anglicans are confused about this today, holding to a functionally Roman view of "real presence" while studiously avoiding the term transubstantiation. Some suddenly turn "Lutheran" when it is convenient, or refer back to the 1549 Book of Common Prayer to justify their privately held views. Our Anglican formularies couldn't be clearer: Christ's body and blood are not automatically forced on anyone apart from faith, and "real presence" is not objectively in the bread and wine of Holy Communion, but spiritually in the hearts and affections of those who receive the grace of the sacrament by faith with thanksgiving.

"Transubstantiation (or the change 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" (Thirty-nine Articles, XXVIII).

"They say, that Christ is received in the mouth, and entereth in with the bread and wine: we say, that he is received in the heart, and entereth in by faith" (Thomas Cranmer, On the True and Catholic Doctrine and Use of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, 1550)

END