What is Utraquism or an Utraquist?

Definition and Etymology

The term “Utraquism” stems from the Latin phrase “sub utraque specie,” which translates to “under both kinds.” In Christian history, an “Utraquist” denotes someone who maintains that the bread and the cup of the Lord’s Supper (Communion) should be partaken of by all believers, not only by clergy. This position initially rose to prominence among the Hussites in Bohemia during the early 15th century.

Historical Context

Utraquism has its roots in the Hussite movement, itself influenced by the teachings of Jan Hus (c. 1369–1415). Hus, a Czech priest and reformer, challenged certain practices within the Catholic Church, including the restriction of drinking from the cup during Communion to clergy only. After his martyrdom at the Council of Constance, his followers in Bohemia continued to press for reforms, and one of their hallmark points was distributing both bread and wine to all participants in the Eucharist.

In the aftermath of Hus’s death, the Bohemian Reformation advanced under various factions—most prominently, the Utraquists (also known as the Calixtines) and the more radical Taborites. Ultimately, Utraquist principles continued, shaping certain discussions on Communion practice throughout Europe and influencing other reform movements leading up to and following the Reformation period.

Key Tenets of Utraquism

1. Communion in Both Kinds: Utraquists believe that Christ instituted the Lord’s Supper for all believers in both elements: bread and wine. They refer to Scriptures such as Matthew 26:27, “Then He took the cup, gave thanks and gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you,’” emphasizing the inclusive nature of these words for all who follow Him.

2. Authority of Scripture: This conviction about Communion arises directly from a literal reading of the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper and from passages like 1 Corinthians 11:26: “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.” Utraquists throughout history used such verses to underscore that the command to “drink” was inherently given to the entirety of the believing assembly.

3. Reform of Church Practices: The Hussite emphasis on receiving both elements was part of a broader push toward returning to scriptural mandates and the practice of the early church. Although certain church councils restricted the cup to clergy, the Utraquists argued that biblical precedent and the universal priesthood of all believers warranted both elements be administered to every participant.

Biblical and Historical Support

Utraquists highlight that the synoptic Gospels (Matthew 26:26–28; Mark 14:22–24; Luke 22:19–20) appear to show Christ instituting Communion by distributing both bread and wine. The apostle Paul’s description in 1 Corinthians 11:23–26 reinforces the practice of each believer partaking of every element, commemorating the Lord’s death in its fullness. Early Christian writings and anecdotal references from the first centuries of the church further support the idea that laity received both the bread and the cup.

Archaeological discoveries in regions historically influenced by Hussite reforms provide material evidence—such as chalices and liturgical implements—indicating a robust practice of lay participation in the cup during the period. Such findings shed light on the fervor for an authentic biblical faith expression that motivated Utraquist communities.

Controversy and Resolution

Disputes arose because the medieval Western Church maintained that the fullness of communion was present even if only the bread was received, citing doctrines related to Christ’s full presence under either species. Utraquists, however, regarded it as faithful to Scripture to partake of both kinds explicitly. Over time, some compromises were reached in certain areas, with various church synods granting partial permission or ignoring the cup issue to keep peace. Yet the debate eventually folded into Reformation-era discussions as movements across Europe challenged certain long-held traditions and underscored the centrality of biblical texts.

Theological Implications

Utraquism emphasizes:

• A concern for literal obedience to Christ’s own instructions concerning Communion.

• A demonstration of equality among believers, affirming that all partake of Christ’s sacrifice without hierarchical barriers.

• A broader call to reform and adherence to biblical authority, underscoring the sufficiency and clarity of Scripture for guiding church practice.

Legacy and Modern References

In modern discussions, Utraquism is often studied as a precursor to broader Protestant reforms. Many Christian traditions now commonly practice Communion in both kinds, seeing it as the most faithful way to observe Christ’s commands. Although it may appear to be a historical footnote, understanding Utraquism provides insight into a critical juncture in church history where believers sought to calibrate every aspect of worship—and especially the Lord’s Supper—by Scripture.

The Utraquist example also highlights the enduring question of how Christians balance church tradition with the clear instructions found in biblical texts. For those who desire to worship “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24), the historical account of Utraquism stands as a reminder that Scripture must remain the measuring rod for determining church practices.

Conclusion

Utraquism, or the conviction that believers should receive both bread and wine in Communion, exemplifies a historically and biblically grounded practice that has shaped church reforms since the early 15th century. By championing a literal reading of Gospel texts and the equality of all believers at the Lord’s Table, Utraquists contributed to a momentous realignment of church traditions with what they saw as the straightforward teaching of Scripture. Even centuries later, their legacy informs discussions about the nature of Communion, the authority of God’s Word, and the importance of maintaining faithful obedience to Christ’s instructions.