The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology - Saint Mary ...

space of a few feet, so is the separateness of the two natures of Christ to
their unity on the Reformed theory. And this shows that the divergence of
the Reformed and Lutheran views on the Lord's Supper originates in a
radical diversity on one point of doctrine, of the highest importance, in
regard to the person of Christ. When the Augsburg Confession. 290 says
that the two natures are "in unitate personae inseperabiliter conjunctae,"
(in unity of person inseparably conjoined,) it asserts what in its sense the
Reformed doctrine denies. The connection of the two doctrines of the
inseparableness of Christ's person, and the co-presence of them in the
Supper, is no afterthought of, the stricter Lutheran theology, but was
distinctly before Melanchthon's mind in the whole era of the composition
of the Confession. Thus, January 30, 1529, Melanchthon wrote: "It is not
to be imagined that the divinity of Christ is anywhere where His humanity
is not; for what is this but to separate Christ?" 291 And a little later, April,
1529: "Why should there be these contentions in regard to the Lord's
Supper? As all confess that Christ is present in the communion (synaxi),
according to His divine nature, to what purpose is it to separate the
humanity from the divinity?" 292 In a similar strain he writes to
(OEcolampadius, April 8, 1529: "I look at Christ's promises of this kind,
'Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world!' where there is
no need to tear away the divinity from the humanity. Hence (proinde) I
believe that this sacrament is the testimony of a true presence...It is a
sentiment unworthy of Christians, that Christ in such a way occupies a
part of heaven--that He sits in it as if shut up in prison...We are to form our
judgment of heavenly things not from geometry, but from the Word of
God." 293 These extracts show that Melanchthon meant by an "inseparable"
union, one which excluded the separation in space as well as in time, and
that the doctrine of the Formula of Concord on the personal co-presence
290 Art. III. 1.
291 Corp. Reform. I. No. 585. Non est fingendum, alicubi esse divinitatem Christi, ubi non sit humanitas. Quid hoc
est aliud, quam seperare Christum?
292 Corp. Ref. I. No. 596. Quid attinet discerpere humanitatem a divinitate?
293 Corp. Ref. I. No. 598.