05.04.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

20: that when our Lord says: "This cup (is) the New Testament in my<br />

blood," the word "cup" is used figuratively for "contents of the cup;" <strong>and</strong><br />

that we do not hold that the cup is literally the New Testament. If we allow<br />

a figure in the second part, does it not follow that there may be a figure in<br />

the first? To this we answer, First. Either the modes of expression in the<br />

two parts are grammatically <strong>and</strong> rhetorically parallel, or they are not. If<br />

they are not parallel, there not only can be no inconsistency in different<br />

modes of interpreting, but they must be interpreted differently. If they are<br />

parallel, then both doctrines are bound to authenticate themselves by<br />

perfect consistency in the mode of interpreting. Both agree that the word<br />

"cup" involves "contents of the cup." Now treat them as parallel, <strong>and</strong> on<br />

the Calvinistic view results logically, "<strong>The</strong> contents of this bread is my<br />

body, the contents of this cup is my blood, or, the New Testament in my<br />

blood"--that is, they reach the Lutheran view. If Lutherans are inconsistent<br />

here, it is certainly not that they fear to lose by consistency.<br />

We at least accept the result of our exegesis of the word "cup,"<br />

(which our opponents admit is here right,) whether it be consistent with<br />

our former exegesis or not. If any man believes that the "contents of the<br />

cup" is the blood of Christ, he can hardly refrain from believing that the<br />

bread is the Communion of His body. But our opponents will no more<br />

accept the necessary consequence of our exegesis where it coincides with<br />

their own, than where it differs; for while on their own exegesis, with which<br />

they claim that on this point ours is identical, the "cup" means "contents of<br />

the cup;" to avoid the necessary inference, or rather the direct statement,<br />

that the "contents of the cup" is Christ's blood, they go on to say, "the<br />

contents of the cup" we know to be wine; the cup therefore really means,<br />

not in general the "contents of the cup," but specifically "wine." <strong>The</strong> word<br />

"cup," as such, never means "wine." When Jesus says of the cup, “This<br />

cup is the New Testament in my blood," the meaning they give it is, after<br />

all, not as Lutherans believe, that the "contents of the cup" is the New<br />

Testament in Christ's blood,

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!