The Lord's Supper in the Theology of Martin Chemnitz Bjarne - Logia

The Consecration |
was not reserved, but certain boys were sent for from the elementary
school who were to eat these remnants” (Ex. 2, 298). Clement clarifies
this custom by explaining that “the remnants should be eaten by the
clergy on the same day,” except when the amount of the remnants was
extremely large, scholars were summoned to partake with them.
321 Chemnitz notes that the Greeks (“not among the most ancient”)
introduced a liturgy called proeegiasmenon, “that is, of previously consecrated
elements.” During Lent they would consecrate elements only
on Saturday and Sunday, and not on any of the five other days. In this
new liturgy they would distribute only preconsecrated elements. But
Humbert, Bishop of Sylva Candida, strongly criticized this rite of the
Greeks, saying, “among other things,
we read that the Lord did not teach His disciples an imperfect but a
perfect commemoration, blessing the bread and at once breaking and
distributing it. For He did not just bless it and then reserve it to be
broken the next day, neither did He only break it and then lay it away;
but having broken it, He immediately distributed it” (Ex. 2, 298).
322 Chemnitz concludes his listing of witnesses with a very recent one,
Gabriel Biel (1420–95), the great nominalist theologian, one of whose
students had been a teacher of Luther at Erfurt. Biel’s reference sums
up quite succinctly the Biblical objections to consecrating elements
but not distributing them. In his Lecture 26 on the Canon he “adduces
a statement from Paschasius and says,
Christ, desiring that His disciples might become partakers of the
fruit of this sacrament, did not, after He had consecrated His body, stop
with the consecration; neither did He give it to the disciples in order
that they might preserve it in an honorable manner, but gave it for its
use, saying: “Take eat”; and because in the course of use what is eaten is
spent and consumed, He gave them the power to consecrate as often as
they would, when He adds: “This do in memory of me” (Ex. 2, 299).
323 From the facts of the Biblical evidence and the history of the practice
of the early church Chemnitz draws the final conclusion, “Therefore
reservation of the consecrated Eucharist without distribution
and reception has not been received, approved, and observed, either
always, or everywhere, or by all as a Catholic dogma and necessary
custom. Rather, there were those who not only did not observe this
custom but strongly condemned it on the basis of the Words of Institution”
(Ex. 2, 299).