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

The Consecration |
348 Luther next writes that the presence of the body and blood of Christ
in the consecrated elements must be extended in time, “Therefore
one must look not only upon this movement of instant or present
action, but also on the time, not in terms of mathematical but of
physical breadth, that is, one must give this action a certain period
of time and a period of appropriate breadth of time, as they say ‘in
breadth.’”
349 And now Luther gives a definition of the “sacramental action” which
is the doctrinal point under discussion in SD VII, 73–90, “Therefore
we shall define the time or the sacramental action in this way: that
is starts with the beginning of the Word of the Lord [ab initio orationis
dominicae], 81 and lasts until all have communicated, have emptied
the chalice, have consumed the Hosts, until the people have been dismissed,
and [the priest] has left the altar.” Luther understands the
“This do” of the Words of Institution to mean that we should do all
that Christ Himself did at the First Supper, namely, consecrate the elements
with His words, which effect the Real Presence, distribute all
that of which Christ has said “This is my body; this is my blood,” and
consume all that which has been consecrated at that service. Then
the assembly has done the will of the Lord and can be rightfully dismissed
by the officiant.
350 Luther recognizes that a practical problem may arise in which more
has been consecrated than would have been necessary. His solution is
a practical one, that the minister and the last communicants should
consume the reliquiae at the service, “Therefore see to it that if anything
is left over of the sacrament, either some communicants or the
priest himself and his assistants receive it, so that it is not only a curate
or someone else who drinks what is left over in the chalice, but
he gives it to the others who were also participants in the body [of
Christ].” Chemnitz has understood the Verba in the same way, because
he says that “it conflicts with the Words of Institution when
the bread which has been blessed is not distributed, not received, not
eaten” (Ex. 2, 281).
351 That this is the position of the Formula of Concord can be seen from
SD VII, 84, which states that “we take bread and wine, consecrate it, distribute
it, receive it, eat it and drink it.” But lest there be any misreading
of this, SD VII, 87 refers to the Wolferinus correspondence of Luther.
As a matter of hindsight we can acknowledge that it would have