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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

| The Lord’s Supper been well if the folio number had been given in the original Dresden edition of the Book of Concord in addition to the volume number of Luther’s works. But in the controversy over the meaning of the “action” commanded by the Lord, this correspondence of Luther with Wolferinus was used so much that it did not need a more specific reference than “von D. Luthero selbst, Tom. 4. Jen., erkläret ist.” 352 From this evidence it is apparent that Luther, Chemnitz, and the Formula have the same understanding of 1 Cor. 11:23–25 also with reference to the matter of the reliquiae. notes 44–81, chapter v 44. Es sind aber under andern vielen/zween Punct darauss mit fleiss zumercken/ wölches uns zu dies en zeiten nützlich und nötig sind (HS 116). 45. It is important to note that these theologians in this context regard the terms localiter and circumscriptive as synonymous and thus referring to that mode of presence as when Christ walked bodily on earth, “in a circumscribed and local manner according to the definition of this life, . . . as is the case with other men” (TNC 426; emphasis added). They did not want localiter to be under stood in such a way as to deny the definitive mode of Christ’s presence, where the space is material and circumscribed but Christ’s mode of presence is a supernatural one, according to which He neither occupies nor yields space. His presence in the Supper is different from His general omnipresence and from His earthly presence 1950 years ago (see p. 37–39). 46. See Sasse, This is My Body (see note #1), p. 150. 47. The Histori first quotes from Bugenhagen’s Latin text (126–130) and then gives a German translation (130–134). 48. Christus dicit, Hoc facite. In quo verbo fidenter facimus, quae Christus instituit. Non fidimus in nostris consecrationibus et anhelitu, ut stulte obijicitur nobis, sed hoc verbo Christi. Hoc facite, hoc est, fidimus in Christi institutione et iusione. Christus non dixit, Accipite et comedite panem, accipite et bibite vinum, sed, hoc facite, id est, accipite, et comedite meum corpus, sic instituo, sic volo, sic iubeo, etc. Non dico aut iubeo, ut vos faciatis panem corpus meum. Instituo et volo, ut in commemorationem mortis meae edatis corpus meum, etc. (HS 126). 49. Interroga Christi institutionem, quae dicit, Panis iste meus est Corpus meum, Poculum istud meum est sanguis meus, etc. Unde nobis haec omnia? Ex Christi institutione. Ipse sic instituit, voluit. Christi ani hanc institutionem amplectuntur, et gratias agunt. Stultum igitur fuerit haec verba institutionis Christi omittere, impium his non confidere. Nam sine his, quid quaeso in pane et poculo quaeremus? Haec verba sacrae Christi institutiones publice recitat minister nostre Ecclesiae super pane et poculum, super mens am, super altare posita, nullo eis adhibito flatu (ut irridemur) quando agnoscit, nihil hic sua virtute fieri, sed omnia virtute instituionis et ordinationis Christi. Et recitat, ut agnoscant communicaturi, quid erg a hoc Sacramentu sit nobis et facienda et credendum, ultque contra Sacramentarios perpetuo pro nobis respondeat haec institutio et usque ad finem mundi duratura Christi ordinatio, quae efficit, ut sit ibi nobis ad edendum et bibendum corpus et sanguis Christi, non postulat aut iubet; ut nos Corpus et sanguinem Christi faciamus: quod datur nobis, grato animo et exult ante gratiarum
The Consecration | actione accipimus, non praesumus facere, quod quia non iubeter a Christo, facere non possumus. Dicit enim, Hoc est Corpus meum, Hic est Sanguis meus. Non dicit, Facite meum corpus, Facite meum sanguinem. Non factores sui corporis et sanguinis voluit, sed communicatores, id est, ut ederemus Dominicum Corpus et sanguinem biberemus, in eius commemorationem, quod corpus, et quem sanguinem, nobis ipse per suam institutionem daret, non nobis ipsi faceremus. 50. The index to the English translation, The Lord’s Supper carries no reference to“consecration,” although it is used at least once in a significant way which reflects Chemnitz’s understanding of it as effecting the Real Presence, p. 156. Nor is there any reference to the synonyms of the term, e.g., p. 46, “this bread here present after receiving its name from God, is not only bread but at the same time also the body of Christ.” The index to the second volume of The Examination, it is true, has several references to the consecration, but they are vague by the omission of direct references to what Chemnitz himself says, and in general limiting the references to the papalists and the Latin Fathers. 51. J. H. C. Fritz, Pastoral Theology (St. Louis: CPH, 1932) is here obviously at odds with the Chemnitz understanding of the consecration when he says,“The minister therefore should repeat the Words of Institution at the time when the sacrament is to be administered in order thereby to consecrate the elements, that is, to set them apart and bless them in their holy use in the sacrament even as Christ has commanded, and at the same time thereby to invite the communicants to receive not only bread and wine but also orally, Christ’s body and blood (1 Cor. 10:16),” p. 143. Pieper, too, here differs from Chemnitz, “Consecration is correctly defined as the act whereby bread and wine are detached from their ordinary use and appointed to the use of the Lord’s Supper, that is, they are set apart to this end, that with the bread, according to Christ’s promise, the body of Christ and with the wine according to Christ’s promise, the blood of Christ is received” (Dogmatics III, 366). 52. Prof. Siegbert Becker adopted an entirely different interpretation of these texts. He asserted that “Christ did not say, ‘Say, This is my body,’ but ‘Take and eat, this is my body’ “ (Nya Vdktaren, 8/1973, p. 104). He thereby limited the force of Luke 22:19 and 1 Cor. 11:23–25 by holding that these texts do not command us to do what Christ Himself did. 53. Chemnitz is here in agreement with Luther that we preach the Gospel to the world and administer the sacraments only because Christ has given this command to His Church, “We have the Gospel. Christ says,‘Go and preach the Gospel’ not only to the Jews, as Moses did, but to‘all nations,’ to‘all creatures’ [Mark 16:15]. To me it is said,‘He who believes and is baptized will be saved’ [Mark 16:16] . . . . These words strike me too, for I am one of the ‘all creatures,’ If Christ had not added’ preach to all creatures,’ then I would not listen, would not be baptized, just as I now will not listen to Moses because he is given not to me but only to the Jews” (How Christians Should Regard Moses, 1525; LW 35, 171). 54. Prof. Seth Erlandsson has entirely misunderstood Chemnitz in his attempt to defend his own thesis that Chemnitz“makes no doctrine of‘any moment of consecration’“ (“The Biblical and Lutheran Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper,” WLQ, April 1977, 95–112; see especially p. 103 f.). While he quotes at length from the Chemnitz Examination, he carefully skips over what Chemnitz has to say specifically about the consecration (Ex. 2, 222–230; since Prof. Erlandsson quotes from the Latin, the corresponding pages in the Ed. Preuss Latin edition — 1861 — will also be given, 299–303). Besides, Prof. Erlandsson makes no reference to Chemnitz’s discussion of the adoration of the sacrament (Ex. 2, 276–284; Latin 320–323). As will be recognized later, an analysis of this part of the Examination will reveal that if Chemnitz did not know when the Real Presence began, he would be guilty of gross idolatry.
Page 2 and 3:
Links in the eLectionic version Tab
Page 4 and 5:
Published by Trinity Lutheran Press
Page 7 and 8:
Contents Forewords to Electronic Ed
Page 9 and 10:
Foreword to the electronic edition
Page 11 and 12:
Why the Doctrine of the Lord’s Su
Page 13 and 14:
Author’s Foreword In submitting t
Page 15 and 16:
Chapter I Introduction Introduction
Page 17 and 18:
Introduction | votes the largest pa
Page 19 and 20:
Introduction | could bring it about
Page 21 and 22:
Introduction | do point out that Lu
Page 23 and 24:
Chapter II sacrament and sacramenta
Page 25 and 26:
Sacrament | 3. “That it be instit
Page 27 and 28:
Sacrament | habet rationem sacramen
Page 29 and 30:
Sacrament | Supper, but there was a
Page 31 and 32:
The Biblical Foundation | Chapter I
Page 33 and 34:
The Biblical Foundation | certainty
Page 35 and 36:
never forget that “the dogma of t
Page 37 and 38:
As a matter of fact, Chemnitz remar
Page 39 and 40:
The Biblical Foundation | Concord,
Page 41 and 42:
The Biblical Foundation | nicht uns
Page 43 and 44:
The Sacramental Union | ine meaning
Page 45 and 46:
The Sacramental Union | ing Christ,
Page 47 and 48:
The Sacramental Union | We should n
Page 49 and 50:
The Sacramental Union | for in Chap
Page 51 and 52:
The Sacramental Union | hypostatic
Page 53 and 54:
of Christ has been exalted through
Page 55 and 56:
The Sacramental Union | 1. The seco
Page 57 and 58:
The Sacramental Union | delimited b
Page 59 and 60:
The Sacramental Union | And this ta
Page 61 and 62:
The Sacramental Union | 114 The ans
Page 63 and 64:
The Sacramental Union | simple and
Page 65 and 66:
The Sacramental Union | Mary, and n
Page 67 and 68:
The Sacramental Union | two in one
Page 69 and 70:
The Sacramental Union | likeness re
Page 71 and 72:
The Sacramental Union | “bread,
Page 73 and 74:
The Sacramental Union | distributed
Page 75 and 76:
The Sacramental Union | 153 The rea
Page 77 and 78:
The Sacramental Union | (cf. Ex. 25
Page 79 and 80:
The Sacramental Union | 164 Since t
Page 81 and 82:
The Sacramental Union | are in a wa
Page 83 and 84:
The Sacramental Union | 173 Chemnit
Page 85 and 86:
The Sacramental Union | solche Mitt
Page 87 and 88:
The Sacramental Union | of transubs
Page 89 and 90:
The Sacramental Union | 42. Grammat
Page 91 and 92:
The Consecration | two natures in t
Page 93 and 94:
The Consecration | 184 It is furthe
Page 95 and 96:
The Consecration | consecration in
Page 97 and 98:
The Consecration | of the Council t
Page 99 and 100:
The Consecration | mand and bidding
Page 101 and 102:
The Consecration | tion must be tak
Page 103 and 104:
The Consecration | thing in the Gos
Page 105 and 106:
The Consecration | himself who bapt
Page 107 and 108:
The Consecration | so that the comm
Page 109 and 110:
The Consecration | As far as the si
Page 111 and 112: The Consecration | This is a charge
Page 113 and 114: The Consecration | they serve a hig
Page 115 and 116: The Consecration | 0 Sacrament is R
Page 117 and 118: The Consecration | 0 Lutheran. The
Page 119 and 120: The Consecration | 0 by an enduring
Page 121 and 122: The Consecration | 0 248 In Chapter
Page 123 and 124: The Consecration | 0 253 This doctr
Page 125 and 126: The Consecration | eat and drink it
Page 127 and 128: The Consecration | everywhere, and
Page 129 and 130: The Consecration | called for true
Page 131 and 132: The Consecration | nitz directs chi
Page 133 and 134: The Consecration | Again: We must j
Page 135 and 136: The Consecration | has confessed th
Page 137 and 138: The Consecration | way He might app
Page 139 and 140: The Consecration | churches as adhe
Page 141 and 142: The Consecration | formulated, for
Page 143 and 144: without blessing and distribution,
Page 145 and 146: The Consecration | out that “we l
Page 147 and 148: will do what Christ did before and
Page 149 and 150: The Consecration | was not reserved
Page 151 and 152: The Consecration | “epempon—the
Page 153 and 154: The Consecration | some small part
Page 155 and 156: The Consecration | taken place, who
Page 157 and 158: The Consecration | been consecrated
Page 159 and 160: The Consecration | from the first l
Page 161: The Consecration | 348 Luther next
Page 165 and 166: The Consecration | Green calls it a
Page 167 and 168: The Consecration | of the consecrat
Page 169 and 170: causes and uses the case of the scu
Page 171 and 172: The Consecration | sondern viel meh
Page 173 and 174: The Consecration | Verba. Chemnitz,
Page 175 and 176: The Consecration | Prof. Becker bel
Page 177 and 178: The Consecration | traditional term
Page 179 and 180: The Effects of Sacramental Eating |
Page 199 and 200: Summary and Conclusions | Chapter v
Page 201 and 202: Summary and Conclusions | that it i
Page 203 and 204: Summary and Conclusions | qualities
Page 205 and 206: Summary and Conclusions | times”
Page 207 and 208: Summary and Conclusions | 421 No te
Page 209 and 210: Summary and Conclusions | 427 It is
Page 211 and 212: Summary and Conclusions | nothing i
Page 213 and 214:
Summary and Conclusions | tion is t
Page 215 and 216:
Summary and Conclusions | 0 Luther
Page 217 and 218:
Summary and Conclusions | 0 does no
Page 219 and 220:
Summary and Conclusions | 0 standin
Page 221 and 222:
Summary and Conclusions | 0 with Hi
Page 223 and 224:
Summary and Conclusions | 0 God and
Page 225 and 226:
Summary and Conclusions | 468 Many
Page 227 and 228:
sacraments the institution itself i
Page 229 and 230:
Abraham, took his reason captive 53
Page 231 and 232:
Epistemological question, how does
Page 233 and 234:
on “synecdoche” 130, 131, 161 o
Page 235 and 236:
Sacrifice of the Mass destroys the
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?