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

| The Lord’s Supper
base, but he orients the material towards its proper application by the
parish pastor to his flock.
14 Of the works which Chemnitz co-authored three, besides the Formula
of Concord, need special consideration when one undertakes to
investigate Chemnitz’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. “The Catalog of
Testimonies,” composed by Andreae and Chemnitz, was added as an
“Appendix” to the Formula of Concord and is found in the 1580 edition
of the Book of Concord. It treats chiefly of Christology, but it also
reveals the thought of the authors with respect to implications of the
sacramental union.
15 When the Formula appeared in the Book of Concord in 1580, it was
severely attacked by the Reformed theologians in 1581 in a book with
the title, Neostadiensium Admonitio, etc. Its authors were a Reformed
group at Neustadt, and their purpose was to attempt to refute the Formula
of Concord, the Augsburg Confession, and Martin Luther, especially
with respect to Christology, the Lord’s Supper, and Predestination.
In 1583 the Elector August commissioned Chemnitz, Kirchner,
and Selneccer (1528–1592) to write a defense of the Book of Concord.
It is today generally known as the Apology to the Formula of Concord
and also as the “Erfurt Book.” Because it is the first formal defense
and explication of the doctrines of the Formula its importance will be
readily acknowledged. In contrast to some of Chemnitz’s works, which
are quite irenical in tone, the Apology to the Formula is rather acerbic
in its comments.
16 Approximately at the same time these three theologians felt it
necessary and helpful to compile a source book on the history of the
sacramental controversy. The 736 pages of Histori des Sacramentstreit
constitute a remarkable collection culled from original sources, giving
virtually a blow-by-blow account of how among the Evangelicals
the controversy over the Lord’s Supper began in the early 1520s and
continued through the years until finally settled in the Formula of
Concord. These three scholars went to the original sources to explain
how the controversy developed from year to year, beginning with 1521.
They ended their historical account with the year 1561. It is obvious
that their chief aim is to demonstrate that Sacramentarians of all
stripes have twisted the words of Luther and misrepresented his doctrine
even to the point of asserting that at the end of his life he had
retracted his former teaching. Early in the book (HS 15) the authors