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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

| The Lord’s Supper Book of Concord, does not hesitate to use the word “change” 135 the quia pledge 333 Brenz, John 94 “Brief Statement,” rejects the false charge of double predestination 304, 305 Bugenhagen, John, on the consecration 181–185 Calvin, denies the Real Presence 78 is wrong in denying the unworthy receive the body of Christ 107 Capernaitic eating and drinking disavowed 69 Carlstadt, Andrew, denies the communicatio majestatis 79 ridicules an effective consecration 181 Catalog of Testimonies 395 Certainty of Christ’s presence in the Supper 105; see also Epistemological basis “Change,” its meaning when used by the Ancients, Luther, Chemnitz, Book of Concord 135–140 not transubstantiation but a miraculous divine change so that the body of Christ is present under the consecrated bread 141 Chase, Stuart, #34 Chemnitz, Martin, the forgotten theologian on the Lord’s Supper 406 a sixteenth century theologian in contrast to seventeenth century 407 never quoted on the consecration by standard dogmaticians 460 Chrysostom, confesses the true veneration of the Sacrament 294 quotation (SO VII, 76a) settles the whole controversy 218–220 quotation often disregarded by later Lutherans 220 Chytraeus, dissatisfied with the final version of the Formula 60–63 Church Fellowship, confessed through common participation in the Supper 404 Concomitance, cannot be a defense for withholding the cup 75 cannot be used as an argument for a symbolic understanding of the Verba 76, 77 Consecration and its effects 117–352 achieves the sacramental union 121, 186, 213, 214, 246, 248 c commanded by Christ 191 confessed by Apologia 218, 219 confessed by Bugenhagen 183–185 confessed by Early Church 248–252 confessed by the Formula 194, 219 confessed by Luther 181, 189, 193 defended by the Apologia 217, 218 denied by Carlstadt 181 denied by Hunnius 222–224 denied by Melanchthon 207 denied by Philippists 208–210 defined 190 given to the church through Christ’s command and promise 200 in dispute after Luther’s death 217 not “magic” 206–210, 338 not “Romanizing” 218, 220 not similar to blessing ordinary food 188 synonyms of 188, 189 Chemnitz’s doctrine in harmony with sola gratia 331 as effective taught by Lutheran Church from its inception 422 its results 246–253 “Consecrationist” vs “Receptionist,” really a secondary question to certainty 428, 468 Copi, I. N. #4 Cyprian, heed what Christ said 44 on erring in simplicity 333, 334 Cyril of Alexandria 392–394, #86 Difference between Lutherans and Romanists on the veneration 285–295 Distribution formulas are not consecratory 197 Doctrine, every, has its own foundation in certain texts 45 Encyclopedia of Philosophy, on “Subject and Predicate” 156, #38 Effects of the sacramental eating and drinking 353–402 Einsiedel Letters of Luther #77 Elert, Werner #87 Entire Christ present in the Sacrament 78–93
Epistemological question, how does one know that he has the same Supper today as instituted by Christ 176 basis for certainty of the Real Presence is the unconditional command and promise of Christ 204, 220, 429, 468 Erlandsson, Seth #43, #54 Eucharist, see also Lord’s Supper a testimony of unity and faith 402–405 Examination II, draws a precise line between Lutheran and Roman doctrine 10 Faith accepts the gift of the Supper 375–387 as one kind of eating does not negate sacramental eating 377 necessary for worthy eating 376, 385, 387 Forgiveness of sins offered through the ministry of the Gospel 357 given in the Supper 357, 378 Formula of Concord on the consecration (SO VII, 73–90) 335–352 admits dissension among some Lutherans on the consecration 215 analogy of Personal Union to show Sacramental Union 127 avoids using “Four-Cause” paradigm 63 Christ one indivisible person with God 114 defines the action of the Supper 257 doctrine of consecration rejected by Hunnius 221–225 does not condemn those who err ingenuously 333, 334 enumerates the divine attributes communicated to the human nature 91 gives confessional status to Cyril’s words 394 intention of the Lord’s Word must be fulfilled 471 on modes of Christ’s presence 95–103 present-day reluctance to accept Formula on consecration 220 refers to Luther-Wolferinus correspondence 340–352 on the rule Nihil habet 30, 338–352 Index | spiritual eating useful and necessary 362 takes over Luther’s exegesis of 1 Cor. 11:23–25 194 refutation of the Formula attempted by Sacramentarians 92 on the veneration 296–305 the Verba not to be omitted 211, 212 Fraenkel, Peter, on Melanchthon’s view of the Lord’s Supper #80 Franck, F. H. R., misrepresents Chemnitz on the repletive mode 112 Fritz, J. H. C. #51, #97 Furberg, Ingemar #43 Genus Majestaticum, denied by the Sacramentarians 413 George of Anhalt on the Real Presence and the Adoration 278–280 on his correspondence with Luther #69 on the outward adoration 434 Green, Lowell #32, #58, #93 Gregory of Nazianzus, honored Christ on the altar in the Sacrament 277 Haile, H. G. #43 Hardt, Tom G. A. #14, #21, #24, #81 Hayakawa, F. I. #34 Heppe, Heinrich #7, #10 Heretics not admitted to the Supper 404 Hilary, warns against imposing one’s own ideas on the text 31 Histori des Sacramentstreit, source book to supplement the Apologia 16 confesses the veneration of the Sacrament as proof of an effective consecration 278–280, 434, #23 Hoenecke, Adolf #88, #90, #91, #99 Hunnius, Aegidius on the consecration 221–225 depotentiates the Verba 331 perpetuates the doctrine of Melanchthon 431 teaches that there is no presence until the sumptio #63, #73 Identical Predication. See Modes of predication Intention, directed towards fulfilling Christ’s command 471–473
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 and 162:
The Consecration | 348 Luther next
Page 163 and 164:
The Consecration | actione accipimu
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: Abraham, took his reason captive 53
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?