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

| The Lord’s Supper
33 Similarly, the Calvinists alter the Supper and its observance (actio)
by asserting that the substantial body of Christ which is in the Supper
is “in the fiery heaven outside this world” (LS 42; emphasis added).
34 Chemnitz recognized that the meaning of these terms had to be
clarified because of the doctrinal issues involved. There was a genuine
disagreement regarding what the Sacrament of the Altar was, and
these divergences led to serious consequences, since they ran counter
to the Biblical revelation. In such a vital matter it was necessary to
go beyond lexical definitions and give what logicians call a “precising
definition” of the key words “action” and “use” in this context.
There are cases where “ordinary usage must be transcended . . . . The
definiendum is not a new term but one with an established, although
vague usage.” 4 Just as precising definitions are of extreme importance
in the defining of laws and legal terms, so they are also imperative
when theological terms are used. They must have precise Scriptural
content. Chemnitz asserts that “Christ has commanded us to do in
the action of the sacrament what he himself did. He did not, however,
perform a mute action but spoke” (Ex 2, 226; emphasis added). Speaking
of the consecration, he says, “Therefore the Words of Institution
are spoken in our Lord’s Supper, not merely for the sake of history
but to show to the church that Christ Himself, through His Word,
according to His command and promise, is present in the action of
the Supper and by the power of this Word offers His body and blood
to those who eat it” (Ex 2, 229; emphasis added). A few pages later
Chemnitz precises the definition of “action” even more, “The institution
of the Supper prescribes the action thus: To take bread and wine,
bless, divide, offer, receive, eat, and add this Word of Christ: ‘This is
my body; this is my blood,’ and do all this in remembrance of Him”
(Ex 2, 249; emphasis added). Within the limits of this precise definition
Chemnitz regards the terms “action” and “use” as synonymous
(Ex 2, 245; Ex 2, 494).
35 Chemnitz elaborates further by stating that the institution of the
Lord’s Supper has not only been handed down as a dogma, “but
there are used in it a number of words which expressly signify a precept
and a command of Christ: ‘Take; eat; drink of it, all of you;
do this’” (Ex 2, 341). Chemnitz also makes clear that the words “do
this” are intended for the church to the end of time, “The words of
command are not meant for only the time and action of that first