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

The Sacramental Union |
ing Christ, knowing that ‘death no longer has dominion over him’”
(Ap X, 4). Chemnitz knew that the body of Christ was not lifeless,
that is, without the blood. The body remains in the personal union as
part of the God-Man. Equally, it remains in its risen state in full possession
of the blood. Chemnitz is quite specific, “Christ mentions His
body and blood, not because His body is separated from His blood
or because both are separated from His soul and outside the personal
union with the deity, apart and separate, as if He wished us to believe
He is present in the Supper only in the abstract” (TNC 432; emphasis
added). Chemnitz seems to recognize that there may be a temptation
to separate the personal union because of references in the Scripture
(e.g., the Verba) to the natural properties of the human nature. Hence
he says that “we also must be on guard that the personal union is not
dissolved, destroyed, or separated because of the natural properties,
and this requires the fullest and most intimate union and presence of
the natures in and with one another” (TNC 443).
73 The position of Chemnitz becomes apparent in his lengthy examination
of Trent on the withholding of the cup from the laity and the
clergy when they are not celebrants. He first advances evidence from
Scripture for communion under both kinds. Here his chief argument
is the command of Christ, “Drink of it, all of you.” “Luke (as it should
be diligently noted) shows that Christ willed that both parts should
be equal in the way they are distributed and used” (Ex 2, 340).
74 Another reason for not changing the command of Christ for all
communicants to drink of the cup is the example of the Apostles.
They knew at the first Supper that they were receiving the living and
whole body of Christ already in the bread, and yet they complied with
Christ’s words, “Drink of it, all of you.” Chemnitz explains:
The fourth reason is taken from the example of the Apostles. For
although the Apostles saw that, when he offered them the cup, the
blood had not yet been separated from the body of Christ nor shed,
they nevertheless did not judge that for this reason the use of the cup
depended on their will or that it might simply be omitted since they
were receiving the not bloodless but living and whole body of Christ
already in the bread; but as they were commanded: “Drink of it, all of
you,” so they complied in simple obedience with this command without
inquiring into the reason and without the pretext that it was dangerous.
For Mark says: “And they all drank of it.” Thus the Apostles have
instructed us by their example that in the mystery of the Supper we
should adhere with simple obedience to the institution and command