The consecrated bread is the Body of Christ also when it lies upon the altar or when the pastor holds it in his hand. This is the Lutheran view. -- Hermann Sasse, *We Confess: The Sacraments* p. 136
Certainly not Melanchthon's view in later life, and his view is likely behind the mischief in WELS and company (though I don't think they're unanimous on that - our good friend Pr. Webber in particular has something to say on this topic, I believe). BUT it is the view of the Formula, and so of any who subscribe to the BOC. When St. John Chrysostom's words are paraphrased in the Latin, they include the confession that Christ's words bring it about that the bread *on all the altars of Christendom* until the end of the world is His body.
I have been peeking at Eastern Orthodoxy the last couple of years, though now I think enough things have become bothersome to me that I doubt they are what they think they are. They are very careful to place a cloth under the communicants as they receive so as to not get any on the floor. What is the Lutheran view of His body and blood if the elements "hit the floor"?
Historically Lutherans also used the cloth under the elements as they were distributed (called the housling cloth). By the 19th century the idea had taken hold in much of Lutheranism that our Lord joins his body only to that which is received; not to that which is dropped (Loehe). The result was a decided lack of reverence toward the reliquae. The late 20th century saw a recovery in significant parts of American Lutheranism of the older belief that whatever has been consecrated is truly the body and blood of Christ. There was an interesting discussion on this topic on Gottesdienst Blog a few months ago.
The WELS teaches that we don't know when the bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the wine His Blood. This is because they don't believe Jesus tells us when it happens. I think they hold to the position of Franz Pieper on this, but I may be wrong.
Zion Detroit still has the tradition of the subdeacon holding a paten under the chin of each communicant as they receive the Body of Christ.
where in the Confessions does it indicate that the consecrated bread and wine, prior to distribution, are the Body and Blood of Christ?
Could you direct me to an article explaining and defending this viewpoint?
I see clearly from the Scriptures that by the time of the distribution, the elements are the Body and Blood of Christ. But I do not see how the commendable practice of reading the Words of Institution causes the change. Reading the Words of Institution is not the same as doing the Words. Doing the Words would seem to be what consecrates the elements, or am I leaving something out?
It is the SPEAKING of the Words of Christ, by which He has joined His speaking to ours, that accomplishes the presence. Our Symbols express this clearly in citing Luther in FC SD VII:78:
When we follow His institution and command in the Supper and say, "This is My Body," then it is His body, not because of our speaking or our declarative word, but because of His command in which He told us to speak and to do *and has attached His own command AND DEED to our speaking.*
Additionally, in the Latin text of FC VII:76 we find that Christ's word "even to this day and up to his second coming is effective and works so that *per omnes mensas ecclesias* His true body and blood are present. - upon all the altars of the Church.
thanks very much for taking the time to entertain my questions. I appreciate your explanation and Confessional reference. "Attached His own command and deed to our speaking" is really key and worthy of further pondering. It's an exciting reality.
Joel (and others) might find it profitable to read "Domesticating an Untamed Sacramental Rule," by Keith Killinger, *Lutheran Quarterly* VII:4 (Winter 1993), pp. 401-424, which is on this very question.
Not Melanchthon's view, though, or that of the WELS and its fellowship partners, no?
ReplyDeleteCertainly not Melanchthon's view in later life, and his view is likely behind the mischief in WELS and company (though I don't think they're unanimous on that - our good friend Pr. Webber in particular has something to say on this topic, I believe). BUT it is the view of the Formula, and so of any who subscribe to the BOC. When St. John Chrysostom's words are paraphrased in the Latin, they include the confession that Christ's words bring it about that the bread *on all the altars of Christendom* until the end of the world is His body.
ReplyDeleteI have been peeking at Eastern Orthodoxy the last couple of years, though now I think enough things have become bothersome to me that I doubt they are what they think they are. They are very careful to place a cloth under the communicants as they receive so as to not get any on the floor. What is the Lutheran view of His body and blood if the elements "hit the floor"?
ReplyDeleteHistorically Lutherans also used the cloth under the elements as they were distributed (called the housling cloth). By the 19th century the idea had taken hold in much of Lutheranism that our Lord joins his body only to that which is received; not to that which is dropped (Loehe). The result was a decided lack of reverence toward the reliquae. The late 20th century saw a recovery in significant parts of American Lutheranism of the older belief that whatever has been consecrated is truly the body and blood of Christ. There was an interesting discussion on this topic on Gottesdienst Blog a few months ago.
ReplyDeleteThe WELS teaches that we don't know when the bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the wine His Blood. This is because they don't believe Jesus tells us when it happens. I think they hold to the position of Franz Pieper on this, but I may be wrong.
ReplyDeleteZion Detroit still has the tradition of the subdeacon holding a paten under the chin of each communicant as they receive the Body of Christ.
Pr. Weedon,
ReplyDeletewhere in the Confessions does it indicate that the consecrated bread and wine, prior to distribution, are the Body and Blood of Christ?
Could you direct me to an article explaining and defending this viewpoint?
I see clearly from the Scriptures that by the time of the distribution, the elements are the Body and Blood of Christ. But I do not see how the commendable practice of reading the Words of Institution causes the change. Reading the Words of Institution is not the same as doing the Words. Doing the Words would seem to be what consecrates the elements, or am I leaving something out?
Thanks!
Joel,
ReplyDeleteIt is the SPEAKING of the Words of Christ, by which He has joined His speaking to ours, that accomplishes the presence. Our Symbols express this clearly in citing Luther in FC SD VII:78:
When we follow His institution and command in the Supper and say, "This is My Body," then it is His body, not because of our speaking or our declarative word, but because of His command in which He told us to speak and to do *and has attached His own command AND DEED to our speaking.*
Additionally, in the Latin text of FC VII:76 we find that Christ's word "even to this day and up to his second coming is effective and works so that *per omnes mensas ecclesias* His true body and blood are present. - upon all the altars of the Church.
Pr. Weedon,
ReplyDeletethanks very much for taking the time to entertain my questions. I appreciate your explanation and Confessional reference. "Attached His own command and deed to our speaking" is really key and worthy of further pondering. It's an exciting reality.
Joel (and others) might find it profitable to read "Domesticating an Untamed Sacramental Rule," by Keith Killinger, *Lutheran Quarterly* VII:4 (Winter 1993), pp. 401-424, which is on this very question.
ReplyDeleteWilliam, thanks for the reference!
ReplyDelete