Luther said that if he had to choose between Rome and the Enthusiasts, as he called them, he would choose Rome, for there there was certainty of the body and blood of Christ, while with the Enthusiasts there was certainty only of bread and wine, with the body and blood spiritualized away from the bread and wine. Luther's teaching on the Lord's Supper, however, is not a choice between alternatives but an insistence upon the whole. Body and blood may not be separated from bread and wine to fit the demands of reason. Christ simply does and gives what He ays and in Him and His Supper there is no gap between earthly and heavenly. -- Dr. Norman Nagel, The Springfielder, Fall 1963, p. 48.
As pointed out earlier, IF there are the verba, and IF there are bread and wine, the Enthusiasts have the Body and Blood. Whether they think they do or not is not material -- God's Word does what it says it will do, and our believing or correct doctrine are not what makes this occur. Of course, the 2 "if's" stand there as a warning, both to Enthusiasts and others who either distort the verba or tinker with the elements.
ReplyDeleteThe Formula's concern is that the Reformed may in fact so alter the signification of the vocables as not to truly have the words - see SD VII:32.
ReplyDeleteGiven that teaching is done both by words and practice, I wonder if such "alteration" may also occur when the reliquae are treated in a disrespectful manner. (Of course, such disrespectful treatment -- as well as misuse of the verba and using non-biblical elements -- both teaches something as well as reflecting what is believed).
ReplyDeleteWhen we behave like Enthusiasts ourselves, and conduct our worship accordingly, we create this same choice in the minds of people now, and they head to Rome just as in Luther's hypothetical choice because because they find among us only Enthusiasm with a Lutheran cover.
ReplyDeleteI would be a good deal more concerned about this than controversies over reliquae and whether "fruit of the vine" must be wine.