I THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF THE REAL PRESENCE

From Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 22-24, Luke 22:19-20 and 1 Corinthians 10:16-20; 11:17-34 it is clear that both the bread and wine as well as the body and blood of Christ are in the act commanded by Christ Himself. The modifiers in these texts make it plain that the body and blood are those "given" and "shed" for the forgiveness of men's sins.

This paper will seek to demonstrate that the distinctive Scriptural doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper, as held by true Lutherans is being eroded to such a degree that it will soon be completely compatible with the Roman/Reformed view. It will also seek to show that the terminology frequently used by even orthodox Lutherans is aiding in the misunderstanding of what the Real Presence refers to.

A Summary of Christian Doctrine, by Edward W. A. Koehler, Page 2l7 "The heavenly elements present, distributed, and received in the Sacrament are the true Body and true Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have no right to add to, or to detract from, this. The "person of Christ" is indeed present at the Lord's Supper, as it is present everywhere; but it is not "Christ's whole and entire," His Body and soul, His humanity and divinity, that constitute the heavenly element, as Rome declares, but only the Body and Blood of Christ."

John Stephenson, "Admission to the Lutheran Altar; Reflections on Open vs Closed Communion" Concordia Theological Quarterly, January - April 1989. Under the topic "The Essence of the Blessed Sacrament" Professor Stephenson says "The Lutheran Holy Communion and the Reformed Communion are not one and the same, and so the Lutheran - Reformed Inter-Communion is eo ipso a charade. Union is impossible without unity, and there can be no unity where communicants commune in different realities. . . At this point we must insist that what is really present in the Lord's Supper is not simply Christ as a person, but quite specifically His actual Body and His actual Blood. Much mischief has been wrought by Lutherans keen to water down the real presence into a shadow of itself. "What is given in the Holy Supper? The really present exalted Christ, acting through His earthly minister, consecrates and distributes His actual Body and Blood to communicants believing and unbelieving alike." John Stephenson, "Admission to the Lutheran Altar; Reflections on Open vs Closed Communion" Concordia Theological Quarterly, January - April 1989. Page 43.

II TERMINOLOGY THAT HAS BLURRED THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE REAL PRESENCE

1. The Roman View

Adding to the incorrect interpretation of Jesus's words to mean "This is changed into my body," the Roman Church went a step further in order to justify some of their adaptive practices such as one-kind distribution, reservation of the sacrament, the Corpus Christi festival and the carrying of the sacrament to the sick (without speaking the words of institution in the communicant's presence). They claimed that since the body and blood of Christ were present, "the Whole Christ" was present. Since Christ was present, either of the elements was sufficient for a true sacrament.

Chapter 3 of the Council of Trent pronounced: "Therefore it is most true that as much is contained under one form as under both, for the whole and undivided Christ is under the form of bread and under any part whatsoever of that form; likewise the Whole Christ is under the form of the wine and under its parts." ECOT p. 241

The Roman Church condemned "anyone who denies that the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained in the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, but says that Christ is present in the sacrament only as a sign, or figure, or by his power."

The Lutherans responded that Christ was indeed personally present, but not in the elements. He was in the Word spoken by the pastor, His representative. What is given by Christ's spokesman and received by the communicant was the body and blood of the divine host of the meal. And it most definitly was not merely a "sign" or "figure." It was his real body and blood.

ECOT P. 229 "So in the action of the Eucharist the minister acts as an ambassador in the place of Christ, Who is Himself there present, and through the ministers pronounces these words: "This is My Body; this do," etc., and for this reason His word is efficatious. Therefore it is not a man, the minister, who by his consecration and blessing makes bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, but Christ Himself, by means of His Word, is present in this action, and by means of the Word of His institution, which is spoken through the mouth of the minister, He brings it about that the bread is His Body, and the cup His Blood, ..."

The LC-MS in the 1930s echoed Chemnitz. "Per Contra (against the Romans) we must maintain: The whole Christ is present, of course, as in the universe, so in particular in the Church and in all rites of the Church, hence also in the Lord's Supper. But in his Sacrament Christ gives something to be eaten and drunk with the mouth, and that is not the whole Christ, but Christ's body and blood, as the words of institution read: 'Take, eat; this is My body,' etc. In the Lord's Supper we therefore receive with our mouth no more and no less than Christ's body and blood . . .." Christian Dogmatics, F. Pieper, Vol. III, p. 356

This was also the public doctrine of the ALC as late as 1939. "We believe that when we receive the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper, the Lord also gives us His body and blood, according to His Word. The is the Lutheran doctrine of the real presence." Senior Catechism, The Wartburg Press, 1939.

2. The Reformed View

The Reformed could not admit to an illocal and invisible presence of Christ's body and blood apart from the person of the ascended Christ, what the Lutherans called the "sacramental presence." This led them to all sorts of ungrammatical misinterptations and even to the denial of the genus maiestaticum. The "body and blood" Jesus spoke of at the institution of the Supper could not possibly mean the "real and corporeal" body, for that they linked exclusively to the Person of the ascended Christ. The presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper for them was His personal, spiritual presence, nothing special. They made big protestations about believing in a "real presence of Christ," but it was not the presence of the true, substantial, body and blood in the bread and wine. The term "presence of Christ" is one of many ambiguous terms they used to becloud what they really did not believe. Calvin, Institutes,IV,17,19 : "It is necessary for us to establish such a presence of Christ in the sacred supper, as neither, as on the one hand, to fasten Him to the element of bread, or to enclose Him in it, or in any way to circumscribe Him, which would derogate from His celestial glory."

B. CONTEMPORARY (Post-World War II)

Commenting on the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches production, "Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (1982, Faith and Order paper 111) generally known as the Lima Paper, Charles J. Evanson, in Concordia Theological Quarterly April - July 1985 page 121. "Here we are dealing on two levels - on the earthly, we are eating bread and drinking wine; on a higher, more spiritual, level we are sharing in the Body and Blood of Christ, in the sense that we are being encountered by the reality of Christ's personal presence. All that the W.C.C. can say is that in the eating and drinking of the earthly elements in the Eucharist, Christ grants us communion with Himself."

Evanson believes that the W.C.C. in its memorial function for the Lord's Supper is using the theory of the Benedictine monk, Dom Odo Casel. "According to this theory, Christ and His work are made effectively present through the liturgical action, to grant us communion with the person of Christ."

Noticably lacking in the W.C.C.'s publication is the Scriptural teaching of the real presence of Christ's body and blood, yet the terms of personal, spiritual communion abound, sounding so religious and mystical.

It is clear that a change in American Lutheran expressions of the Real Presence occurred after 1945.

One can only speculate how Luther would react to Herbert Girgensohn's explanation of the real presence in Teaching Luther's Catechism, II. "Just as the whole act is governed by the one central fact that Jesus Himself is the Actor and Bestower, so it is also He Himself Who is given. Body and blood are not to be understood as entities separated from the unity of His Person, in which - of themselves - some special power resides. It is not that Body and Blood as material substances are vehicles of His presence; they rather signify His Person as a whole. In other words, He gives and bestows Himself. To those who gather at His Table, He gives Himself- in, with, and under the Bread and the Wine." Girgensohn gives credit for his understanding of the Lord's Supper, a novel comixture of Roman and Reformed terminology, to Willi Marxen Kiel in several German articles from 1949 and 1955.

Dr. Kent Knutson, reporting the results of "Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue, The Eucharist as Sacrifice," 1967 p. 15, surrenders several Lutheran distinctives. The representatives of the Lutheran World Federation were able "to communicate their full commitment to the doctrine that the crucified and risen Lord is wholly, truly and personally present in both his human and divine natures in the sacrament." He also says that Lutherans believe "the Lord is present in the whole Eucharistic action, both before and after the eating and drinking." This is a significant modification of Scriptural, confessional theology. It says nothing about the Real Presence of the body and blood of Christ in the bread and wine.

The Summary Statement of Roman and Lutheran theologians of this 1967 dialogue concluded: "We affirm that in the sacrament of the Lord's supper Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is present wholly and entirely, in his body and blood, under the signs of bread and wine." This is the same kind of ambiguous statement the Reformers fought against in the 16th century.

"The Sacrament of the Altar and Its Implications: Statement Adopted by the 1960 Convention of the United Lutheran Chruch in America as a Guide to Its Congregations" said, "In the Sacrament the total risen Christ who shared with us our humanity and raised it into glory is present. . . . to impart Himself to man as such (true God), giving the body that was broken and the blood that was shed on Calvary. . ." "Christ is present and graciously imparts himself to (sic) the entire action."

Martin J. Heiniken in an article "An Orientation Toward the Lord's Supper Today" in "Meaning and Practice of the Lord's Supper,"(Muhlenburg Press, 1961 Helmut T. Lehmann) shockingly says that "The addition of the word "real" to "presence" is redundant. There is no presence other than that of the self- impartation of the total Christ." . . . "The bread and wine mediate the presence of Christ. . . ." The words of institution are God's creative word which "bring about Christ's presence for us in and through the elements."

The booklet "What Every Lutheran Should Know About The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper" by Channing L. Bete Company contain this contemporary expression of the real presence: "Communicants may include: ... OTHER BAPTIZED CHRISTIANS who believe that the crucified Lord is present in this sacrament, giving Himself to His people."

Page l2 in explaining "The Mystery of Christ's Presence" it says "Though the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine, Christ becomes present in, with and under these earthly elements. This great mystery cannot be explained. But, though we can never understand how Christ becomes present, we BELIEVE that Christ is truly present.

Page l4 under the title "The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Affects Our Daily Lives" it says the Lutheran attends communion to "Strengthen our belief that Christ is ever present and that we are invited to partake of Jesus' presence in the sacramental elements of Bread and Wine."

The ELCA publishes a catechism, "Affirm," for its youth that clearly shows that the drift has gone pretty far in the direction of Roman/Reformed understanding of the Lord's Supper. Many objections on the basis of the Lutheran Confessions could be made against the doctrine presented, but please note the number of times the "personal presence" (15) is presented as the meaning of "This is by body . . . blood."(7 most of which are quotes of the verba.) The 6th chapter of John is also quoted as a sacramental reference 3 times.

Even the sainted Dr. F. E. Mayer in The Religious Bodies of America, 1961, overstates the position of the Lutheran Confessions on p. 167 where he claims that the Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, VII,6 means that "In the Lord's Supper Christ offers Himself, His entire Person, life, and work, in the words and the elements to all communicants." He does refer to the Confessional position that "Christ offers us the entire treasure which as God-man He has brought from heaven," but goes on to say in a footnote, not that the benefits of Christ's death, are received with the body and blood of Christ, but that "the believing communicant receives the entire Christ." It makes one wonder what the unbelieving communicant recieves: only a part of Christ?

That something was happening to the Lutheran doctrine of the Real Presence was not unknown even back in the early sixties. Some people did recognize that Lutherans were abandoning what they had once confessed.

"The adverbs vere, realiter, and substantialiter make it impossible for Lutherans to water down the corporeal- objective presence of the body and blood of Christ into nothing more than the personal presence of Christ in his body and blood, . . ." reminds Hans-Joachim Huhnke. ("Realpraesenz und Konsekration: Ein Beitrag zu Zentralpunkten lutherische Abendssmahlslehre, Sanct Athanasius, Vol. 15, no. 31 (June 28, 1964) One wonders what Huhnke's comments would be when he sees even orthodox Lutherans using the terminology of the Reformed and the Romanists.

In summary, we see that the doctrine of "the real presence of Christ's body and blood" has already become the doctrine of "the real presence of Christ" in some circles. There is little resistance to the intrusion of the terminology into our own synodical churches.

III THE EFFECTS OF AMBIGUOUS TERMINOLOGY

Let me demonstrate that this terminology is being used widely in our own synod to inadequately describe our biblical and confessional position

. From the Mother's Day bulletin of a Texas District Congregation: "Holy Communion is offered to every baptized Christian who has been instructed and confirmed in our Lutheran faith, who confess it with us as in the Creeds, and who may, in good conscience and faith, receive the Sacrament in keeping with the understanding with which it is celebrated here, namely, that in the bread and wine Christ Himself is truly present to forgive our sins and empower us for Godly living."

From a service for Easter Joy in Life "The invitation to join Christ at His Table:
Leader: Come to this table in peace and joy
Come, because you want to draw close to Christ who is ready to meet you in bread and wine to bring you joy and peace in this life and in the life to come.
Come, because you want to draw close to each other in love and communication.

From a Christmas Eve worship guide of a large congregation in the Texas District:

The following questions are helpful in preparing for the Lord's Supper:

A. Do I believe that I am a sinful human being without hope of salvation except for God's mercy in Christ?
B. Do I believe that Jesus Christ is God's Son and my personal Savior?
C. Do I believe that he is personally present in the Sacrament of Holy Communion with His Body and Blood?
D. Do I hope and intend by the power fo (sic) the Holy Spirit to live a better Christian life?

From an announcement card for Holy Communion: "I believe that the Risen Christ is truly present in the sacrament and that with the bread and wine I receive His true Body and Blood."

From a Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod congregation's February 5, 1989 bulletin: "All who plan to attend the celebration of the Lord's Supper are asked to realize that Jesus is fully present in the bread and the wine. Visiting members from other Lutheran Churches, who confess the real presence of Christ, are invited to celebrate with us."

From the January 14, 1990, worship folder of a Missouri Synod church in Central Texas. The communion registration card: "also asks if you accept the real presence of Christ in the Holy Supper."

From a bulletin of a Missouri Synod congregation August 19, 1990 in the Eastern part of our State, after an explanation of instruction concerning the Sacrament, this bulletin says: "After this period of study candidates are admitted to communion in a ceremony in which they confess before the congregation their conviction concerning the real presence of Christ in His Supper and concerning the blessings He gives us here..."

Synod wide negligence with regard to the ambiguous terminology can also be demonstrated. The new Catechism of the LC-MS uses the term give or receive the "body and blood" at least 19 times, but quotes only part of Apology X, 4 that refers to "the presence of the living Christ" as a benefit of the Lord's Supper. The previous sentence in the Apology says clearly that Christ's body and blood "are truly and substantially present. . . with . . . bread and wine." Only when quoted in context is the phrase "presence of the living Christ" really understood.

The pseudo-eucharistic prayer in Lutheran Worship, Divine Service II, pages 171 and 190, invokes the Holy Spirit to: "prepare us joyfully to remember our Redeemer and receive him who come to us in his body and blood." We do not receive "him" as a person. "He" does not come to us "in his body and blood." The more accurate, Scriptural and Lutheran statement would be: ". . . remember our Redeemer who gives us His body and blood."

Lowell C. Green in his article Ecumenical Concerns and Communion Fellowship in Luther's Day and Ours, in Evangelical directions for the Lutheran Church, Page 95. Describing the Ecumenical pressure put on the Lutherans by the Protestants:

"The accusation that Luther and his followers were too realistic in their doctrine was accompanied by charges of materialism, a physical understanding of the sacrament, the enclosing of God in bread, or even cannibalism - a charge leveled also against the theologians of the ancient church! How can one avoid such accusations? It's easy! Speak no longer about the presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, but speak simply of the presence of the "whole person" of Christ. As a matter of fact, certain Lutherans in America have decided to follow just that course. But it is a deceptive course."

Norman Nagel, "Closed Communion: In the Way of the Gospel; In the Way of the Law" Concordia Journal, January 1991:

"From the Words of Institution the Lutheran Book of Worship excizes a reference to drinking (1 Cor. 11:25). Some have inserted the word "sacrament" into the Small Catechism's first answer. This answer is some times difficult to find in some Lutheran documents which speak of Christ giving Himself rather than repeating what he said: His Body and Blood for us to eat and to drink. A weakening in this confession naturally brings with it a weakening in the care exercised in closed communion, as Luther saw so clearly."

B. DOCTRINAL

The professors at the seminaries can teach the objective, real presence of Christ's body and blood with power and eloquence, but if the pastors, teachers, catechisms, Sunday School materials, church bulletins and periodicals adopt the current terminology and teach the real presence of Christ in place of the Scriptural truth, the people will come to believe that which is error with regard to the sacred meal. Then they will be robbed of the Sacrament even as the Sacramentarians of Luther's day were. Some of our pastors today are undermining the confessional doctrine, not by honestly, openly challenging it, but, deliberately or unknowingly adopting faulty phrasiology, by simply presenting publically a Roman/Reformed formula that has emotional appeal. Who knows how many in our churches today have a faulty view and faith in the Lord's Supper. Will we all soon go the way of one of the congregations of the ELCA?

Luther's response to a similar survey was not to give up the Christians to ignorance and misbelief, but to write his Small and Large Catechism.

What our Circuit Councilors and District Presidents are doing or saying about these doctrinal aberrations, who can say? Pastoral dealing is often so private that no one knows if it is taking place. Certainly the results of it are imperceptible, as are most of the brotherly admonitions one knows of personally.

IV PARISH PASTORS CAN HELP RECLAIM THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF THE REAL PRESENCE

Let us first refresh our confidence in the doctrine of Scripture. Read what it says about what is present: The body and blood of Christ and bread and wine. Note what it does not say is present: Christ, whole and entire, personally present. Look at the Catechisms of Luther and the other Confessions, which (upon a cursory count, non-computer aided) use the term "body and blood of Christ" 150 times and the term "presence of Christ" 5 times, 3 of which are expressing the opinons of the confessor's opponents.

Hear the simple description of Chemnitz: "Therefore Christ, God and man is present in the total action of the Supper instituted by Him, and offers to those who eat it His Body and Blood." ECOT p. 248

ECOT p. 25l ".... He (Christ) wishes to offer and communicate His Body and Blood to those who eat, in order that He might be and remain in the believers not only through faith and spirit but, as the ancients speak, also by natural or substantial participation in His Sacrament, Christ gives something to be eaten and drunk with the mouth, and that is not the whole Christ, but Christ's Body and Blood, as the Words of Institution read: "Take, eat; this is My Body," etc.

Lowell C. Green "God's People in Fellowship at the Communion Table" Concordia Theological Quarterly, July 1977 Page 3:

1. Holy Communion is the sacramental union of the bread and wine with the Body and Blood of Christ.

Are we dealing with merely "a personal presence of Christ"? This is not an adequate description of the position of the Evangelical Lutheran Church." After a lengthy treatise on the real presence, he concludes quoting The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord, Article 7: "...the union of the Body and Blood of Christ with the bread and wine is not a personal union, like that of the two natures in Christ, but a sacramental union ..." (S. D. VII 37).

Once we have determined that we are in heart and indeed Lutherans, let us as teachers of the church teach that which Christ teaches. Let us eliminate human speculation and sophistic speculation, no matter how good it sounds, about the "presence" and just teach what Jesus and Paul taught through the Holy Spirit. Let us also follow the pattern of the original confessors and expose in a loving fashion the errors of ancient and modern false teachings, so that our Christian people are clear and confident in what they believe and do not believe when they approach the sacred Supper. We owe them this.

Let us also be loving enough to admonish those we see using terminology that expresses an inadequate position of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood. Encourage these friends to consult the Scripture and the confessions for accurate phrases and thoughts for their bulletins and newsletters. Encourage them to love the people who approach them for the Sacrament and not to short-change them with quick acceptance of pious phrases of belief in some kind of "Christ's Presence." Give every communicant an instruction in the faith built of gold and silver, not hay and straw. We Lutherans are scripturally and confessionally equipped and pledged to give more than our Protestant and Roman colleagues.