Lutheran view of Reformed churches

[Me Died Blue]

Here is the LCMS's official answer online to the question of what they understand the main differences to be between them and Reformed churches:

Q. What are the major differences between the Missouri Synod and Reformed churches?

A. The major differences between the LCMS and most Reformed churches include the following:

1) The centrality of the Gospel. Reformed churches tend to emphasize the "glory" or "sovereignty" of God as the central teaching of Scripture while Lutherans believe that the central teaching of Scripture--and the key to understanding and interpreting the Bible--is the Gospel: the Good News of salvation for sinners by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

2) The nature of Christ's atonement. Lutherans believe that when Jesus died on the cross He atoned for the sins of all people of all time--even those who have not or will not come to faith in Christ. Reformed churches have historically taught a "limited atonement" of Christ, i.e., that Christ's death on the cross atoned only for the sins of "the elect"--those who have been predestined from eternity to believe in Christ and will spend eternity with Him in heaven.

3) Predestination. Most Reformed churches teach a "double predestination," i.e., that some people are predestined by God from eternity to be saved and others are predestined by God from eternity to be damned. Lutherans believe that while God in His grace in Christ Jesus has indeed chosen from eternity to save those who trust in Jesus Christ, He has not predestined anyone to damnation. Those who are saved are saved by grace alone; those who are damned are damned not by God's choice but because of their own sin and stubbornness. This is a mystery that is incomprehensible to human reason (as are all true Scriptural articles of faith).

4) The authority of Scripture. A fourth difference has to do with the proper use of reason and its relationship to the authority of Scripture. Lutherans look to Scripture alone as the source of all Christian doctrine, and hold to the teachings of Scripture even when they are incomprehensible to human reason. Reformed churches tend to place human reason alongside Scripture as a source of doctrinal authority, and seek to bring paradoxical Scriptural truths into harmony with human reason in ways that (in our view) undermine the truthfulness and authority of Scripture.

5) The Sacraments. Most Reformed churches (to a greater or lesser degree) view the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper merely as "signs" or "symbols" of God's grace. Lutherans believe that Baptism and the Lord's Supper (which is the true body and blood of Christ in, with, and under bread and wine) are actual means of God's grace through which the Holy Spirit works to convey and/or strengthen faith.

I have my own more specific thoughts on all the particular points, but first I'd like to hear others'.

For now I'll just say that I would have expected a number of laypeople within the LCMS to have relative ignorance on the historic Reformed confessions and practice (just as a number of Reformed laypeople are ignorant of historic Lutheran doctrine, and even their own doctrine), but that I'm truly surprised to see that type of ignorance and misunderstanding from the official LCMS site (with regard to the first and fourth points to a certain extent, but especially the fifth).

 

[Scott Bushey]

Chris,
Apparently, the author has confused the reformed w/ the present day evangelical or charismatic.

 

[Scott Shahan]

This universal Salvation I don't get?!!!

2) The nature of Christ's atonement. Lutherans believe that when Jesus died on the cross He atoned for the sins of all people of all time--even those who have not or will not come to faith in Christ.

I had a professor say this in class the other day. It doesn't matter if you believe or not; Jesus died for that sin of unbelief, so it doesn't matter if you believe in Him, your covered dude, His blood has covered you.

The trouble with this is this;

Jesus died for sin, but not for unbelief. Unbelief is the sin for which there is no cure, because without faith in Jesus, one cannot profit from his atoning death. John 3:18.

duh


Scott:bigsmile:

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by Scott Shahan
This universal Salvation I don't get?!!!

2) The nature of Christ's atonement. Lutherans believe that when Jesus died on the cross He atoned for the sins of all people of all time--even those who have not or will not come to faith in Christ.

I had a professor say this in class the other day. It doesn't matter if you believe or not; Jesus died for that sin of unbelief, so it doesn't matter if you believe in Him, your covered dude, His blood has covered you.

The trouble with this is this;

Jesus died for sin, but not for unbelief. Unbelief is the sin for which there is no cure, because without faith in Jesus, one cannot profit from his atoning death. John 3:18.

duh


Scott:bigsmile:

I didn't even see that, Scott. It's hard to believe that Lutherans are totally man centered. Based upon this premise, Heaven could be empty.

 

[RamistThomist]

It's hard to believe that Lutherans are totally man centered

Be careful, I once cautiously suggested that Lutherans might be different from Reformed folk and I was sternly told otherwise.

 

[Me Died Blue]

Regarding their rejection of Limited Atonement - of course they're going to disagree on that, as they have historically done ever since the generation after Luther. The same is true with regard to the double predestination and the Real Presence in the Supper. Basically, it's no surprise that we already know they still disagree with us on those points, and I'm at least glad that they understand us on them.

So rather than simply having another reiteration of why we believe our view on those issues is the correct one, I started this thread specifically to focus on the aspects of our beliefs that they seem to (the LCMS) misunderstand, at least as evidenced by the above statement from their site. What misunderstandings of historic Reformed theology do people here see in parts of those five points (no pun intended) of disagreement they listed? Also, what do you think may have caused those misunderstandings of historic Reformed theology to come about in today's circles? Is it all them or partially us? Either way, what could be done to try and clarify them?

 

[Me Died Blue]

Originally posted by Draught Horse

It's hard to believe that Lutherans are totally man centered

Be careful, I once cautiously suggested that Lutherans might be different from Reformed folk and I was sternly told otherwise.

In fairness, the context of that discussion was in regard to a very specific issue, and the belief that we (Reformed and Lutherans) are united on that issue does not automatically imply the belief that we are united on every issue; indeed, I have not heard anyone claim anything even remotely resembling the latter belief.

 

[RamistThomist]

You're right. That was a long time ago although I do maintain there was some stubstance in my claim.

 

[RamistThomist]

Basically, I was told I had a "decrepid" knowledge of Reformed theology for suggesting that Calvin and Luther didn't ahve the same view on Law-Gospel. Note, however, I was not denying that Calvin had a view on Law-Gospel. More importantly, I was quoting Peter Lillback, President of a major Reformed seminary. If I had a decrepid understanding of Reformed history (which I might have), then by strictest logic so must he.

Btw, I actually have come closer to a Law-Gospel hermeneutic, but I still see some tensions that force me to stumble in belief and thus remain outside the camp.

 

[beej6]

I've reviewed the LCMS site in the past. I find it interesting that right on the first point, they place the words "glory" and "sovereignty" in quotation marks. I pray that doesn't mean they don't believe in God's glory and sovereignty... or maybe the other four points show that.

And they juxtapose that against justification by faith alone, as if the two are incompatible.

 

[ADKing]

The first point listed above: ie resolving the main point of the scriptures to the glory of God or the gospel seems to be very important. In a fascinating article called "The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology" Geerhardus Vos deals with some of the distinctions between Lutheranism and the Reformed. He boils them down to this question. I supply a couple of quotes but would encourage anyone to read this article online at http://www.biblicaltheology.org/dcrt.pdf

"To what, then, does one attribute the fact that from the beginning this concept of the covenant appears so much in the foreground of Reformed theology? There must be something in its starting point by which it feels itself drawn to this idea. One might perhaps say: the question is superfluous. The doctrine of the covenant is taken from the Scriptures. It came with the Reformation’s return to the Scriptures, and there is no need for any but this natural explanation. However, such a reply would not at all be satisfactory. The Lutherans as well as the Reformed cast themselves on the Scriptures. Even though we now fully recognize that the latter better than the former succeeded in mastering the
rich content of Scripture, this fact in turn also calls for an explanation. Because Reformed theology took hold of the Scriptures in their deepest root idea, it was in a position to work through them more fully from this central point and to let each part of their content come to its own.

This root idea which served as the key to unlock the rich treasuries of the Scriptures was the preeminence of God’s glory in the consideration of all that has been created. All other explanations of the difference between the Lutheran and the Reformed traditions in the end again come down to
this, that the former begins with man and the latter with God. God does not exist because of man, but man because of God. This is what is written at the entrance of the temple of Reformed theology."

and

"Let us now further consider how the requirement of God’s honor is reckoned with in this doctrine of the covenant of redemption. After the fall man will never again be able to work in a manner pleasing to God except a completed work of God be performed on his behalf. Earning eternal life has forever been taken out of his hands. Everything that subjectively happens within him can only be a principle and phenomenon of eternal life itself and in no way a prerequisite for eternal life. The obtaining of eternal life thus comes to lie in God, as a work that is His alone, in which His glory shines and of which nothing, without detracting from that glory, can be attributed to the creature. On this point the entire Reformation, both Lutheran and Calvinist, took exception to Rome, which
failed to appreciate this fundamental truth. Yet the reasons which had driven both sides to this protest were different. With Luther it was the thirst for peace and stability for a restless conscience which could find no tranquility in Rome’s salvation by works. As long as the sinner himself has to do something for his acquittal, his work remains unstable. Thus the sola fide became the shibboleth
of the German Reformation, justification, its principle doctrine. One will agree that, despite all the purity with which this doctrine develops and in which, in developed form, it is given anew to the church, the highest point is still not reached, namely, that point from which the Scripture itself views the matter when, in the words of Paul, it sees the heart of Abraham’s faith in his “giving God the glory” (Rom. 4:20). Even in its doctrine of justification Lutheranism did not catch hold of this idea in its fullness. Not a purely theological, but a partly anthropological motif ran through it. It was different with the Reformed. They, too, felt the same necessity to leave the waves of Rome’s salvation by works and once again stand on solid ground. But beside and behind this necessity there lay a deeper longing: a thirst for the glory of God that did not primarily meditate on its own peace. When the Reformed takes the obtaining of salvation completely out of man’s hands, he does this so that the glory which God gets from it might be uncurtailed. What is important for him is the realization that God glorifies Himself in the salvation of sinners, whereas the Lutheran is satisfied when it merely becomes evident that man brings nothing of his own instability into the picture. For the Reformed the center of gravity does not lie in justification as such, but in the principle by which the latter is to be judged and which the Scripture everywhere applies when it teaches us to regard the
work of salvation in its totality as being exclusively a work of God. "

 

[Peter]

I thought the only difference between Lutherans and Reformed on the Law is their denial or weakening of the 3rd use. These days I think you see more "Reformed" folks trying to draw closer to a Lutheran view of physical or semi-opere ex operato efficacy of the sacraments and ceremonialism and ritualism.

 

[py3ak]

Those were soom good quotes by Vos.

 

[AdamM]

For what it's worth, at 2.5mm members the LCMS (8x the size of the PCA) has a lot of different factions within the denomination, so its hard to pin down a real position on these sorts of questions. You've got everything from mega seeker church types, to genuine liberals, to folks a whisker away from being home in Rome and everything in between. Funny, but whenever I am tempted to get worried about all the issues the PCA has to face, I listen to my LCMS friends and hear about the stuff they have on their plate right now and I realize we have it pretty good on our side of the fence.



[Edited on 10-7-2006 by AdamM]

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

The modern Lutheran Church is another issue, but I believe were it not for the pickiness over how one views the presence of Christ in the elements of the Lord's Supper, Lutherans and the Reformed would be one Church.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Interestingly, in my neighborhood, a Presbyterian and Lutheran joint congregation/ministry has just been formed. They have a website here.

 

[Scott Shahan]

Did I read this correctly? Does it refer to a universal salvation. I thought that the LCMS was more conservative then that. Are they really saying that all are saved, regardless if one comes to faith in Christ or not. If they are saying this, this is really out to lunch. Am I reading this right? or am I out to lunch?

2) The nature of Christ's atonement. Lutherans believe that when Jesus died on the cross He atoned for the sins of all people of all time--even those who have not or will not come to faith in Christ. Reformed churches have historically taught a "limited atonement" of Christ, i.e., that Christ's death on the cross atoned only for the sins of "the elect"--those who have been predestined from eternity to believe in Christ and will spend eternity with Him in heaven.

Scott

 

[beej6]

Andrew, that joint "venture" is interesting. Looks like the ELCA church is trying to build a new building, and are attending services with the PC(USA)ers at their building.

 

[Me Died Blue]

There has been some good discussion in this thread. I’ve been somewhat busy throughout parts of the last few weeks, but I hope we can try and further flesh out some of these issues of misunderstanding (and to some extent those of actual difference as well). The main disappointing points that first made me inclined to bring this up were #1, #4 and #5.

Regarding #1, it is a mistake to say that the Reformed do not give the Gospel a central or primary/foremost role in one sense, even though we do indeed give God’s glory that primacy in another sense (more on that below).

Also, the issue of reason’s relation to Scripture (#4) seems to be partially justified, partially a misrepresentation and partially a false dichotomy. It is partially justified in that there have unfortunately been some movements and theologians within the Reformed camp that could be said to have a tendency of over-rationalizing certain doctrines and reading explanations into some of Scripture might work philosophically, but that are simply not there. On the other hand, it is partially a misrepresentation on the part of the LCMS in that there has been an recognition of the error in that tendency, and a respect given to the existence and role of paradoxes in the faith—especially by Van Til and those who follow him on that particular issue. Thirdly, it seems to partially be a false dichotomy since some reason is necessarily used in the very reading and contemplation of Scripture at all—such as the notion that we can see and understand the meaning of words by looking at them on paper or hearing them audibly. A similar example that may shed further clarifying light on that is the fact that Scripture does not directly tell us that 2+2=4, though it does tell us that God created the universe and its properties in a logical and coherent manner. But the application of thatbiblical truth to some situations (such as math) requires logic and reason.

Regarding #5, the LCMS’ perception of the Reformed view is simply misinformed altogether, and could not be more historically inaccurate. The view memorialist view they have described is of course that of the Zwinglians, which is completely different from the universal Reformed view of our actual spiritual communion with and partaking of Christ and His benefits through the work of the Holy Spirit in the Supper.

I've reviewed the LCMS site in the past. I find it interesting that right on the first point, they place the words "glory" and "sovereignty" in quotation marks. I pray that doesn't mean they don't believe in God's glory and sovereignty... or maybe the other four points show that.

And they juxtapose that against justification by faith alone, as if the two are incompatible.

This is a noteworthy issue to discuss. There is indeed a certain sort of difference in the two camps regarding the issue of centrality to the faith with respect to the Gospel and the glory of God. Indeed, it is noteworthy that in the Lutheran church, “Soli Deo Gloria” is not one of the primarily-emphasized “Solas” of the Reformation, but rather it received that official recognition and status from the Reformed branches. As Vos noted in the quotations cited above, much of that did indeed start with the differently-emphasized reasons for both camps’ shared abandonment of Rome’s doctrine. And that difference can indeed still be seen to this day.

But it also seems to predominantly (or even solely) be a difference of emphasis, and not one of substance or content, on which the Reformed and Lutherans are united; for both churches confess the vital importance both of the glory of God and of the Gospel. Furthermore, both churches agree that the two doctrines (God’s glory and the Gospel) both do work together for the carrying out and furthering of each other. Also, it would be a misunderstanding to speak as though God’s glory and the Gospel could ever in any sense be opposed to each other in terms of content, or making a false dichotomy of choosing to believe and embrace “one or the other.” Hopefully that is not what the LCMS site has in mind, and I am definitely inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on that one.

That’s not to say, however, that there is no difference in the primacy given to each in the grand scheme of God’s plan—for the Reformed view God’s glory as the ultimate and supreme end, purpose and driving force behind all of His creation and workings, the redemption of His people being one of those many workings. At the same time, the Reformed view is balanced because it gives a certain type of primacy to the Gospel (and what it gives us) as well, namely that it is the main or central particular act of God by which He has chosen to bring glory to Himself, and is of a much higher realm in the grand scheme of God’s glory than are His ordinary providences, or even His judgment on the wicked.

The Lutheran emphasis, on the other hand, doesn’t really seem to have a balance as such, but seems to view man’s own joy and relief as being the central result of the Gospel, and though they of course confess God’s glory as also having vital importance, it does not seem to have a primary or foremost standing in any particular category—whereas we view God’s glory being as the primary and central result and purpose of the Gospel, while at the same time balancing that out by saying that the joy and relief it brings to God’s people is in fact the primary means by which God derives glory from the Gospel.

I thought the only difference between Lutherans and Reformed on the Law is their denial or weakening of the 3rd use. These days I think you see more "Reformed" folks trying to draw closer to a Lutheran view of physical or semi-opere ex operato efficacy of the sacraments and ceremonialism and ritualism.

There are of course two senses in which the difference between Lutherans and Reformed may be spoken of: The historic, confessional (official) views of each, and the contemporary views and practices of each. With regard to the Law in the former sense (historic), I would lean towards saying that there is essentially no difference between the two—for the Lutheran confessions explicitly uphold the third use of the Law; likewise, there has been a great deal of affirmation and application of the Law/Gospel distinction among the great historic Reformed theologians (even given that that same understanding was not universal in the Reformed camp, it was definitely there).

In the latter sense (contemporary), it certainly seems that there are indeed notable differences on the Law between the two camps, but it cuts both ways. With respect to the Lutherans, it is very true that a lot of their churches and members seem to have unfortunately either weakened or all but forgotten the significance of the third use of the Law. But likewise, with respect to the Reformed, it is undeniable that the Law/Gospel distinction is not as widely talked about or even accepted by as significant a portion of the Church and her theologians as it has often been in the past.

The modern Lutheran Church is another issue, but I believe were it not for the pickiness over how one views the presence of Christ in the elements of the Lord's Supper, Lutherans and the Reformed would be one Church.

Do you mean they would have already united in earlier centuries, or that they at least would today? Either way, I have to say this seems like a significant stretch and oversimplification.

There is the significant difference over much of the TULIP beliefs on the cause of saving faith, namely over Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints.

Somewhat related to that particular difference is also the significant difference on baptism, and whether or not it confers actual regeneration, and thus whether those born-again can fall.

Furthermore, the historic Lutheran confessions (not just the contemporary churches) do not even have a system of understanding regarding the covenants and their role throughout Scripture.

They also deny the Regulative Principle of Worship.

Ecclesiology and church government are also notably different in the two camps.

So while it is true that the Reformed have much more in common with confessional Lutherans than we do with mainstream evangelicals and the vast majority of contemporary Protestantism, there have still always been very significant issues separating us.

Did I read this correctly? Does it refer to a universal salvation. I thought that the LCMS was more conservative then that. Are they really saying that all are saved, regardless if one comes to faith in Christ or not. If they are saying this, this is really out to lunch. Am I reading this right? or am I out to lunch?

2) The nature of Christ's atonement. Lutherans believe that when Jesus died on the cross He atoned for the sins of all people of all time--even those who have not or will not come to faith in Christ. Reformed churches have historically taught a "limited atonement" of Christ, i.e., that Christ's death on the cross atoned only for the sins of "the elect"--those who have been predestined from eternity to believe in Christ and will spend eternity with Him in heaven.

Scott

No, it absolutely does not refer to universal salvation. It is simply the belief in a universal atonement that all non-Calvinists hold, historically and to this day: the belief that the atonement made it possible for everyone to be saved, being a potential salvation for all, but not an actual salvation in and of itself for any, only being an actual salvation to those who freely accept it by faith (rather than viewing faith as one of the gifts purchased by it).

Confessional Lutherans of our day (and all ages) would not be caught dead affirming universal salvation. The view expressed on the LCMS site really is no different from the view of the atonement that dominates evangelical circles today—and it comes as no surprise either, since the Lutherans have never confessed Particular Redemption ever since right after the Reformation.

 

[Me Died Blue]

I agree that the Van Tillian issues such as paradox are indeed "inner" disagreements within the Reformed community. But with regard to the Supper, Calvin, the Puritans and, most importantly, the confessional standards of the Presbyterian and Reformed churches (most notably the Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity) have decidedly viewed the sacraments as means of grace along with the Word; and the wording on the LCMS site suggests that Reformed theology does not confess that they are even means of grace as such.

 

[Me Died Blue]

The LCMS say they are "actual means of God's grace through which the Holy Spirit works to convey and/or strengthen faith." The word "actual" to them means that the thing signified is always present with the sign; and that these "convey" faith as well as "strengthen" it. The reformed do not teach that the sacraments are bare signs where the thing signified is present, but are a seal of the thing signified in the case of the elect on the presumption that faith has been wrought by the Holy Spirit.

We (you and I) certainly seem to agree on the nature of the Reformed understanding of the sacraments. We (and the historic Reformed churches at large) certainly do not mean "actual" in the same way the Lutherans do when referring to the means of grace and what we spiritually receive through them (i.e. our distinction between the sign and the thing signified). But neither do the Reformed view them "merely as 'signs' or 'symbols' of God's grace" (emphasis mine) in the way Zwinglians do - namely without any seal or spiritual grace (beyond a visual reminder) being given to those with true faith. So the problem with the LCMS comments is that they are not acknowledging the view of Calvin, the Puritans and the confessions as an alternative to the two choices of the Lutheran view and the Zwinglian view.

For the sake of general reference and clarity in this thread overall, particularly in light of the fact that one of the initially-cited Lutheran misunderstandings of Reformed theology was in regard to the sacraments as means of grace, I'll post the relevant sections of the Larger Catechism and the Heidelberg Catechism, respectively (not every question on the sacraments, but simply those that deal with their nature as means of grace:

Westminster Larger Catechism:

Q. 161. How do the sacraments become effectual means of salvation?

A. The sacraments become effectual means of salvation, not by any power in themselves, or any virtue derived from the piety or intention of him by whom they are administered, but only by the working of the Holy Ghost, and the blessing of Christ, by whom they are instituted[1047].

Q. 162. What is a sacrament?

A. A sacrament is an holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church,[1048] to signify, seal, and exhibit[1049] unto those that are within the covenant of grace,[1050] the benefits of his mediation;[1051] to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces;[1052] to oblige them to obedience;[1053] to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another;[1054] and to distinguish them from those that are without.[1055]

Q. 163. What are the parts of a sacrament?

A. The parts of the sacrament are two; the one an outward and sensible sign, used according to Christ’s own appointment; the other an inward and spiritual grace thereby signified.[1056]

[1047] 1 Peter 3:21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Acts 8:13, 23. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.... For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. 1 Corinthians 3:6-7. I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. 1 Corinthians 12:13. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

[1048] Genesis 17:7, 10. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.... This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. Exodus 12 (containing the institution of the passover). Matthew 28:19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matthew 26:26-28. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

[1049] Romans 4:11. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also. 1 Corinthians 11:24-25. And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

[1050] Romans 15:8. Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers. Exodus 12:48. And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

[1051] Acts 2:38. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 1 Corinthians 10:16. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

[1052] Romans 4:11. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also. Galatians 3:27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

[1053] Romans 6:3-4. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 1 Corinthians 10:21. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

[1054] Ephesians 4:2-5. With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism. 1 Corinthians 12:13. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

[1055] Ephesians 2:11-12. Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. Genesis 34:14. And they said unto them, We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one that is uncircumcised; for that were a reproach unto us.

[1056] Matthew 3:11. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire. 1 Peter 3:21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Romans 2:28-29. For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Q. 165. What is baptism?

A. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,[1058] to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself,[1059] of remission of sins by his blood,[1060] and regeneration by his Spirit;[1061] of adoption,[1062] and resurrection unto everlasting life;[1063] and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[1064] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord’s.[1065]

[1058] Matthew 28:19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

[1059] Galatians 3:27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

[1060] Mark 1:4. John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Revelation 1:5. And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.

[1061] Titus 3:5. Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. Ephesians 5:26. That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.

[1062] Galatians 3:26-27. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

[1063] 1 Corinthians 15:29. Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? Romans 6:5. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

[1064] 1 Corinthians 12:13. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

[1065] Romans 6:4. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Q. 167. How is our baptism to be improved by us?

A. The needful but much neglected duty of improving our baptism, is to be performed by us all our life long, especially in the time of temptation, and when we are present at the administration of it to others;[1068] by serious and thankful consideration of the nature of it, and of the ends for which Christ instituted it, the privileges and benefits conferred and sealed thereby, and our solemn vow made therein;[1069] by being humbled for our sinful defilement, our falling short of, and walking contrary to, the grace of baptism, and our engagements;[1070] by growing up to assurance of pardon of sin, and of all other blessings sealed to us in that sacrament;[1071] by drawing strength from the death and resurrection of Christ, into whom we are baptized, for the mortifying of sin, and quickening of grace;[1072] and by endeavoring to live by faith,[1073] to have our conversation in holiness and righteousness,[1074] as those that have therein given up their names to Christ;[1075] and to walk in brotherly love, as being baptized by the same Spirit into one body.[1076]

[1068] Colossians 2:11-12. In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Romans 6:4, 6, 11. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.... Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.... Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

[1069] Romans 6:3-5. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

[1070] 1 Corinthians 1:11-13. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? Romans 6:2-3. God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

[1071] Romans 4:11-12. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 1 Peter 3:21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

[1072] Romans 6:3-5. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

[1073] Galatians 3:26-27. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

[1074] Romans 6:22. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

[1075] Acts 2:38. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

[1076] 1 Corinthians 12:13, 25. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.... That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

Q. 168. What is the Lord’s supper?

A. The Lord’s supper is a sacrament of the New Testament,[1077] wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is showed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace;[1078] have their union and communion with him confirmed;[1079] testify and renew their thankfulness,[1080] and engagement to God,[1081] and their mutual love and fellowship each with the other, as members of the same mystical body.[1082]

Q. 169. How hath Christ appointed bread and wine to be given and received in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper?

A. Christ hath appointed the ministers of his Word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lord’s supper, to set apart the bread and wine from common use, by the word of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer; to take and break the bread, and to give both the bread and the wine to the communicants: who are, by the same appointment, to take and eat the bread, and to drink the wine, in thankful remembrance that the body of Christ was broken and given, and his blood shed, for them.[1083]

Q. 170. How do they that worthily communicate in the Lord’s supper feed upon the body and blood of Christ therein?

A. As the body and blood of Christ are not corporally or carnally present in, with, or under the bread and wine in the Lord’s supper,[1084] and yet are spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to their outward senses;[1085] so they that worthily communicate in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, do therein feed upon the body and blood of Christ, not after a corporal and carnal, but in a spiritual manner; yet truly and really,[1086] while by faith they receive and apply unto themselves Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death.[1087]

[1077] Luke 22:20. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

[1078] Matthew 26:26-28. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come.

[1079] 1 Corinthians 10:16. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

[1080] 1 Corinthians 11:24. And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

[1081] 1 Corinthians 10:14-16, 21. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?... Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

[1082] 1 Corinthians 10:17. For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

[1083] 1 Corinthians 11:23-24. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. Matthew 26:26-28. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Mark 14:22-24. And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Luke 22:19-20. And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

[1084] Acts 3:21. Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

[1085] Matthew 26:26, 28. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.... For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

[1086] 1 Corinthians 11:24-29. And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

[1087] 1 Corinthians 10:16. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Heidelberg Catechism:

Question 66. What are the sacraments?

Answer: The sacraments are holy visible signs and seals, appointed of God for this end, that by the use thereof, he may the more fully declare and seal to us the promise of the gospel, viz., that he grants us freely the remission of sin, and life eternal, for the sake of that one sacrifice of Christ, accomplished on the cross. (a)

(a) Gen.17:11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. Rom.4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: Deut.30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live. Lev.6:25 Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, saying, This is the law of the sin offering: In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the LORD: it is most holy. Heb.9:7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: Heb.9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Heb.9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Heb.9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Ezek.20:12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them. Isa.6:6 Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar: Isa.6:7 And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged. Isa.54:9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.

Question 67. Are both word and sacraments, then, ordained and appointed for this end, that they may direct our faith to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, as the only ground of our salvation? (a)

Answer: Yes, indeed: for the Holy Ghost teaches us in the gospel, and assures us by the sacraments, that the whole of our salvation depends upon that one sacrifice of Christ which he offered for us on the cross.

(a) Rom.6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Gal.3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Question 68. How many sacraments has Christ instituted in the new covenant, or testament?

Answer: Two: namely, holy baptism, and the holy supper.
Of Holy Baptism
26. Lord's Day

Question 69. How art thou admonished and assured by holy baptism, that the one sacrifice of Christ upon the cross is of real advantage to thee?

Answer: Thus: That Christ appointed this external washing with water, (a) adding thereto this promise, (b) that I am as certainly washed by his blood and Spirit from all the pollution of my soul, that is, from all my sins, (c) as I am washed externally with water, by which the filthiness of the body is commonly washed away.

(a) Matt.28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (b) Matt.28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Matt.3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. John 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. Rom.6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Rom.6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (c) 1 Pet.3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Luke 3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

Question 70. What is it to be washed with the blood and Spirit of Christ?

Answer: It is to receive of God the remission of sins, freely, for the sake of Christ's blood, which he shed for us by his sacrifice upon the cross; (a) and also to be renewed by the Holy Ghost, and sanctified to be members of Christ, that so we may more and more die unto sin, and lead holy and unblamable lives. (b)

(a) Heb.12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. 1 Pet.1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Rev.1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Rev.7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Zech.13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness. Ezek.36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. (b) John 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 1 Cor.6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Cor.12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. Rom.6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. Col.2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Question 71. Where has Christ promised us, that he will as certainly wash us by his blood and Spirit, as we are washed with the water of baptism?

Answer: In the institution of baptism, which is thus expressed: "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost", Matt.28:19. And "he that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned.", Mark 16:16. This promise is also repeated, where the scripture calls baptism "the washing of regenerations" and the washing away of sins. Tit.3:5, Acts 22:16. (a)

(a) Tit.3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

27. Lord's Day

Question 72. Is then the external baptism with water the washing away of sin itself?

Answer: Not at all: (a) for the blood of Jesus Christ only, and the Holy Ghost cleanse us from all sin. (b)

(a) Matt.3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: 1 Pet.3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: Eph.5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, Eph.5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. (b) 1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 1 Cor.6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Question 73. Why then does the Holy Ghost call baptism "the washing of regeneration," and "the washing away of sins"?

Answer: God speaks thus not without great cause, to-wit, not only thereby to teach us, that as the filth of the body is purged away by water, so our sins are removed by the blood and Spirit of Jesus Christ; (a) but especially that by this divine pledge and sign he may assure us, that we are spiritually cleansed from our sins as really, as we are externally washed with water. (b)

(a) Rev.1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Rev.7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 1 Cor.6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. (b) Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Gal.3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Question 75. How art thou admonished and assured in the Lord's Supper, that thou art a partaker of that one sacrifice of Christ, accomplished on the cross, and of all his benefits?

Answer: Thus: That Christ has commanded me and all believers, to eat of this broken bread, and to drink of this cup, in remembrance of him, adding these promises: (a) first, that his body was offered and broken on the cross for me, and his blood shed for me, as certainly as I see with my eyes, the bread of the Lord broken for me, and the cup communicated to me; and further, that he feeds and nourishes my soul to everlasting life, with his crucified body and shed blood, as assuredly as I receive from the hands of the minister, and taste with my mouth the bread and cup of the Lord, as certain signs of the body and blood of Christ.

(a) Matt.26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. Matt.26:27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; Matt.26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Mark 14:22 And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. Mark 14:23 And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. 1 Cor.10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 1 Cor.10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 1 Cor.11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 1 Cor.11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 1 Cor.11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 1 Cor.12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Question 76. What is it then to eat the crucified body, and drink the shed blood of Christ?

Answer: It is not only to embrace with believing heart all the sufferings and death of Christ and thereby to obtain the pardon of sin, and life eternal; (a) but also, besides that, to become more and more united to his sacred body, (b) by the Holy Ghost, who dwells both in Christ and in us; so that we, though Christ is in heaven (c) and we on earth, are notwithstanding "flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone" (d) and that we live, and are governed forever by one spirit, (e) as members of the same body are by one soul.

(a) John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. John 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. John 6:48 I am that bread of life. John 6:49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. John 6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. John 6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? John 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. John 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. (b) John 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. John 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. (c) Col.3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Acts 3:21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. 1 Cor.11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. (d) Eph.3:16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; Eph.5:29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: Eph.5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. Eph.5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 1 Cor.6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 1 Cor.6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. 1 Cor.6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 1 John 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. 1 John 4:13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. (e) John 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. John 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. John 6:58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. John 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. John 15:2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. John 15:3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. John 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. Eph.4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: Eph.4:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

Question 77. Where has Christ promised that he will as certainly feed and nourish believers with his body and bleed, as they eat of this broken bread, and drink of this cup?

Answer: In the institution of the supper, which is thus expressed: (a) "The Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and: said: eat, this is my body, which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying: this cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For, as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor.11:23-26. This promise is repeated by the holy apostle Paul, where he says "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread." 1 Cor.10:16,17.

(a) 1 Cor.11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 1 Cor.11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 1 Cor.11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. Matt.26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. Matt.26:27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; Matt.26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Mark 14:22 And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. Mark 14:23 And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. 1 Cor.10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 1 Cor.10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

29. Lord's Day

Question 78. Do then the bread and wine become the very body and blood of Christ?

Answer: Not at all: (a) but as the water in baptism is not changed into the blood of Christ, neither is the washing away of sin itself, being only the sign and confirmation thereof appointed of God; (b) so the bread in the Lord's supper is not changed into the very body of Christ; (c) though agreeably to the nature and properties of sacraments, (d) it is called the body of Christ Jesus.

(a) Matt.26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. (b) Eph.5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, Tit.3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; (c) Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. 1 Cor.10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 1 Cor.10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 1 Cor.11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. 1 Cor.11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 1 Cor.11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. (d) Gen.17:10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. Gen.17:11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. Gen.17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. Gen.17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. Exod.12:11 And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD'S passover. Exod.12:13 And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt. Exod.12:27 That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD'S passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped. Exod.12:43 And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof: Exod.12:48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof. Exod.13:9 And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the LORD'S law may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath the LORD brought thee out of Egypt. 1 Pet.3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Cor.10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 1 Cor.10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 1 Cor.10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 1 Cor.10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Question 79. Why then doth Christ call the bread "his body", and the cup "his blood", or "the new covenant in his blood"; and Paul the "communion of body and blood of Christ"?

Answer: Christ speaks thus, not without great reason, namely, not only thereby to teach us, that as bread and wine support this temporal life, so his crucified body and shed blood are the true meat and drink, whereby our souls are fed to eternal life; (a) but more especially by these visible signs and pledges to assure us, that we are as really partakers of his true body and blood by the operation of the Holy Ghost as we receive by the mouths of our bodies these holy signs in remembrance of him; (b) and that all his sufferings and obedience are as certainly ours, as if we had in our own persons suffered and made satisfaction for our sins to God.

(a) John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. John 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. (b) 1 Cor.10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 1 Cor.10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

 

[Me Died Blue]

Any other thoughts in general? I'm particularly interested in hearing more people's thoughts on the issue of primacy regarding the Gospel and God's glory, in addition to the issue of Scriptural supremacy and reason, and possibly even more on the sacraments if one is so inclined.

 

[Ambrose]

Any other thoughts in general? I'm particularly interested in hearing more people's thoughts on the issue of primacy regarding the Gospel and God's glory, in addition to the issue of Scriptural supremacy and reason, and possibly even more on the sacraments if one is so inclined.

On the Gospel and God's glory, a local LCMS pastor mentioned that when I told him that I was coming from a Presbyterian perspective, saying that he saw Calvin's main driving force being the sovereignty of God in all things. (He also asked if that was a fair overview) He said that the LCMS doesn't deny God's sovereignty of course, but instead find in the Scriptures that God's grace in the forgiveness of Christ Jesus is the real comfort for us sinners. It is the chief article through which they see all other theology.

Of course, I really don't see a dilemma between sovereignty and GOd's grace, and really feel that they go together. Maybe its a matter of "perceived" emphasis, and though I don't really feel that the LCMS' view of "Reformed" thought and practice describes either me or many of the churches I've been a part of, you have to admit that its not a stretch to perceive Reformed folk (especially on the internet) as being 99% focused on sovereignty and predestination. In fact some Reformed folks would distinguish themselves in the same way from other Reformed folk!

On scriptural supremacy and reason, the Lutheran pastor spoke on this last night when discussing the Roman Catholic church. His main critique was not the use of reason per se, but the elevation of reason (along with tradition and papal decrees) as co-equal in authority with the scripture. To me you needn't look much further than the Scholastics to see this in action.

On the other hand, one of my questions concerning the LCMS is whether they actually believe in the primacy of scripture, or would it be fair suggest that the Confessions, writings of Luther, and Synodical decisions are, at least in practice, as authoritative (if not more) as Scripture itself? How authoritative is scripture, if scripture can only be accepted when filtered through the Confessions? And some of the recent Synodical decisions (e.g. women in positions of authority) definitely don't seem to be grounded in Scripture, as not a few protesting LCMS churches assert. Some of these same arguments could just as easily be asked of some Presbyterian sects also. And, I should add that these are questions, not arguments.

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Most LCMS and WELS Lutheran sem students seem to be taught that Calvinists are rationalists and sneaky (the Book of Concord calls us crafty sacramentarians). They believe that, no matter what we say, we place reason above revelation. They see our view of predestination as prima facie evidence for their prejudice.

They remain (as do many Reformed) influenced by the old idea that there are "central dogmas" and that the Lutherans derive their whole system from justification and we deduce our whole system from an a priori and unbiblical doctrine of predestination. Richard Muller's whole career has been devoted to debunking this idea, but it's very difficult to get Lutherans to actually read Reformed writers since they've often decided ahead of time that we're sneaky and not to be trusted. Part of this suspicion is grounded in their rejection and fear of the forced union in Germany with the Reformed. In the case of the LCMS, part of their reason for existence is not to unite with the Reformed and not to be Reformed.

rsc

On the Gospel and God's glory, a local LCMS pastor mentioned that when I told him that I was coming from a Presbyterian perspective, saying that he saw Calvin's main driving force being the sovereignty of God in all things. (He also asked if that was a fair overview) He said that the LCMS doesn't deny God's sovereignty of course, but instead find in the Scriptures that God's grace in the forgiveness of Christ Jesus is the real comfort for us sinners. It is the chief article through which they see all other theology.

Of course, I really don't see a dilemma between sovereignty and GOd's grace, and really feel that they go together. Maybe its a matter of "perceived" emphasis, and though I don't really feel that the LCMS' view of "Reformed" thought and practice describes either me or many of the churches I've been a part of, you have to admit that its not a stretch to perceive Reformed folk (especially on the internet) as being 99% focused on sovereignty and predestination. In fact some Reformed folks would distinguish themselves in the same way from other Reformed folk!

On scriptural supremacy and reason, the Lutheran pastor spoke on this last night when discussing the Roman Catholic church. His main critique was not the use of reason per se, but the elevation of reason (along with tradition and papal decrees) as co-equal in authority with the scripture. To me you needn't look much further than the Scholastics to see this in action.

On the other hand, one of my questions concerning the LCMS is whether they actually believe in the primacy of scripture, or would it be fair suggest that the Confessions, writings of Luther, and Synodical decisions are, at least in practice, as authoritative (if not more) as Scripture itself? How authoritative is scripture, if scripture can only be accepted when filtered through the Confessions? And some of the recent Synodical decisions (e.g. women in positions of authority) definitely don't seem to be grounded in Scripture, as not a few protesting LCMS churches assert. Some of these same arguments could just as easily be asked of some Presbyterian sects also. And, I should add that these are questions, not arguments.

 

[ChristopherPaul]

>Whoa, you kinda snuck up on me there...

>I am, very very sneaky Sr.

I fear you are underestimating the sneakiness sir.

I had to insert irrelevant movie quotes.

Carry on.

(I have one for someone)

Most LCMS and WELS Lutheran sem students seem taught that 1) Calvinists are rationalists and sneaky (the Book of Concord calls us crafty sacramentarians). They believe that, no matter what we say, we place reason above revelation. They see our view of predestination as prima facie evidence for their prejudice.

They remain (as do many Reformed) influenced by the old idea that there are "central dogmas" and that the Lutherans derive their whole system from justification and we deduce our whole system from a priori doctrine of predestination. Richard Muller's whole career has been devoted to debunking this idea, but it's very difficult to get Lutherans to actually read Reformed writers since they've often decided ahead of time that we're sneaky and not to be trusted. Part of this suspicion is grounded in their rejection and fear of the forced union in Germany with the Reformed. In the case of the LCMS, part of their reason for existence is not to unite with the Reformed and not to be Reformed.

rsc

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

I had to insert irrelevant movie quotes.

Carry on.

(I have one for someone)

Mr. Deeds

 

[ChristopherPaul]

Mr. Deeds

You are not going to know what to do with all of these, but here ya go:

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

You are not going to know what to do with all of these, but here ya go:

 

[yeutter]

Interestingly, in my neighborhood, a Presbyterian and Lutheran joint congregation/ministry has just been formed. They have a website here.

The ELCA is Lutheran in name only.
The PCUSA is Presbyterian in name only.
Isn't nice that two nonconfessional groups of liberals can get along.

 

[yeutter]

Most LCMS and WELS Lutheran sem students seem to be taught that Calvinists are rationalists and sneaky (the Book of Concord calls us crafty sacramentarians). They believe that, no matter what we say, we place reason above revelation. They see our view of predestination as prima facie evidence for their prejudice.

rsc

WELS & CLC types hold Anglicans under the same suspicion.