Consecration of the Holy Supper, the Office, and Local Fellowship in
Dispersion
Rev. John A. Frahm
III
In his 1533 treatise, “The Private Mass and the Consecration
of Priests,” Luther mentions how Christians in isolation in Turkey are advised
to respond to their lack of clergy and their desire for the Holy Supper of
Christ’s body and blood:
And what must the Christians do who
are held captive in Turkey? They cannot receive the sacrament and have to be
content with their faith and desire which they have for the sacrament and the
ordinance of Christ, just as those who die before baptism are nevertheless
saved by their faith and desire for baptism. What did the children of Israel do
in Babylon when they were unable to have public worship at Jerusalem except in
faith and in sincere desire and longing? Therefore, even if the church would
have been robbed completely of the sacrament by the pope, still, because the
ordinance of Christ remained in their hearts with faith and desire, it would
nevertheless have been preserved thereby, as indeed now in our time there are
many who outwardly do without the sacrament for they are not willing to honor
and strengthen the pope's abomination under one kind. For Christ's ordinance
and faith are two works of God which are capable of doing anything.[1]
Notice here in this radical situation, nay “emergency,” what
Luther does not suggest or improvise. The
further one departs from the institution of Christ, the more doubt creeps into
the picture and consequently the certainty and foundation of faith begins to
fall away. The solidity of hope in Christ turns into nothing more than a
wishful leap into the Deus absconditus
(the “dark” unrevealed aspects of God, apart from His Word). Nothing can be
more certain than that which is done according to the mandate and institution
of Christ. Faith clings not so much to
what could possibly be in the abstract, nor to what we think “God would
understand in our circumstances,” but rather to His mandate and institution and
the promises therein.
Luther makes the point in 1533, in “The Private Mass and the
Consecration of Priests” that the reason why he holds to the position on the
consecration he does is that all may be certain for faith. The private mass
Luther is dealing with are masses performed by Roman priests for money often to
release souls from purgatory. They are celebrating masses without the
congregation gathered. Such masses were
done where none of the people communed, and the notion of the propitiatory
sacrifice of the mass was promote in the Roman church. The Lord’s Supper was turned into something
human beings do rather than something Christ does. In discussing the private mass, Luther says:
But I have not been commanded to
perform the private mass and it is uncertain. In short, as St. Augustine says: Tene certum, dimitte incertum - “Rely on
what is certain and abandon what is uncertain.” Yes, I even add, because it is
uncertain whether the body and blood of Christ are present in the private mass
and because it is certainly a purely human trifle, therefore you should never
in your life believe that Christ's body and blood are present; for faith should
be sure of its affairs and have a sure basis concerning which one must not and
should not be in doubt.[2]
Luther notes the instrumentality of the called servant:
So it is not our work or speaking
but the command and ordinance of Christ which make the bread the body and the
wine the blood, beginning with the first Lord's Supper and continuing to the
end of the world, and it is administered daily through our ministry or office.[3]
Throughout this treatise Luther deals with the certainty for
faith which comes from heeding the institution of Christ. Previously, in 1527, Luther wrote in his
tremendous, “That These Words of Christ, ‘This is My Body,’ Etc., Still Stand
Firm Against the Fanatics,” in summary form:
We know, however, that it is the
Lord’s Supper, in name and in reality, not the supper of Christians. For the Lord not only instituted it, but
also prepares and gives it himself, and is himself cook, butler, food, and
drink, as we have demonstrated our belief above. Christ does not say, in commanding and
instituting it, “Do this as your summons to mutual recognition and love,” but,
“Do this in remembrance of me” [Luke 22:19, I Cor. 11:24].[4]
Perhaps, in part, has explained a Luther preference for
referring to the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar as ‘the Lord’s Supper,” or the
‘Holy Supper.’ We receive this
sacrament, as with all the mysteries of God, as it is given from the Lord (see
1 Corinthians 11:23-26). The pastor is
particularly charged to be the local steward of the mysteries of God, which
includes, but is not limited to the Lord’s Supper. He is steward but does not own it. He may not do with it as he pleases or as it
seems best to him. As it is given to us
from the Lord through the apostles so we deliver it to the Church for her
nourishment in the wilderness of this world in the end times. It would be a foolish and
troubling thing to tinker with what the Lord has given even with “missional”
motivations of heartfelt origin or vision. There is no ecclesial bureaucratic license to
exceptions. The Bride of Christ receives what the Bridegroom has provided. The Lord’s mysteries do not need adjustment
for the culture to be relevant or adequate, but the Blessed Sacrament is the
medicine of immortality and antidote to death as we confess with the ancient
church.
The institution of the means of grace and the office which
is charged with divine authority to deliver them for the church is a divine
office that is enacted in real flesh and blood men. The
Book of Concord begins the discussion of the office of the holy ministry,
with a bridge from Article IV to Article V of the Augsburg Confession. The
office of the ministry is established so that such justifying faith in Christ
(by grace) may be created, conferred, and sustained through the spoken and
sacramental Gospel. The German speaks of the Predigtamt – the preaching office, which implies someone in the
office. The Word and Sacraments are confessed as the exclusive salvific,
faith-engendering instruments of the Holy Spirit. And then there is the
condemnation of the Anabaptists and other schwärmer,
who teach that the Holy Spirit works apart from the external Word and
sacraments through our own preparations, thoughts, and works. In the teaching of these fanatics, the
working of the Holy Spirit was separated from the external Word and moved to an
internal experience, desire, or concept.
The claim to be spiritual does not detour around the apostolic word.
The liturgy is not the “work of the people” as Rome has
said, or put in protestant terms, our praise and worship experience for
God. To be sure there is response, but
the initiating, primary, divine monergism of the Divine Service is so that
everything in the Church, as the Large Catechism says, may be so arranged that
we may daily receive the forgiveness of sins.
This is done through the Christ-provided means of grace. The point of the Divine Service isn’t about
“getting people involved” (work of the people, ala Rome, said in a protestant
way) but being at the receiving end of all that the Lord desires to give in His
particular way in His spoken and sacramental gospel. So, indeed, as St. Augustine says, for the
sake of faith, cling to the certain, and depart from the uncertain. And the glory of the means of grace is that
they are plural. This blesses us even
in situations of pandemic social distancing, travel, or other forms of local
separation. “Behold, I am with you
always” at the end of the Great Commission to the apostles is not a separate
saying but is indicative of the localized presence of the Lord for them and the
Church in the means of grace (“all things I have commanded you”). As Luther put it succinctly, “If you want
to have God, then mark where he resides and where he wants to be found.”[5] In times of distress it does us no good to
try to relocate the Temple from Jerusalem to Mt. Gerizim, or to baptize by a
fire hose. While all baptized
Christians are priests by faith, our understanding of the office of the
ministry is not primarily priestly (sacrificial) but as ambassadors and
householders of the mysteries as spiritual fathers. The sons of Korah (Numbers 16) thought Moses
and Aaron were free to re-allocate the callings of the Lord since all in Israel
were holy by His name.
In the apostolic ministry the teaching and miracles of Jesus
continue in the Word preached and the holy sacraments administered (Acts 1:1-5;
1 Corinthians 3:5-11). When
considering the administration of the Lord’s Supper it is not merely that the
pastor can broadcast his voice in a “live” setting (over a public address
system, television, or internet) but rather is the whole and undivided
sacrament administered. If the intent
is to consecrate bread and wine (or grape juice, sic!) over a “livestream” or
broadcast to another location with lay administration on the other end. The one broadcasting a recitation of the verba testamenti cannot “take the bread”
or “give it to them” etc where the sacrament is intended to be
administered. It has lost its union or
never had it. It is utterly
dubious. St. Augustine shouts out: tene
certum, dimitte incertum! The
“this do” is violated. Stewardship is
broken. Faith needs the marks of the
church to have divine integrity not human imprimaturs or licensure or pastoral
exceptions by authority of personal feelings.
Our first LCMS President, Walther, writes:
The great majority of our
theologians, Luther in the forefront, believe that the holy Supper should never
be administered privately by one who is not in the public preaching office, by
a layman. That is partly because no such necessity can occur with the holy
Supper, as with Baptism and Absolution, that would justify a departure from
God’s ordinance ( I Cor 4:1; Romans 10:15; Heb 5:4); partly because the holy
Supper “is a public confession and so should have a public minister”; partly
because schisms can easily be brought about by such private Communion…[6]
On the other end of the livestream or by delegation by
pastoral letter, directing the laity to take upon themselves what Luther was
unwilling to suggest in 1533 and what the Augsburg Confession denies in Article
XIV is schismatic and good old-fashioned fanaticism. No doubt, one can engage in vision casting
over an internet livestream, but dividing what Lord has joined together
dislocates the object of faith as the speaker and the bread cannot complete the
action. In Luther’s day the church
inherited whispered Words of Institution in a problematic canon of the mass
eucharistic prayer. Now recent ersatz pastoral innovations to adapt to
the temporary state of quasi-quarantine, while not done in malice, are
ill-conceived, and attach an urgency to a temporary disruption of corporate
Divine Services that is incongruous with the typical tangential use of the
sacrament in many liturgically loose locales.
Assumed-emergencies, quasi-exiles, and exuberant pastoral
desire deliver the gifts by innovation can bring out the pre-existent fractures
more dramatically and reveal the need for further study and reflection so that
the marks of the church are not compromised and zeal for accomplishing
something does not undermine the goal of faith being given certainty in the
Word and the sacraments according to Christ’s institution.
The Words of our Lord which used within the institution
command “this do” inhabit a context for the mandate to be fulfilled. With regard to the office of the ministry we
ought to bear in mind the fact pointed out earlier, that in "The Private
Mass and the Consecration of Priests" of Luther in 1533, he does not
condone or recommend any attempts of "lay consecration" of the Supper
but simply recommends for exiled Christians in Turkey to be content, given
their situation, with their hunger and thirst for the Sacrament. The Lutheran fathers, including Chemnitz and
Formula of Concord, walked a fine line.
So in their denial that, "No man's word or work, be it the merit or
speaking of the minister," brings about the real presence is not to deny
that the body and blood are, "distributed through our ministry and
office" (cf. FC-SD, VII.74-77). Chemnitz states clearly that, "it is
with those who are legitimately chosen and called by God through the church,
therefore with the ministers to whom the use or administration of the ministry
of the Word and the sacraments has been committed."[7]
The office is not the source of the authority but the means
by which Christ serves His people in the Lord's Supper, the Divine Service. It
is "apostolic" in that pastors are called and sent by Christ for the
benefit of the church. They are “your
servants for the sake of Christ.” They
have His authority in the mandates He has given the holy office. We may point
to Apology XXIV, under the discussion of the term "Mass," where the
liturgy is identified with "the public ministry." Even when the "emergency" case is
cited from the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, it must be
pointed out that this emergency only mentions Baptism and Absolution and not
the Holy Supper. The Lord’s Supper
cannot be an emergency need the way Baptism or Absolution can be. Means of restoration and conversion are not
the same as means of sustenance or the “solid food” of faith.
The “action” of the Lord’s Supper, as it is described by the
orthodox Lutheran dogmaticians is a threefold action of the Supper. Consecration, distribution and reception are
what belongs to the institution. The office bearer consecrates and distributes,
all receive. Not only are the body and blood present in the reception, but also
in the distribution (according to the Lord’s word), in the thought of the
Confessions. The Formula of Concord
summarizes (emphasis added):
In the administration of Communion
the words of institution are to be spoken
or sung distinctly and clearly before the congregation and are under no
circumstances to be omitted. Thereby we render obedience to the command of
Christ, ‘This do.’ Thereby the faith of the hearers in the essence and benefits
of this sacrament (the presence of the body and blood of Christ, the
forgiveness of sins, and all the benefits which Christ has won for us by his
death and the shedding of his blood and which he give to us in his testament)
is awakened, strengthened and confirmed through his Word. And thereby the
elements of bread and wine are hallowed or blessed in this holy use, so
that therewith the body and blood of Christ are distributed to us to eat and to
drink, as Paul says, "The cup of blessing which we bless," which
happens precisely through the repetition and recitation of the words of institution.
The Words of Institution "are under no circumstances to
be omitted." More than this they are to be spoken or sung "clearly
and distinctly before the people." Through this, the bread and the wine
are consecrated. Hence in the understanding of Formula of Concord-Solid
Declaration VII and the Large Catechism, the Words of Institution are said
simultaneously over the elements and before the people. Does a livestream do this? Let’s cling to the certain and depart from
uncertain. Let’s not in times of crisis,
when faith is tried, further introduce doubt or shadows on the object of faith. Let’s avoid the edge of the cliff, the
shadows, the lay ministry, the grape juice, the video communion, the postal
delivery, the coffee creamer hermetically sealed elements, etc. Cling to what is certain and depart from
what is uncertain. Be stewards of the
mysteries of God, be a brave and steadfast spiritual father.
In such unusual times as a pandemic we rejoice in the
manifold instruments that the Lord has given to bestow forgiveness, life, and
salvation, by the work the Holy Spirit.
The reading of Scripture does not require an emergency circumstance for
its verbal delivery in , as Luther admonishes the head of the household (hausvater) to teach the Small Catechism
in his home, which includes the use of Scripture. The royal priesthood of baptized believers in
Christ and the pastoral office each have their realm of service and
duties. We appreciate each best when we
receive them as the Lord uniquely gave each one rather than in terms of
comparisons or even in terms of lists of functions. The mutual conversation and consolation of
the brethren wherever two or three are gathered in the name of Jesus is a great
resource in times of exile, temporary separation, and waiting upon the
Lord. It is also an opportunity to
recover our devotional use of Scripture, rejoice in our Baptism, and speak
words of forgiveness to one another in our households. Even when we go through a period of not
communing, we have been sent forth from the altar to our homes to “proclaim the
Lord’s death until He comes” to one another.
[1] "The
Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests" (Luther’s Works, AE:38; p.207).
[2]
“The Private Mass…”, p.163
[3]
“The Private Mass…”, p.199
[4]
“That These Words of Christ, ‘This Is My Body,’ Etc., Still Stand Firm Against
the Fanatics” (Luther’s Works, AE:37,
p.142).
[5]
Sermon on John 6:51, Luther’s Works AE:
23, p.121
[6] C.F.W. Walther. Pastoral Theology. Trans. John M.
Drickamer. (New Haven: Lutheran News Inc, 1995); p.134
Posts
