"In, With, and Under" the bread and wine

ImaginaryDay

We Live Here
Mar 24, 2012
4,200
791
Fawlty Towers
✟30,199.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Separated
Politics
CA-Conservatives
As I'm still learning some things about the Lutheran church, I'm a bit confused about the context of Christ being present "in, with, and under" the bread and wine, as the words themselves relate to the Eucharist. Cam someone break this down for me?
 

Resha Caner

Expert Fool
Sep 16, 2010
9,171
1,398
✟148,100.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
As I'm still learning some things about the Lutheran church, I'm a bit confused about the context of Christ being present "in, with, and under" the bread and wine, as the words themselves relate to the Eucharist. Cam someone break this down for me?

It's not meant to be a clinical description of the Eucharist, but rather a compact phrase expressing our belief that Christ is present in the Eucharist, yet the elements themselves don't transform into body and blood as some believe. Even further, his presence is more than some mystical or sentimental common mind. God is physically present and those communing experience a physical consequence.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
.. yet the elements themselves don't transform into body and blood as some believe.

I think that point could be taken too far. In fact the Eucharistic prayer sometimes used before the Words of Institution often includes the epiclesis that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ.

My impression, at least at my particular church, is that there isn't a huge difference between Lutheran and Roman Catholic beliefs, at least pertaining to Christ's presence in the sacrament. Lutherans and Roman Catholics are certainly in more agreement than Lutherans and the Reformed, on this point.

I think it is a bit of a mystery what is happening at communion. The important thing isn't to understand it, it's to believe you receive "the true body and blood of Christ for the forgiveness of all your sins".
 
Upvote 0

Resha Caner

Expert Fool
Sep 16, 2010
9,171
1,398
✟148,100.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I think that point could be taken too far. In fact the Eucharistic prayer sometimes used before the Words of Institution often includes the epiclesis that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ.

My impression, at least at my particular church, is that there isn't a huge difference between Lutheran and Roman Catholic beliefs, at least pertaining to Christ's presence in the sacrament. Lutherans and Roman Catholics are certainly in more agreement than Lutherans and the Reformed, on this point.

I think it is a bit of a mystery what is happening at communion. The important thing isn't to understand it, it's to believe you receive "the true body and blood of Christ for the forgiveness of all your sins".

It is always difficult to strike the right balance. It requires an extended conversation, and those new to the topic shouldn't assume they've got it all down at first blush. With that said, I agree with you - getting too caught up in explaining details can become a distraction to the benefits of the sacraments, which one receives through faith, not through reason. Still, I do have my pet concepts that make the idea of the sacraments more personally satisfying for me than what is written in the Confessions.

We probably are closest to the conservative branches of the Anglican, RCC, and OC churches, but there are still important differences, and that is what I meant to emphasize. If you take the chalice to a lab and analyze it, you'll find wine ... no blood. The RCC has to use mystical handwaving to explain why that is, whereas that result is what Lutherans expect.

If it were merely about chemistry, it probably wouldn't be worth the bother to mention it. But it drives concerning differences in practice. My experience is that if you attend an RCC service, you only receive the bread, not the wine. There is concern about dribbling Christ's blood on the carpet and wasting it. The wafer must go directly into the mouth whole for the same reason. There is a humorous story from Angela's Ashes about how Frank McCourt got sick after his first communion, and his grandmother berated him for casting Christ into the loo.

The RCC has this idea that they have somehow captured Christ in the bread and wine, and can therefore use Christ without his permission. It becomes magic rather than God's power. So, in some RCC churches they do the consecration before the service and place the bread and wine in a special room where people can come and "be with Christ" to meditate ... as if Christ doesn't hear their prayers otherwise .. as if Christ is not a willing participant in the sacrament ... as if his body/blood can't come and go as he pleases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KevinC1129
Upvote 0

ImaginaryDay

We Live Here
Mar 24, 2012
4,200
791
Fawlty Towers
✟30,199.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Separated
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I think it is a bit of a mystery what is happening at communion. The important thing isn't to understand it, it's to believe you receive "the true body and blood of Christ for the forgiveness of all your sins".

I appreciate that the Lutheran church makes room for 'mystery', in the sense that not everything can (and should) necessarily be perfectly understood. I think that stood in my way for some time - things had to be 'understood' before I accepted/believed them. But having an incomplete understanding doesn't necessarily negate the truth of a thing, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KevinC1129
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
Eucharistic adoration is an unrelated issue to our particular understandings of the sacrament. It has more to do with Roman Catholic rationalistic tendencies in their epistemology. It's something me and my pastor discussed, since we had participated in such a service as guests. We eventually agreed that it could be seen as a devotional action that potentially draws us into the sacrament of Communion.

It's even my understanding that a few rare Lutheran churches engage in the practice.

At the Episcopal cathedral I used to regularly attend, the canon of the cathedral once accidentally dropped a host from the paten and it wen flip-flopping around like a helicopter seed until it hit the ground. He walked forward, bent over, picked up the host, and ate it. I was transfixed observing him so, there was the beauty of holiness in his actions. Canon Gary was an old Anglo-Catholic man and very particulrar about his practice of the faith (not to mention, he was a font of wisdom). He brought a lot of gifts to that church : the beauty of his holiness, his healing ministry, wound up in a complex, intense, seemingly contardictory personality, but sadly now he is retired.

Roman Catholics distinguish between the accidents and the substance of the Eucharist. Lutherans do not. But it wouldn't be so far off for a Catholic to say that Christ is present under the bread and wine. There's a beautiful hymn by Thomas Aquinas, Pange Lingua Gloriosi that would make a great communion hymn. I see nothing un-Lutheran in it.

My own personal understanding is that the bread is a kind of icon for Christ's body, and the wine an icon for the Christ's blood, when the Words of Institution are spoken. And by icon, I don't mean as a calvinist symbolic understanding. I mean a physical sign that rerpresents, even delivers, what it signifies. It is a union that you can't separate out the one from the other (the mistake that the sacramental nominalists make). So, in that sense, the Eucharist as icon (in the eastern sense, a window into heaven) does fit with Eucharistic Adoration. But of course, we have no clear Scriptural command to use it in that manner (eastern orthodox have similar objections).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Resha Caner

Expert Fool
Sep 16, 2010
9,171
1,398
✟148,100.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
It's even my understanding that a few rare Lutheran churches engage in the practice.

I wouldn't support such a thing - would even oppose it should it be suggested at my church. Mystical inventions are dangerous.

My own personal understanding is that the bread is a kind of icon for Christ's body, and the wine an icon for the Christ's blood, when the Words of Institution are spoken. And by icon, I don't mean as a calvinist symbolic understanding. I mean a physical sign that rerpresents, even delivers, what it signifies. It is a union that you can't separate out the one from the other (the mistake that the sacramental nominalists make).

I've no problem with the above passage, and see no reason to try to separate bread/wine and body/blood. But I don't see how that could lead to adoration in any way. To do so is to worship an immaterial object. It's as if you're trying to put Christ in a zoo. For long after the consecration do you think you can keep Christ trapped so you can adore him? An hour? A week? Years? Let's consecrate some bread and wine, lock it in a glass box, and leave it for people to adore in perpetuity.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I've no problem with the above passage, and see no reason to try to separate bread/wine and body/blood. But I don't see how that could lead to adoration in any way.

I don't see a warrant necessarily for Roman Catholic adoration in a Lutheran context (especially because the focus is on the correct use of the sacrament), but I do think it means that reverence given to the sacrament, for instance, bowing the head at the elevation (if this is practiced), is not inappropriate. I wouldn't say it's even idolatry to do so (in fact that's the sort of argument I tend to hear from Reformed Christians, that veneration given to the physical elements of the sacrament is "idolatry", because Christ is not corporally present). If the sacrament is the body and blood of Christ, then veneration is fitting.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,253
✟816,720.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I don't see a warrant necessarily for Roman Catholic adoration in a Lutheran context (especially because the focus is on the correct use of the sacrament), but I do think it means that reverence given to the sacrament, for instance, bowing the head at the elevation (if this is practiced), is not inappropriate. I wouldn't say it's even idolatry to do so (in fact that's the sort of argument I tend to hear from Reformed Christians, that veneration given to the physical elements of the sacrament is "idolatry", because Christ is not corporally present). If the sacrament is the body and blood of Christ, then veneration is fitting.

The thing is that individuals theorize, yet we play it safe at my and most of our parishes where the consecrated elements are safely reserved, locked in the Sacristy; precisely because it is a mystery. We are not receptionists, the Sacraments, according to our confessions, are valid even if administered by "evil men"; as Luther argued with Zwingli: Hoc est corpus meum. It is what it is.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tangible
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,375
✟241,875.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The thing is that individuals theorize, yet we play it safe at my and most of our parishes where the consecrated elements are safely reserved, locked in the Sacristy; precisely because it is a mystery. We are not receptionists, the Sacraments, according to our confessions, are valid even if administered by "evil men"; as Luther argued with Zwingli: Hoc est corpus meum. It is what it is.

Is it common practice to reserve the consecrated elements in Lutheran churches? Is there any instruction from Lutheran tradition?
 
Upvote 0

Tangible

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato
May 29, 2009
9,837
1,416
cruce tectum
Visit site
✟59,743.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Is it common practice to reserve the consecrated elements in Lutheran churches? Is there any instruction from Lutheran tradition?
No it isn't common practice. In Lutheran Eucharistic theology the presence of Our Lord is only certain within the context of the Divine Service.
 
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,253
✟816,720.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Is it common practice to reserve the consecrated elements in Lutheran churches? Is there any instruction from Lutheran tradition?

No it isn't common practice. In Lutheran Eucharistic theology the presence of Our Lord is only certain within the context of the Divine Service.

While only certain within the context of the Mass; there is nothing definitive to state that it ceases to be outside of that context; therefore, if we err, we err on the side of caution.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: zippy2006
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,375
✟241,875.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
No it isn't common practice. In Lutheran Eucharistic theology the presence of Our Lord is only certain within the context of the Divine Service.

While only certain within the context of the Mass; there is nothing definitive to state that it ceases to be outside of that context; therefore, if we err, we err on the side of caution.

It seems like a significant thing to disagree on. Which of these possibilities would be acceptable according to Lutheran teaching:

  1. No real change takes place in the bread and the wine (and therefore they need not be reserved).
  2. A real change takes place, but the bread and wine revert back to their original state at the end of the service (and therefore they need not be reserved).
  3. A real change takes place and remains even after the end of the service (and therefore they need to be reserved).

Do different Lutherans believe all three? Perhaps there are other options? Perhaps I am vindicating your view of the "rationalistic Catholic"? :D

(Note: I have no idea how long the change might be thought to persist; I just picked "the end of the service" as an arbitrary point for the means of illustration.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImaginaryDay
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,785
Pacific Northwest
✟728,115.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
It seems like a significant thing to disagree on. Which of these possibilities would be acceptable according to Lutheran teaching:

  1. No real change takes place in the bread and the wine (and therefore they need not be reserved).
  2. A real change takes place, but the bread and wine revert back to their original state at the end of the service (and therefore they need not be reserved).
  3. A real change takes place and remains even after the end of the service (and therefore they need to be reserved).

4. We don't know. We can only be confident that it is Christ's body and blood given for us, and that it is in the context of the Service that this is so. It is what it is because Christ says so; all else is speculation. Speculation isn't wrong per se, but doctrine and practice cannot be determined by speculation, we can only go by what we can know because it has been revealed: Jesus says, "This is My body" therefore it's His body, on this we hang our faith and confession.

Is there a change in the species? Who can say? Who can know? On this we might say,

"Let all mortal flesh keep silence,
and with fear and trembling stand;
set your minds on things eternal,
for with blessing in his hand
Christ our God to earth descendeth,
come our homage to command
."

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,375
✟241,875.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
4. We don't know. We can only be confident that it is Christ's body and blood given for us, and that it is in the context of the Service that this is so. It is what it is because Christ says so; all else is speculation. Speculation isn't wrong per se, but doctrine and practice cannot be determined by speculation, we can only go by what we can know because it has been revealed: Jesus says, "This is My body" therefore it's His body, on this we hang our faith and confession.

Thanks for your reply. Since you claim that you can't know, it would seem that all three are viable options for a Lutheran.

Speculation isn't wrong per se, but doctrine and practice cannot be determined by speculation...

But as this thread shows, doctrine and practice can't help but be determined by "speculation." For example, at the end of the service the Lutheran has to make a choice: to reserve the bread or not. The ground for such a decision is whether the elements have changed and remained so, or not. But according to you both of these options are speculation. No matter what choice the Lutheran makes, his decision is based on speculation.

Is there a change in the species? Who can say? Who can know?

Inevitably I find this unsatisfying. This is because something which is Jesus' body and blood is different from something which is not Jesus' body and blood, no? If we add this to the fact that the bread and wine over which Jesus speaks these words were not previously his body and blood, one cannot deny that some change has taken place. As far as I know, Lutherans affirm that a change takes place, but perhaps I am missing a distinction. Are you claiming that some change takes place, but not necessarily a change of species?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AMM

A Beggar
Supporter
May 2, 2017
1,725
1,269
Virginia
✟329,845.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
My 2 cents:

It is truly Christ's very Body and Blood on the Altar and in the hands of the priest/pastor. Christ instructed us to eat and to drink it for the forgiveness of our sins.

So shouldn't we consume all the elements? Just as we would reject Rome's Eucharistic Adoration because they do not follow Christ's command to eat and drink, so too should we not reject the reservation of consecrated elements? The Pastor and his assistants can finish what remains on the Altar after all have communed. And then, there is no problem about what to do with the "extra" of Christ's body and blood. Problem solved.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Resha Caner

Expert Fool
Sep 16, 2010
9,171
1,398
✟148,100.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
But as this thread shows, doctrine and practice can't help but be determined by "speculation." For example, at the end of the service the Lutheran has to make a choice: to reserve the bread or not. The ground for such a decision is whether the elements have changed and remained so, or not. But according to you both of these options are speculation. No matter what choice the Lutheran makes, his decision is based on speculation.

I'm confused. Why is a decision to reserve the bread/wine (or not) a theological issue? What does the RCC do?
 
Upvote 0