As believers, we daily fight the devil, the world, and our own flesh. The devil is always looking for more ways to tempt us away from the pure doctrines of the true faith. It is no surprise that he would use the isolation edicts of the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 to tempt us even more.
History has recorded many examples where believers endured extended seasons of imposed fasting, sometimes lasting hundreds of years. There were fasts of worship gathering, of sacrificing, and of the Word. The recent pandemic isolation limitations has created yet another fasting season. Such conditions are an extreme test of faith for believers. When considering the celebration of the Lord’s Holy Supper, will believers continue to heed the Word or give-in to temptation and invent perversions of its core precepts?
What does Scripture say about the Lord’s institution of Holy Communion? Is it meant to be a divine shared experience? Do the instructional words have specific meanings based on the context of their use? How are the sacramental elements administered? How did other faithful witnesses perceive this precious gift? How has the Church[1] addressed the challenges of this new fasting season?
One method the Church has used to temporarily work-around the imposed government limitations was to expand the telephone call-in service to broadcast both pre-recorded and live sermons.
Notices for live Church call-in services has included statements such as:
“We will have communion service and for those that can’t attend you can take part at home!”
(IALCnotices)[2]
“For those calling in from home for Duluth services, communion packets will be available for pick up at the church Saturday July 11th at 6-630 PM (Central time) and Sunday July 12th at 9:30-10 AM (Central time) for communion Sunday.”
(IALCnotices)[3]
“We will be having communion during the call in, so those at home can partake as well.”
(IALCnotices)[4]
A live call-in sermon stated:
“We do this communion (like brother said) in faith believing that it is the body and blood of Christ. We don’t get hung-up on the mechanics, we don’t get hung-up on the logistics. It’s in our hearts… We need not get wrapped-up in any bit of tradition except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.”
(I.A.L.C. Minister)[5]
These statements support an emerging concept of a remote virtual communion. That is, while those in Church commune, those at a distance listening to the broadcast (open to anyone, anywhere) may consume bread and wine with the expectation they are participating in the Lord’s Supper. Does this new innovative practice truly embody all the precepts of a shared Holy Communion as described in Scripture? What is meant by what is written?
Words Have Meanings
Words have meanings and without agreement on common meanings then words mean nothing. To commune[6] with others requires an intimate local presence. To be a guest at a feast[7] requires a common location and a shared meal in an assembly[8][9] of others.
If words mean nothing, then the Words of Scripture mean nothing.
Meanings Are Contextual
The specific meanings of words are dependent upon the context in which they are used. If context is ignored, then their meanings (and their scopes) are indeterminate.
Note how the Lord performed objective acts with the communion elements visible and present to sanctify them as sacraments as He established the first communion with His disciples:
“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.”
(Matthew 26:26-28, emphasis added.)
That is, in closed company, He took the bread and the wine that was present on the table, He gave thanks and blessed the bread and wine, He brake and gave the bread and wine to the disciples and commanded them to take, eat and drink His body and blood.[10]
What was the scope of the elements being sanctified for the sacramental eating and drinking?
“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.”
(Matthew 26:26-28 , emphasis added.)
When the Lord identifies this bread and this cup, He refers only to that taken and visible and present in that specific time and space. He says this, He does not say there, as in “over there in the next room, or building, or town, or future time.” He does not imply all the bread and wine that exists across all of creation, then or in the past or future. (See also the meaning of is.)[11]
What was the scope of the audience celebrating the supper?
“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.”
(Matthew 26:26-28, emphasis added.)
When Scripture uses the words disciples, they, them, and ye (you) it refers only to those visible and present in that specific time and space. It does not refer to all believers across all creation, then or in the past or future.
When the Lord says many [His blood] there is a shift in context, referring to all of creation, (both believing and unbelieving) past, present, and future, but it does not mean that all believers across time and space are physically celebrating this particular feast in this specific time and space. It is a promise for what would shortly transpire on the cross—the redemption of all of creation!
Apostle Paul repeats the limited scope of an audience celebrating the supper:
“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 Corinthians 10:16, emphasis added.)
Paul refers to we within the context of a specific localized communion celebration as only those believers present, not all believers across all of time and space. When he says bless or break he is speaking of the elements within the same localized context, he is not referring to potentially all or any bread and wine that did, does, or will exist across time and space.
Apostle Paul then shifts the context to relate believers present at a supper to the larger body of believers across time and space:
“For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.”
(1 Corinthians 10:17, emphasis added.)
His words are comforting as he assures those that locally celebrate the supper are indeed part of a larger body of believers across time and space and united within the body of Christ. He does not suggest that a supper celebrated within a specific time and space can be physically shared across or through time and space. (Note also how Paul uses the word many in a different context than shown above.)
“This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.”
(Luke 22:19b, emphasis added.)
Did the Lord say all these things just to fill-up pages in the Bible, or were these instructions given for a purpose? Should we ignore them (or feed them to the cows[12] ) or did He specifically say to do them?
If the context in which words are used are irrelevant, then the Words and promises of Scripture become uncertain.
Sacraments Have Elements
The sacraments of Holy Communion and Baptism are visible, physical, present, simple earthly elements comprehended and sanctified with the present spoken Word.
“Namely, that in the natural bread and wine is the true Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, comprehended in God’s Word and commandment, and sanctified by the Word as instituted by Jesus Christ himself.”
(Catechism[13])
“Namely, that baptism is not simply common water only; but it is natural water comprehended in God’s Word and commandment, and sanctified by them.”
(Catechism[14])
Sacraments are distributed in the Church by qualified chosen ministers:
“It is taught among us that nobody should publicly teach or preach or administer the sacraments in the church without a regular call.”
(Catechism[15])
Along with the earthly elements and the Word, the process of sacrament sanctification[16] requires objective acts with the elements to commit them to be sacraments, otherwise there would be no need for a common location of the elements with the spoken Word.
Sacrament Consecration Requires Commonly Located Objective Acts
Holy Communion (as shown above) was instituted[17] by our Lord through His Word and the physical administration of the elements present in the same time and space[18] in the direct presence of his disciples.
Today, a minister of the Word has the responsibility to faithfully[19] deliver the sacrament of communion as the Lord instructed.[20] Acting in His behalf, he assumes control of the visible bread and wine, offers thanks to Him, blesses them through the proclamation of the Lord’s Words of institution, supervises the distribution, gives them to the eligible[21][22][23] assembled believers present, and instructs them to eat and drink.
All these basic precepts break-down when the new innovation[24] of remote virtual communion is introduced.
It’s important to understand that the Words of institution alone do not consummate Holy Communion. (If it did, simply reading or speaking the Words alone might inadvertently trigger a virtual communion feast!)
A truly efficacious[25] Holy Communion is complete, that is, it includes all its aspects. This includes: a present qualified minister; his proclamation of thanks and the blessing of the Words of institution over the visually present bread and wine; spiritual discernment of the assembled recipients; supervision of the local distribution and receiving of the consecrated elements; sacramental eating and drinking by the receiving body of partakers.
In contrast, a remote virtual communion is incomplete, that is, it includes virtually none of the true aspects. It merely involves: an absent minister; his audible (wizard-like) incantation of thanks and blessings; absent bread[26] and wine separated from the minister through space and/or time; no spiritual discernment of the recipients; no supervision of the remote distribution and receiving; an absent body of partakers.
Remote virtual communion has more dissimilarities than similarities with complete (real) communion! Faithfulness to the Word and the faithful administration of the sacraments (as Scripture instructs) provides a proper foundation of certainty for the trust that indeed Holy Communion is being offered and is efficacious among believers. When the elements and aspects of communion are separated across space and/or time, no assurance can be discerned that the Lord’s instructions are being heeded or that His body and blood are actually given and received for the forgiveness of sins and the strengthening of faith. The innovation of doubtful doctrines and practices introduces uncertainties about the validity of the sacrament and His promises.
Historic Perspectives
It is admittedly difficult to find any historic review for this particular scenario, since modern communications (telephone, instant messaging, etc.) are relatively new inventions. However, a few examples from the 16th century Reformation era are noteworthy.
Martin Luther was asked whether it was permissible for somebody to self-administer the sacrament, he replied:
“No! At least two persons must always be there, the one who gives and the one who receives… If a person can’t have access to the sacrament, faith is enough, according to that word, ‘Your faith has made you well’ [Matt 9:22]. I have had many questions like this… But it isn’t right for a person to administer the sacrament to himself.”
(Martin Luther[28])
“But if any one should advance the pretext that as an act of devotion he wishes to administer the Sacrament, or Communion, to himself, he is not in earnest [he would commit a great mistake, and would not be speaking seriously and sincerely]. For if he wishes to commune in sincerity, the surest and best way for him is in the Sacrament administered according to Christ’s institution. But that one administer communion to himself is a human notion, uncertain, unnecessary, yea, even prohibited.”
(Martin Luther[27])
Luther was asked if it was possible for ministers to privately self-administer communion:
“First, it is not enough to speak thus or to undertake [such a thing], but they ought to have a clear Word and command of God, that this is proper and should be done; for without God’s Word one ought not undertake anything in God’s service and in the things of God. Secondly, it is a perversion of the priestly office which God has instituted, for the Sacraments are to be distributed through a common public office in the stead of Christ and of Christendom. Now a single individual cannot have or exercise a common public office all by himself in opposition to Christendom.”
(Martin Luther,[29] emphasis added.)
Additional comments regarding communion:
“[In our churches we show] a true Christian mass [communion] according to the ordinance and institution of Christ, as well as according to the true intention of Christ and the church. [There our minister,] rightly and honorably and publicly called, …goes before the altar. Publicly and plainly he sings what Christ has ordained and instituted in the Lord’s Supper. He takes the bread and wine, gives thanks, distributes and gives them to the rest of us who are there and want to receive them, on the strength of the words of Christ: ‘This is my body, this is my blood. Do this,’ etc.”
(Martin Luther[30])
“[The] people should be told in sermons to receive Communion three or four times a year in order that, strengthened by the Word, they may afterward fall asleep, no matter what the cause of death may be. For private Communion will increasingly impose an intolerable and impossible burden, especially in time of pestilence.”
(Martin Luther[31])
Also, consider how faithful communion was maintained in 19th century Lapland despite the harsh conditions. Some were so remote they received communion only once a year:
“The Lord’s Supper was held in connection with the prayer days and the major church holidays in the Karesuando Church, which was attended by 60 persons on average. On the Second Day of Easter, the number generally doubled. It fell to its lowest number in connection with communion at haying time on St. James’ Day.”
(Seppo Lohi,[32] emphasis added.)
Objections
No doubt those that accept remote virtual communion will object to the reproof here offered. I have attempted to capture and respond to a few of the objections that might arise:
1. Every means of hearing God’s audible Word is exactly equivalent. It does not matter if we hear it spoken in person, through the telephone, live or pre-recorded, through a tape player, MP3 player, internet browser, smartphone app, etc. Response: While each of these means of hearing God’s Word is beneficial, that does not make them equivalent. One might say that each of these means has an office, but each office is different. Just as reading the Word is beneficial, but reading provides significantly different benefits than hearing it preached in person.
2. When we listen to God’s Word spoken, regardless if in person, or by telephone, or by a played recording, the whole body of believers is joined in spirit. Therefore, if we hear communion being offered through these means, we may join them and partake even when separated by time and space. Response: The giving and receiving of sacraments (either communion or baptism) have unique physical aspects as described above. While believers on the present earth are indeed joined in spirit through Christ, we do not experience[33] this level of membership while we are still in the flesh. This experience is scheduled on the last day, in the resurrection and in the new heaven and earth. Until then, we are limited to a physical existence which requires a physical presence with the sacraments. To suggest otherwise leads into heresies such as Gnostic material/spiritual dualism.
3. Remote virtual communion is only valid when the audio source of the communion celebration is live and broadcasted in real-time. Pre-recorded communions are invalid. Response: What would happen if we discovered that even live broadcasts have a system latency of 7 seconds, or 3 seconds, or 1 second? The latency delay would therefore render the broadcast a recording of sorts, even if the recording medium is just along the wire. If the latency is still acceptable for communion purposes, then pre-recordings would need to be acceptable, regardless if they were 3 minutes old, or 40 years old. Therefore, regardless whether the audio source is live or pre-recorded, remote virtual communion is still invalid.
4. When communion is offered in Church, the Lord himself is not visibly present, therefore believers don’t need to be physically present to participate either. Response: Until the day of resurrection, the limitations of our corrupt physical bodies still require us to be present to receive a true efficacious sacrament of communion. A clear statement on this is recorded in our catechism:
“It is taught among us that the true body and blood of Christ are really present in the Supper of our Lord under the form of bread and wine and are there distributed and received. The contrary doctrine is therefore rejected.”
(Catechism[34])
5. The pandemic restrictions constitutes a state of emergency. Since even laymen can perform emergency baptisms, then surely we can participate in emergency remote virtual communions. Response: The 16th century Reformers affirmed that only regularly called[35] minsters should administer the sacraments. In dire circumstances, a layman could perform an emergency Baptism, but there was no emergency case for serving Holy Communion.
“[Communion] is not so necessary that salvation depends on it. The gospel and baptism are sufficient, since faith alone justifies…”
(Martin Luther[36])
“The word of God is the greatest, most necessary, and most sublime part in Christendom… and in an emergency one could be saved without the sacraments – as for example, those who die before receiving the desired baptism – but not without the word.”
(Martin Luther[37])
6. The Lord can do anything because He is God and transcends time and space. Therefore we can celebrate communion with Him and other believers through time and space because we occupy a spiritual assembly and are unconstrained by time and space. Response: It is true that God the creator could do anything He wanted in any way that He wanted. However, He has preserved the Scripture for us[38] so that we would know the ordinary ways that He has chosen to operate.[39] Even the Holy Spirit will not operate except according to Scriptural authority.[40] While we are still in the flesh we are bound to the earth (as noted above) though we have His gift of a lively hope of everlasting life in His eternal dwelling place. As earthly creatures, it would be dangerously presumptuous for us to impose changes[41] on His institutions. Indeed, Scripture forbids us to tempt or put God to the test by coercing Him to operate in ways He has not authorized or promised.[42]
“The devil has no better way to conquer us than by leading us away from the Word and to the Spirit. I have observed this as some thing remarkable in the sacramentarians that they don’t consider the Word but only the things added to the Word, namely, the bread and wine. But one should hold fast to the Word and not concede the Spirit to people apart from the Word. The sacramentarians see only bread and wine (and, in like manner, water) but not the Word.”
(Martin Luther[43])
7. The crucifixion occurred a long time ago in a far-away place—in a completely different time and space. Therefore, communion can be celebrated with other believers across time and space. Response: Luther explained it this way:
“We treat the forgiveness of sins in two ways. First, how it is achieved and won. Second, how it is distributed and given to us. Christ has achieved it on the cross, it is true. But he has not distributed or given it on the cross. He has not won it in the supper or sacrament. There he has distributed and given it through the Word, as also in the gospel, where it is preached. He has won it once for all on the cross. But the distribution takes place continuously, before and after, from the beginning to the end of the world… If now I seek the forgiveness of sins, I do not run to the cross, for I will not find it there… but I will find in the sacrament or the Gospel the word which distributes, presents, offers, and gives to me that forgiveness which was won on the cross.”
(Martin Luther[44])
8. Faith should be simple. All the reproofs offered are complex and only go to prove they are wrong because too much brain-powered reason has been used to write them. Don’t you know that the brain is in cahoots with the devil? Response: It’s true, faith is basically simple but it gets complex when we ignore (subtract from) the revealed Word or add to it.[45] History[46] has borne this out when heresies arose from within the Church and faithful witnesses had to search, study, ponder, and wrestle with Scripture (while guided by the Holy Spirit) to discover and clarify the truth of the pure doctrines. The use of our brains (reason) is justified and encouraged provided it remains bound within Scripture. To add or subtract from it builds an alliance with the devil. Luther and our Catechism explained it this way:
Dr. [Luther] was asked whether, since it is necessary to exclude reason from articles of faith, reason has any value at all for Christians. He replied, “Prior to faith and a knowledge of God, reason is darkness, but in believers it’s an excellent instrument. Just as all gifts and instruments of nature are evil in godless men, so they are good in believers. Faith is now furthered by reason, speech, and eloquence, whereas these were only impediments prior to faith. Enlightened reason, taken captive by faith, receives life from faith, for it is slain and given life again. As our body will rise [from the dead] glorified, so our reason is different in believers than it was before, for it doesn’t fight against faith but promotes it. Our speech, which used to be godless and blasphemous, now preaches, praises God, and gives him thanks. So, iron which glows from fire is different from iron that doesn’t glow. This is regeneration through the Word and occurs while the person and the members remain the same… Reason, speech, and all gifts and created things are therefore different in believers and Christians than in unbelievers.”
(Martin Luther[47])
“What is meant by this: ‘I believe that God has created me and all that exists; that He has given me and still sustains my soul and body, all my limbs and senses, my reason and all the faculties of my mind’…”
(Catechism, [48] emphasis added.)
If you can think of additional objections, or if you hear of some more, please let me know.
Unintended Consequences
If some form of remote virtual communion was assumed to be valid, it would nevertheless create a plethora of opportunities for abuse and new problems. For example:
1. What happens if the remote virtual communion partaker is unworthy or is not eligible[49] for the supper? Does that person eat and drink to their damnation?[50] Does that person alone bear all the guilt[51] or is the Church at-large also responsible?[52] What would be an appropriate remedy for this sin for all those involved?
“We must, therefore, make a distinction here among men. For those who are wanton and dissolute must be told to stay away; for they are not prepared to receive forgiveness of sin, since they do not desire it and do not wish to be godly. But the others, who are not such callous and wicked people, and desire to be godly, must not absent themselves, even though otherwise they be feeble and full of infirmities…”
(Martin Luther[53])
“In the same manner as we have heard regarding Holy Baptism, we must speak also concerning the other Sacrament [Holy Communion], namely, these three points: What is it? What are its benefits? and, Who is to receive it? And all these are established by the words by which Christ has instituted it, and which every one who desires to be a Christian and go to the Sacrament should know. For it is not our intention to admit to it and to administer it to those who know not what they seek, or why they come.”
(Martin Luther[54])
2. When a live remote virtual communion is available, what happens to those that listen to the service but do not partake? Having avoided the sacrament, are they now guilty of despising (not discerning) it?[55] What about those that could have remotely listened to the service, but were unaware of it or did not connect to the service? Are they likewise guilty?
3. When a pre-recorded service is broadcasted (or played through some other device) which includes a communion service, and the listener assumes it to be a live service or otherwise considers it to be a valid opportunity to partake, is the sacrament efficacious or has a sinful mockery been committed?
4. If an incomplete form of communion is accepted, that is, an absence of some of the precepts (commonly located elements and objective acts) that constitute an efficacious communion, then how is it really any different from other communion heresies, such as the Romish heresy[56] of serving only the bread (without the wine) to those partaking, or the more subtle communion heresies like those found in Zwinglism or Calvinism?
5. If the words of institution alone effect sacramental elements of the body and blood, then how would such a belief avoid devolving into an error like the Romish heresy of perpetual adoration?
6. If virtual remote communion through audible mediums are valid, what other mediums would also be considered valid? E-mail? Text messaging? Facebook Live streams? Virtual reality? A.I. chat-bots?
7. Are other forms of virtual worship also valid? Why not virtual baptisms? If virtual sacraments are valid, why not other lesser ceremonies? Virtual funerals? Virtual weddings? Virtual confirmations? Virtual song-services? Why gather[57] at all, if everything can be done virtually? Are there any limits, where would it stop?[58]
These kinds of perverse questions multiply and get more difficult to answer as the Word is progressively ignored and pure doctrines and practices are corrupted.
Conclusion
Holy Communion is not our service to the Lord, it is Lord’s service to us. Man did not invent communion, the Lord instituted it. Scripture describes the end of those that innovate[59] upon the Lord’s institutions. The concept of a man-made remote virtual communion violates the underlying precepts of a shared communion. It ignores the meanings and the context of the words used in Scripture to institute and celebrate it. It ignores the localized commonality and proper administration of the sacramental elements. It ignores the sound testimony of gifted faithful witnesses that fought similar issues. It introduces new opportunities for mischief and abuse.
“The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered.”
(Catechism[60])
It is clear that remote virtual communion is antithetical to the pure concept of celebrating the shared communion feast of the Holy Supper. Errors like these are bound to occur whenever the Church fails to heed the Word and drifts away from it. When we drift away from the Word, we also drift away from the counsel and guidance it provides. Certainty becomes uncertain and unsolvable problems ensue.
“So that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.”
(Ephesians 4:14)
Scripture often labels[61] those that appear to be Christian yet pervert the Gospel as the Antichrist. Please reply and let me know if we should likewise label the error of remote virtual communion as Anticommunion.
[1] Finnish Independent Apostolic Lutheran Congregations. (I.A.L.C.)
[2] Yahoo Group IALCnotices, Jul 19, 2020.
[3] Yahoo Group IALCnotices, Jul 10, 2020.
[4] Yahoo Group IALCnotices, Jul 05, 2020.
[5] Quotation heard during an I.A.L.C. telephone call-in broadcasted live from the Cedar Valley church in Minnesota on Sunday, July 19, 2020, 2:00 PM service, 2nd sermon.
[6] The American Heritage Dictionary, Commune.
[7] The American Heritage Dictionary, Feast.
[8] A Catechism According to God’s Word. The Augsburg Confession, Article VII. “[The Church is] the assembly of all believers among whom the Gospel is preached in its purity and the holy sacraments are administered according to the Gospel. For it is sufficient for the true unity of the Christian church that the Gospel be preached in conformity with a pure understanding of it and that the sacraments be administered in accordance with the divine Word.” (Emphasis added.)
[9] The American Heritage Dictionary, Assembly.
[10] Krauth, Charles Porterfield (1871). The Conservative Reformation and its Theology. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Originally published by the United Lutheran Publication House. (2007 ISBN: 978-0-7586-0994-6) p. 673-674.
[11] To learn about the meaning of what is is, as in “this is my body” and “this is my blood,” review the history of the Marburg Colloquy (1529) when Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli debated the definition.
[12] A refrain reportedly heard during the schism of 1962, “We don’t need [the Bible’s] instructions, they can be fed to the cows.” spoken by those who abandoned the Word.
[13] A Catechism According to God’s Word, The Sacrament of the Altar.
[14] A Catechism According to God’s Word, The Sacrament of Holy Baptism.
[15] A Catechism According to God’s Word , The Augsburg Confession. Article XIV. See also: Romans 10:15 , 1 Corinthians 4:1.
[16] The American Heritage Dictionary, Sanctify, Consecrate.
[17] Matthew 26:26-28, Luke 22:14-23.
[18] Luke 22:7-13, Matthew 26:17-19.
[19] 1 Corinthians 4:1-2
[20] Luke 22:19
[21] 1 Corinthians 11:27-30
[22] “The people are accustomed to partake of the Sacrament together, if any be fit for it, and this also increases the reverence and devotion of public worship. For none are admitted except they be first examined.” (The Augsburg Confession, Article XXIV.)
[23] “[The Catechism is instruction for] what every Christian must needs know, so that he who does not know this could not be numbered with the Christians nor be admitted to any [Communion] Sacrament… those who come to the Lord’s Supper ought to know more and have a fuller understanding of all Christian doctrine than children and new scholars.” (Luther, Martin. The Large Catechism, 1529. Short Preface.)
[24] French, Henry F. (2017). Martin Luther’s Table Talk: Abridged from Luther’s Works, Volume 54. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Published by Fortress Press (P.O. Box 1209, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440-1209.) ISBN: 978-1-5064-3431-5 p. 84, “When somebody inquired whether something might be substituted for wine in the communion sacrament, Luther replied: ‘This question has often been put to me and I have always given this answer: One shouldn’t use anything else than wine. If a person can’t tolerate wine, omit it [the sacrament] altogether in order that no innovation may be made or introduced.'” (Emphasis added.)
[25] The American Heritage Dictionary, Efficacious adj. “Producing or capable of producing a desired effect.”
[26] It seems no small coincidence that the temple shewbread is also known as the bread of the presence. See: Exodus 25:30.
[27] Luther, Martin (1537). The Smalcald Articles, Part II, Article II.
[28] French, Table Talk, p. 85.
[29] Luther, Martin (1530). Letter to George Spalatin, July 27.
[30] Lehmann, Helmut T. (1971) Luther’s Works, Vol. 38, The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests, (Fortress Press P.O. Box 1209, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440.) ISBN: 978-0800603380, 208.
[31] Tappert, Theodore G. (1960) Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, Letter to Anthony Lauterbach, 1539. (The Westminster Press, Philadelphia, PA.) p. 305.
[32] Lohi, Seppo (2019). Christianity of the Heart: Lars Levi Laestadius and the beginning phases of the Laestadian Revival. Loretto, Minnesota: Published by the Laestadian Lutheran Church (279 N. Medina Street Suite 150, Loretto, MN 55357). ISBN: 978-1-7328008-2-3 p. 70.
[33] “[We speak] the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world… Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared…” (1 Corinthians 2:7-9 )
[34] A Catechism According to God’s Word, The Augsburg Confession. Article X.
[35] A Catechism According to God’s Word, The Augsburg Confession. Article XIV. See also: Romans 10:15 , Hebrews 5:4.
[36] Lehmann, Helmut T. (1958) Luther’s Works, Vol. 40, Concerning the Ministry, (Fortress Press P.O. Box 1209, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440.) ISBN: 978-0800603403, p. 9-10.
[37] Lehmann, Luther’s Works, Vol. 38 p. 189.
[38] 2 Timothy 3:16-17
[39] “[Contend] for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 1:3 b)
[40] John 16:13
[41] “[There are] some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:7-8 ) See also: Leviticus 10:1-6
[42] Matthew 4:7, Luke 4:12, Exodus 17:2, Exodus 17:7, Deuteronomy 6:16, 1 Corinthians 10:9.
[43] French, Table Talk, p. 58.
[44] Lehman, Luther’s Works, p. 213-214.
[45] “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.” (Revelation 22:18-19) See also: Deuteronomy 4:2.
[46]
Church History is replete with examples enduring difficult struggles, trials, and extreme tests of faith leading to the clarification of pure sound doctrines. These include: The doctrine of the Trinity, Justification, the nature of the Holy Supper, Holy Baptism, the composition and presentation of The Augsburg Confession, etc. Dr. Martin Luther, in his teaching role at the university in Wittenburg, advocated the use of disputations — a formalized method of debate used for educational study purposes. They proved immensely useful to help clarify points of Scripture and to furnish his ministerial students with the knowledge and mental and oratory skills necessary to defend the pure doctrines.
[47] French, Table Talk (1533) p. 20.
[48] A Catechism According to God’s Word, The Apostles’ Creed, First Article.
[49] “But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” (1 Corinthians 5:11-13 )
[50] “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.” (1 Corinthians 11:29-31 )
[51] “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 Corinthians 11:27)
[52] “Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.” (1 Corinthians 11:33)
[53] Luther, Martin. The Large Catechism (1529). Part Fifth, 58-59.
[54] Luther, Martin. The Large Catechism (1529). Part Fifth, 1.
[55] “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” (1 Corinthians 11:29)
[56] “To the laity are given Both Kinds in the Sacrament… And this usage has long remained in the Church, nor is it known when, or by whose authority, it was changed [to just one kind—the bread only]; But it is evident that any custom introduced against the commandments of God is not to be allowed… But this custom has been received, not only against the Scripture, but also against the old Canons and the example of the Church… because the division of the Sacrament does not agree with the ordinance of Christ…” (The Augsburg Confession, Article XXII.)
[57] Hebrews 10:25
[58] “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.” (Proverbs 12:15) See also: Judges 21:25, Judges 17:6.
[59] Leviticus 10:1-2
[60] A Catechism According to God’s Word. The Augsburg Confession, Article VII.
[61] 1 John 4:1-3, Mark 13:22, 1 John 2:18
Pretty complete. Written like a true apologist.
Keep up the good work!