Martin Luther and the Eucharist
(cf The Large Catechism of M. Luther)
"And say to yourself: I am not commanded to investigate or to know how God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, or how the soul of Christ is in the sacrament. For me it is enough to know that the Word which I hear and the body which I receive are truly the Word and the body of my Lord and God." (M. Luther)
My question to my Protestant brothers and sisters is this: If the founder of the reformation and the originator of the doctrines of faith alone, scripture alone, etc believed that the Lord's Supper was indeed the true body and blood of Christ, and not a symbol, what is the justification by which contemporary Protestants refute this belief? If you don't agree with Martin Luther regarding his views of baptism and the Eucharist, why do you agree with him regarding faith alone and scripture alone? (Catholics of course believe in grace alone) It seems to me that it is a glaring inconsistency. If Luther is so completely wrong on this issue of the Eucharist (according to the beliefs of modern evangelical Protestants), why can't he possibly be wrong regarding his view of justification by faith alone, and his rejection of apostolic succession?
posted by Russ Rentler, M.D. | 2:45 PM
2 Comments:
Lutherans and (generally) Anglicans also believe in the Real Presence. Of course, they both lack valid holy orders so are unable to actually confect the Eucharist (as far as we are concerned).
Martin Luther had one set of beliefs that were schismatic from the Church. Other Protestant denominations simply have their own. As more and more opinions become popular, more and more denominations are created. This is the fruit of no actual authority.
IMHO, sola scriptura results not in making the Holy Bible the sole authority but in making every person their own authority.
A more interesting question to me is not why the countless denominations differ on so much, but rather why do they agree on Luther's subset bible?
Happy New Year Russ!
"IMHO, sola scriptura results not in making the Holy Bible the sole authority but in making every person their own authority."
That's an excellent point George and in my experience I saw that played out many times in innumerable ways.
One such way is the rejection of the creedal doctrines that all of Christendom held from the beginning, in favor of novel doctrines based on ones' own personal interpretation of scripture. It is truly ironic that Luther railed against Zwingli and the other reformers when they used his sola scriptura principle to come up with doctrines in direct contradiction to his.
It is interesting and important to note that in Luther's defense of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist he relied heavily on Sacred Tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers and not on scripture alone. When push came to shove, sola scriptura failed the founder of the reformation who based his new theologies on scripture alone.
Post a Comment
Home