No, no, these are Christ's lambs. They come with His marks upon them. Let the Sunday-school teacher work in harmony with the mother who gave these children to Christ. Let the whole atmosphere of the school impress on that child the precious truth that it is Jesus' little lamb. Feed that lamb, feed it with the sincere milk of the Word. Lead that lamb gently; teach it to understand its relation to the Great Shepherd, to know Him, to rejoice in His love, to love His voice, to follow His leadings more and more closely.
Instead of singing doubtfully and dolefully:
In my grave I soon shall lie.
Am I ready now to go,
If the will of God be so?"
or,
"Child of sin and sorrow
Filled with dismay,
Wait not for to-morrow;
Yield thee to-day:" etc.
or,
"Depth of mercy, can there be
Mercy still reserved for me?" etc.
or,
"Hasten, sinner, to be wise,
Stay not for to-morrow's sun," etc
or,
"I can but perish if I go,
I am resolved to try,
For, if I stay away, I know
I shall forever die."
or,
"When saints gather round Thee, dear Saviour above,
And hasten to crown Thee with jewels of love,
Amid those bright mansions of glory so fair—
Oh, tell me, dear Saviour, if I shall be there!"
Some of these sentiments are unscriptural. Some may do for penitent prodigals. But all are out of place on the lips of baptized children of the Church. Let such rather joyfully sing:
Therefore glad and gay I am;
Jesus loves me, Jesus knows me,
All that's good and fair He shows me,
Tends me every day the same,
Even calls me by my name,"
and such other cheerful and healthy hymns as breathe the spirit of the Church of the Reformation.
This we believe to be the object of our Sunday-schools, as far as the baptized children of Christian parents are concerned. They are to be helps, to keep the children true to their baptismal covenant, and to enable them to grow strong and stronger against sin and in holiness. Jesus did not tell Peter to convert, but feed His lambs.
From these considerations we see how important it is for Lutheran Sunday-schools to have teachers who "know of the doctrine, whether it be true;" who are "rooted and grounded in the faith;" who are "ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh them a reason of the hope that is in them;" who are "apt to teach."
A teacher who does not understand and appreciate the Lutheran doctrine of baptism is out of place in a Lutheran Sunday-school. It is certainly not desirable to have the child instructed at home that it was given to Christ in baptism, received and owned by Him and belongs to Him, and then have the Sunday-school teacher teach it that until it experiences some remarkable change, which the teacher cannot at all explain, it belongs not to Christ, but to the unconverted world. The teaching of the pulpit, the catechetical class, the home and the Sunday-school, ought certainly to be in perfect harmony—especially so on the vital point of the personal relation of the child to the Saviour and His salvation. To have clashing and contradictory instruction is a sure way to sow the seeds of doubt and skepticism.
We must have sound instruction and influence in the Sunday-school, and to this end we must have sound and clear helps and equipments for teacher and pupil. The worship of the school, the singing, the opening and closing exercises, must all be in harmony with this great fundamental idea of feeding those who are already Christ's lambs.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE SUNDAY-SCHOOL—ITS RELATION TO THOSE IN COVENANT RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRIST, AND ALSO TO THE UNBAPTIZED AND WANDERING.
We are still speaking of the dealing of the Sunday-school with the baptized children of Christian parents. We have seen how important it is that the Sunday-school work in harmony with the pastor and the parent. We have seen that, to this end, it is especially important that the instruction of the teacher be in harmony with the doctrine of our Church on baptismal Grace, and the keeping of the baptismal covenant.
Here, however, we meet with a practical difficulty. Too many of our teachers are not clear themselves on this subject. Their own early instruction may have been imperfect. Their whole environment has been unfavorable to rooting and grounding them in this faith, once delivered to the saints. This old-fashioned faith, as we have seen, has become unpopular with the masses even of professing Christians. The whole current of the religionism of the day is against it. In many localities and circles, to profess this faith is to invite ridicule and opposition. The Lutheran Church in this matter, as in others, is behind the age, because the age is away ahead of Christ and the Apostles, the Church Fathers and Reformers.
What wonder then that in many places, our members, on whom we must depend for teachers, have unconsciously drifted away from the old landmarks, and are altogether at sea as to God's means and methods of Grace, especially with the children?
It is, therefore, a matter of the gravest importance that our Church place in the hands of her willing but inexperienced teachers such plain, practical and full helps and equipments as will enable them to be safe and successful instructors in our Sunday-schools. Our good teachers are always willing to learn. They need to be and want to be first taught. They need clear, sound exposition, illustration and application of every lesson for themselves, before they can successfully teach others. They need to be shown in every lesson, how the divine Word everywhere sets forth the precious doctrines of our Church. They need to be shown over and over again, how these doctrines are to be impressed and applied to the heart, conscience, and life of the pupil; and how the truth is to be so instilled that it may, by means of every lesson, awaken and deepen a sense of sinfulness, and repentance therefor, and beget and increase faith and love for the dear Saviour. Every lesson that does not make sin more hateful and Christ more precious, is in so far, a failure.
From what we have learned in the last chapter, a Lutheran Sunday-school cannot safely use the literature, whether lesson leaves, lesson helps, or hymns, of others. And this simply because their sentiment is not only at variance with, but openly hostile to our faith. It is therefore even more important for our Church than for any other, to furnish all the necessary equipments for good, sound, live Sunday-schools. Our equipments ought to aim to become more and more superior to all others. The Church should strive to constantly improve them until they become so desirable and attractive that no Lutheran school would think of exchanging them for any others.
We hope to see the day when our Church will lead in all these practical enterprises, even as she has led and still leads in the sphere of sound doctrine. But we digress.
In these two chapters on Sunday-school work, we have thus far spoken only of the relation of the school, to the baptized children of Christian parents. A Sunday-school has, however, by no means fulfilled its mission by looking only after those who are already lambs of the flock. A Sunday-school, like a congregation, to be true to itself and its divine Master, must be a missionary institution. In every community there are lambs who have never been in the flock of the Good Shepherd, or have already wandered astray. There are children who have never been either baptized, or instructed in heavenly things at home. Or, if baptized, they have been permitted to grow up afterwards as wild as heathen children. Yes, even in the homes of members of our Church, there are children, whether baptized or not, who are thus growing up utterly neglected. If baptized, they don't even know it. Much less do they know the significance of their baptism.
It is the mission of the Sunday-school to gather in these destitute ones, from the street, and from their Christless homes. The Sunday-school must become a spiritual home for them. The earnest teacher can and ought to find out who of his pupils belong to this class, and apply to such the needed instruction and exhortation. In their case it is truly the object of the Sunday-school to lead them to Jesus, to labor for their conversion, to Christianize them. This, as a matter of course, also applies to those, even from Christian homes, who were baptized, and perhaps also, to some extent, instructed in divine things, but who have gone astray, and thus fallen from their baptismal covenant. All such, who are not at present in covenant relationship with Christ, who are turned away from Christ, must be turned back, i.e., converted.
Now this difficult work, this great change, can be accomplished only through the power of God's Word. "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." "The Gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation." The words of Christ, "they are spirit and they are life." If sinners, whether young or old, are to be reclaimed for Christ, it must be through that Word which "is quick"—i.e., full of life—"and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword."
Let the Sunday-school teacher depend on nothing else than this Word of God. It is always accompanied by the Spirit of God. It is the living seed of the new life. Let it be used prayerfully. Let it be taught carefully. Let it be taught clearly. Let it be impressed and applied to heart, and conscience, and life. Drive it home personally and individually to the impenitent pupil. See him by himself, visit him in his home, teach him in his class. Cease not your prayers and your efforts till the Word so lodge and fasten itself in the mind and conscience that it makes him realize his own sinfulness and need of a Saviour, and also that Saviour's readiness to save. This is God's way of salvation. This is the Way of Salvation in the Lutheran Church. The Sunday-school teacher who follows this way will win souls. The impenitent sinners of his class will be brought to repentance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ: or in one word, they will be converted; whilst those who are already Christ's will grow in Grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
CHAPTER IX.
CATECHISATION.
We have spoken of the importance and benefits of home training and instruction. We endeavored to show that Christian parents are under the most solemn obligation to instruct their children in the truth of God's Word. We also endeavored to show that, in order to give their children a clear understanding of the saving truths of the Bible, they could do no better than to diligently teach them Luther's Small Catechism; that this was really Luther's idea and purpose when he wrote that excellent little religious manual; that the first catechetical class ought indeed to be in the family, with father and mother as teachers;—that this home class ought to be carried on so long and so persistently, that in it the children would become perfectly familiar with the contents of the book; so familiar indeed, that they would know all the parts that Luther wrote perfectly by heart. Luther's Small Cathechism, i.e., the parts that Luther wrote himself, is really quite a small book. By giving only a little time and attention to it each week, the parents could easily, in a few years, have all their children know it as perfectly as they know their multiplication table. And such ought to be the case.
After these beginnings have thus been made, and while the home instruction is still going on, the work of the Sunday-school teacher comes in as a help to the home class. In every Sunday-school class there ought to be, with each lesson, some instruction in the Catechism. To this end each teacher, in a Lutheran Sunday-school, ought to be familiarly at home in this most important text-book. The teacher should endeavor so to teach these lessons, that the pupil would learn to love and appreciate the Catechism more and more. Thus, the school ought to be a helper to the home. And thus, home and school together, working in harmony for the same end, would prepare the children for the pastor's catechetical class.
If this good old-fashioned custom were kept up in all our households and schools, then would the pastor's catechetical class be more of a pleasure and a profit to himself and his catechumens. It would then be the pastor's part, as it should be, to review the contents with his class, and thus to find how well the preparatory work had been done. Then could he devote his time and energy to what is really the pastor's part of the work, viz., to explain and set forth clearly the meaning of the Catechism, and show how it all applies to the heart and life of every one.
It is not at all the pastor's place, and it should never be expected of him, to act the school-master, to see to and oversee the memorizing of the answers. It is his office to expound and apply the truth, to make the doctrines clear to the minds of the learners, and to show how they are all related to the individual life.
But, alas, how little is this understood or practiced! How many parents, who call themselves Christians, and Lutherans, seem to think that they have nothing to do in this whole matter! They seem to think that if they send their children once a week, for a few months, to the pastor's class, they have done their whole duty. They do not so much as help and encourage the children to learn the lessons that the pastor assigns. And thus does this part of the pastor's work, which ought to be among the most delightful of all his duties, become wearisome to the flesh and vexatious to the spirit. Scarcely anywhere else in all his duties does a pastor feel so helpless and hopeless and discouraged, as when standing week after week before a class of young people who have such poor instructors at home.
Christian parents, if you desire your sons and your daughters to become steadfast and useful members of the Church of Christ, see to it that you do your part in their religious instruction. Insist on it, and even use your parental authority, if necessary, that your children learn the Catechism and regularly attend the pastor's instructions.
We believe that the trouble in this matter lies largely in the fact that catechisation has become unpopular in our fast age. It is looked upon as a mark of old-fogyism, if not as an evidence of the absence of "spiritual religion!" The new measures and methods of modern revivals are more acceptable to the fickle multitude. They seem to point out a shorter route and quicker time to heaven. As a boy once said to the writer: "I don't want to belong to your church, because I would have to study the Catechism all winter, and down at the other church I can 'get through' in one night." That boy expressed about as clearly and tersely as could well be done, the popular sentiment of the day.
Yielding to this popular sentiment, many churches, that once adhered strictly and firmly to the catechetical method, having either dropped it entirely or are gradually giving it up. And in order to clothe their spiritual cowardliness and laziness in a pious garb, they say: "The Bible is enough for us." "We don't need any man-made Catechisms." "It is all wrong anyhow to place a human book on a level with or above the Bible." "We and our children want our religion from the Spirit of God, and not from a Church Catechism," etc., etc.
Do such people know what they are talking about, or do they sometimes use these pious phrases to quiet a guilty conscience? Do they know what a Catechism is?
Look at it for a moment. What is the nature and object of Luther's Small Catechism? Is it in the nature of a substitute for the Bible? Does it purpose to set aside the Bible? We can scarcely muster patience enough to write such questions. No! No!
Any child that can read this little book knows better. The plainest reader cannot fail to see that it is intended as a help to understand the Bible. Its purpose clearly is to awaken and develop in the reader or learner a more intelligent appreciation and love for the Bible. It contains nothing but Bible truths. Its design is simply this: To summarize and systematize the most important truths and doctrines of the divine Word. To so arrange and group them that even a child may learn what the Bible teaches as to creation, sin, salvation, and the means whereby it may be attained.
We have the assurance, also—and we believe that history and observation will bear out the statement—that those who appreciate and have studied a sound scriptural Catechism most thoroughly, appreciate, understand, love and live their Bibles most.
Of the contents, arrangement and intrinsic value of Luther's Small Catechism, we will speak in the next chapter.
CHAPTER X.
CONTENTS, ARRANGEMENT AND EXCELLENCE OF LUTHER'S SMALL CATECHISM.
We have spoken of Luther's Small Catechism as a help with which to lay hold of and understand the most important truths of the Bible. These fundamental truths are taken from the Scriptures, and are so grouped, arranged and explained that the learner can easily grasp and understand them. That some of the truths contained in the Bible are of greater importance than others will scarcely be denied.
It is certainly more important that the child should know and understand the Ten Commandments, than that it should be familiar with all the details of the ceremonial law. Certainly better to be familiar with the Apostles' Creed, than to know all about the building of the Temple. Better be able to repeat and understand the Lord's Prayer, than to have a clear knowledge of the elaborate ritual of the Temple service. Better understand the meaning of Christ's two Sacraments than to be able to tell all about the great feasts of the Jews.
If any one can know all these other matters also, so much the better. The Catechism will certainly be a help instead of a hindrance to this end. But if all cannot be learned—at least not at once—let the most important be taught first. And for this we have a Catechism.
Look at its contents. It is divided into five parts. Each division treats of a separate subject. The first contains the Ten Commandments, with a brief yet full explanation of each Commandment. The second part has the three articles of the Apostles' Creed, with a clear and most beautiful explanation of each one. The third is the Lord's Prayer, its introduction, the seven petitions, and the conclusion; with a terse, though comprehensive explanation of each sentence. The fourth and fifth parts treat similarly of the two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper.
Here then we have, in a brief space, the most important teachings of the whole Bible systematically arranged and clearly explained. Of these contents and their arrangement, Luther himself says:
"This Catechism is truly the Bible of the laity (or common people), wherein is contained the entire doctrine necessary to be known by every Christian for salvation. Here we have first the Ten Commandments of God, the doctrine of doctrines, by which the will of God is known, what God would have us to do and what is wanting in us.
"Secondly: The Apostles' Creed, the history of histories, or the highest history, wherein are delivered to us the wonderful works of God from the beginning, how we and all creatures are created by God, how all are redeemed by the Son of God, how we are also received and sanctified by the Holy Ghost, and collected together to a people of God, and have the remission of sins and everlasting salvation.
"Thirdly: The Lord's Prayer, the prayer of prayers, the highest prayer which the highest Master taught, wherein are included all temporal and spiritual blessings, and the strongest comforts in all temptations and troubles, and in the hour of death.
"Fourthly: The blessed Sacraments, the ceremonies of ceremonies, which God himself has instituted and ordained, and therein assured us of his Grace."
John Arndt, in a sermon on the Catechism, says: "The Catechism is a brief instruction in the Christian religion, and includes in itself the doctrine of the Law of God, Christian Faith, the Lord's Prayer, the institutions of Holy Baptism and of the Lord's Supper, which five parts are an epitome and kernel of the entire Holy Scriptures, for which reason it is called a 'Little Bible.'"
Dr. Seiss, in his Ecclesia Lutherana, says: "It is the completest summary of the contents of the Bible ever given in the same number of words. It gave to the reviving Church a text-book for the presentation of the truth as it is in Jesus to the school, lecture-room and pulpit."
The sainted Dr. Krauth says: "The Catechism is a thread through the labyrinth of divine wonders. Persons often get confused, but if they will hold on to this Catechism it will lead them through without being lost. It is often called the 'Little Bible' and 'the Bible of the laity' because it presents the plain and simple doctrines of the Holy Book in its own words. Pearls strung are easily carried, unstrung they are easily lost. The Catechism is a string of Bible Pearls. The order of arrangement is the historical—the Law, Faith, Prayer, Sacrament of Baptism, and all crowned with the Lord's Supper—just as God worked them out and fixed them in history."
Thus we might go on quoting page after page of words of admiration and praise, from the greatest minds in our and other Churches, of the contents and arrangement of this little book. Neither can we charge these writers with extravagance in their utterances. For the more we examine and study the pages of this little book, the more we are convinced that it is unique and most admirable in its matter and plan.
Let each one look for a moment at himself, and then from himself into this little book.
I come into this world ignorant, yet full of presentiments and questions. I learn my first vague lesson about myself and God. I naturally ask: For what purpose has God put me here? What does He wish me to do? The Catechism answers: To do His will, to keep His commandments. Here they are, and this is what they mean. I study them, and the more I study them, the more am I convinced that I never did and never can perfectly keep this law.
I ask again: What shall I do? My Catechism tells me I must have faith. I must believe. But what shall I believe? Answer: This summary of truth called the Apostles' Creed. It tells me of my Creator—His work and providence, and His gift of a Redeemer. It tells me of that Redeemer and His redemption; of the gift of the Spirit, and His application of redemption. It not only tells me what to believe, but in the very telling it offers me help to believe.
But I am still weak and more or less perplexed. Whither shall I go for more strength and Grace? My Catechism furnishes the answer: Go to the great Triune God. Ask Him in prayer. Here is a model. It will teach you how to pray.
I learn what it is to pray. But again I ask: How do I know that God will hear my prayer? Is He interested in me personally? Has He any other means besides His written Word to assure me of His love and to give me, in answer to my prayers, more strength to believe Him and love Him?
My Catechism points me to my baptism. It teaches me what it means, and how that in it I have God's own pledge that He is my Father, and that I am His child. Here then is a fountain to which I can return again and again when weak and perplexed.
Further, my Catechism teaches me concerning my Saviour's last legacy of love before His death for me, His Holy Supper. In it He holds out to me and gives to me, personally and individually, Himself and all His heavenly Grace.
Thus does this little Catechism meet me in my perplexity, take me by the hand, and lead me through the labyrinth of the wonders of Grace. Thus does it tell me what I am, what I need, and where and how to get what I need. It takes me to the wells of salvation. It draws from them living water. It holds it to my parched lips. It gathers the precious manna of the Word, and feeds me when I am faint and weary.
Such is Luther's Small Catechism. Is it any wonder that we love it? Is it any wonder that we count the study of it a part of the Way of Salvation in the Lutheran Church?
We have something yet to say on the manner of teaching it and the results of faithful teaching and learning.
CHAPTER XI.
MANNER AND OBJECT OF TEACHING LUTHER'S CATECHISM
We have spoken of the importance of catechisation. We have seen that Luther's Small Catechism is indeed a priceless Bible manual. It sets before us, in matchless order, God's plan of salvation. It is so full and yet so brief, so doctrinal and yet so warm and hearty. "The only Catechism," says Dr. Loehe, "that can be prayed." "It may be bought for sixpence," says Dr. Jonas, "but six thousand worlds could not pay for it."
No wonder that no book outside of the Bible has been translated into so many languages, or circulated so widely. Thirty-seven years after its publication one hundred thousand copies were in circulation. The first book translated into any of the dialects of the American Indian, it was from its pages that the red man read his first lessons concerning the true God, and his own relations to that God. At the present day it is taught in ten different languages in our own land.
And yet how sadly neglected and abused, even by those who bear its author's name! It is neglected, if not entirely ignored, in countless Lutheran homes and Sunday-schools. It is even neglected by many so-called Lutheran pastors. They set at naught the testimony of nearly four centuries. They set their own opinions above the testimony of the wisest, as well as the most deeply spiritual and consecrated witnesses of their own Church. They prefer the baseless, shallow, short-cut methods of this superficial age. Some of them have even joined in the cry of the fanatic, and called all catechisation in the Church dead formalism! Fortunately, their number is growing rapidly less, and many, who were for a while carried away with the tide of new measures, are asking for and returning to the good and tried old ways.
Not only is this Catechism neglected, but it is and has been much abused. Abused, not only by its enemies, who have said hard things against it, but it has been and still is abused, like all good things, by its professed friends. And doubtless it is the abuse by its friends that is largely responsible for the neglect and contempt into which it has sometimes fallen. Thus in the family, it is still too often taught as a mere task. The home teacher often has no higher aim than that the children should learn it by rote—learn to rattle it off like the multiplication table, or the rules of grammar.
Worse than this, it has often been used as an instrument of punishment. A child has done something wrong. It is angrily told that for this it must learn a page or two of the Catechism! The task is sullenly learned and sullenly recited; and the Catechism is hated worse than the sin committed. Then too, it is slurred over in the Sunday-schools, without an earnest word of explanation or application. The learner does not realize that it is meant to change the heart and influence the life.
This same sad mistake is also made by many pastors in the catechetical class. Strange as it may seem, this mistake is most commonly made by those very pastors who profess to be the warmest friends of and the most zealous insisters on the catechisation of every lamb in the flock. Thus we find not a few pastors who catechise their classes after the schoolmaster fashion. They go through the exercise in a perfunctory, formal manner. They insist on the letter of the text, and are satisfied if their pupils know the lessons well by rote! To urge on the dull and lazy pupil they will scold and rage, and even use the rod! The Catechism becomes a sort of text-book. The pupils get out of it a certain amount of head knowledge. There are so many answers and so many proof-texts that must be committed to memory. And when all this is well gotten and recited by rote, the teacher is satisfied, the pupil is praised, imagines that he has gotten all the good out of that book, and is glad he is done with it!
Now we would not for a moment depreciate the memorizing of the Catechism. It is of the most vital importance, and cannot be too strongly urged. What we object to—and we cannot object too strenuously—is the idea that head knowledge is enough! There must of course be head knowledge. The memory should store up all the precious pearls of God's truth that are found in the Catechism. The mind must grasp these truths and understand their meaning and their relation to one another. But if it stops here, it is not yet a knowledge that maketh wise unto salvation. In spiritual matters the enlightening or instructing of the intellect is not the end aimed at, but only a means to an end. The end aimed at must always be the renewal of the heart. The heart must be reached through the understanding. To know about Christ is not life eternal. I must know about Him before I can know Him. But I might know all about Him, be perfectly clear as to His person and His work, and stop there, without ever knowing Him as heart only can know heart, as my personal Saviour and loving friend, my Lord and my God.
Here, we fear, many ministers make a sad mistake. They are too easily satisfied with a mere outward knowledge of the truth. They forget that even if it were possible to "understand all mystery and all knowledge"—intellectually—and not have charity, i.e., deep, fervent, glowing love to God in Christ, springing from a truly penitent and believing heart, it would profit nothing. The true aim and end of all catechetical instruction in the Sunday-school, in the family, and especially in the pastor's class, should ever be a penitent, believing and loving heart in each catechumen.
We have, in a former chapter, shown the duty of the Sunday-school teacher in this matter. The pastor should likewise use all diligence to find out in whom, among his catechumens, the germs of the divine life, implanted in baptism, have been kept alive, and in whom they are dormant. Where the divine life, given in holy baptism has been fostered and cherished—where there has been an uninterrupted enjoyment of baptismal Grace, more or less clear and conscious—there it is the pastor's privilege to give clearer views of truth and Grace, to lead into a more intelligent and hearty fellowship with the Redeemer, to deepen penitence and strengthen faith through the quickening truth of God's word.
Where, on the other hand, the seeds of baptismal Grace have been neglected, where the germs of the new life lie dormant or asleep, or where there never has been any implanting of Grace through Word or Sacrament—in short, where there are no pulsations, no manifestations of the new life, there the pastor has a different duty. He must endeavor to so bring the acquired truth to bear on the conscience and heart, as to awaken and bring about a sense of sin, a genuine sorrow therefor, a hatred thereof, a longing for deliverance, a turning to Christ and a laying hold on Him as the only help and hope.
Thus the one great aim and object of the conscientious pastor, with each impenitent catechumen, is to awaken and bring about genuine, heartfelt penitence and a true, trusting, clinging faith. In one word, he must labor for that catechumen's conversion. Only those of whom there is evidence that they are in a converged state should be admitted to confirmation.
By this we do not mean, as some do, that each one must be able to tell when, and where, and how he was converted. We mean simply this: That each one must have in his heart true penitence, i.e., sorrow for and hatred of sin, and true faith, i.e., a confiding, trustful embracing of Christ as the only Saviour.
Whether these elements of the new life have been constantly and uninterruptedly developed from Baptism, or whether they have been awakened gradually by the Word, is not material. The only important question is: Are the elements of the new life now there—even though as yet feeble and very imperfect—or, is the person now turned away from sin to a Saviour? If so, we consider that person in a converted state.
And this much, we believe, should be demanded of each catechumen before he is admitted to the rite of confirmation. And it is largely because this has not been demanded as the only true and satisfactory result of catechisation, that this important branch of the Church's activity has so largely fallen into disrepute. It is doubtless because of carelessness on this point that so many fall back after confirmation to the world, the flesh and the devil. They did not hold fast to their crown because they had no crown.
Where the Catechism is properly learned, understood and applied, the intellect is used as the gateway to the heart. Where the result of an enlightened mind is a changed heart, there are intelligent believers. They know what it means to be a Christian. They have an earnest desire for closer fellowship with Him who has loved them and washed them from their sins in His own blood. There is good hope that such will be faithful unto death.
CHAPTER XII.
CONFIRMATION.
In our studies concerning the methods of Grace, or the application of the Salvation purchased by Christ, to the sinful race of Adam's children, we necessarily had to begin with the new-born child. We noted the first known operations of Grace at the baptismal font. We traced the infant through the holy influences received at a Christian mother's knee, and in the nurture of a Christian home. We followed up through the lessons and influences of the Church's nursery, the Sunday-school, and from thence into the pastor's catechetical class. We have learned that these are the different successive steps in the Way of Salvation. This is God's way in the sanctuary. It begins at the baptismal font, where the child is received as a member of the Church of Christ; it leads through the Church in the house, and through it keeps up a living connection with the Church in the sanctuary. It is making disciples in accordance with Christ's plain directions, viz, "baptizing them, and teaching them."
We have also admitted all along that there may be some who will go through with this whole process and yet not be disciples of Christ at the end. They wilfully resist the operations of divine Grace, and cast away the pearl. This class we leave, for the present. We will consider them further on.
We speak now of those who have been made disciples; who have not resisted the gracious influences of the Spirit of God, working through the sacramental and written Word. Their minds are enlightened; they know something of sin and Grace and the bestowal and reception of Grace; they have an intelligent understanding of the plan of salvation revealed in the Word of God. But this is not all.
Their hearts also have been drawn ever nearer and closer to their dear Saviour; they believe in and love the Lord Jesus Christ; they are ready to give an answer to every man that asks of them a reason of the hope that is in them. In the ardor and fervor of their young hearts' devotion they can repeat these beautiful words of their catechism and say: "I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord; who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned creature, secured and delivered me from all sin, from death, and from the power of the devil ... in order that I might be His, live under Him in His kingdom and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence and blessedness."
Further, they can joyfully say: "I believe that I cannot by my own reason and strength believe in Jesus Christ my Lord, or come to Him. But the Holy Ghost has called me through the Gospel, enlightened me by His gifts, sanctified and preserved me in the true faith," etc.
But this happy faith of their hearts has never been publicly professed before men. And yet the word of God demands not only faith in the heart, but also confession by the lips. Rom. x. 9-10: "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." Jesus also says, Matt. x. 32: "Whosoever, therefore, shall confess Me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven."
And should any one be ashamed of this public profession and refuse to make it, Jesus clearly tells such an one that of him He also will be ashamed in the judgment day. The Bible nowhere recognizes a secret discipleship. There are no promises to him who does not confess.
If our catechumens would therefore still follow God's Way of Salvation he must now also take this step, and publicly confess Jesus as his Lord and Redeemer and himself as His disciple. And for this there is no time so appropriate as when he desires to be numbered among the communicants of the congregation and participate with them in the celebration of the Lord's Supper.
For this also our Church has made fitting arrangement. It is done at, or is rather a part of, the impressive ceremony of confirmation. Who has not witnessed this beautiful and touching rite? And what could be more interesting or impressive than to see a company of young hearts encircling the altar of Christ, confessing their faith, and bowing the knee to their Saviour amid the prayers and benedictions of the Church? This is confirmation.
The catechumen has been examined by the pastor as to his fitness for this important step. The pastor has found that he possesses an intelligent understanding of the doctrines taught in the Catechism, and that the experience of his heart bears witness to their truth and power. On this account he is adjudged as fit and well prepared to be admitted to the holy communion. He now comes of his own accord—not because he is old enough, or knows enough, or because father, mother, or pastor wants him to—before the altar of Christ. There, in the presence of the assembled congregation and the all-seeing God, his lips confess the faith of his heart, the faith into which he was baptized as a child: He now voluntarily takes upon himself the vows and promises that parents or sponsors took for him at baptism. He receives an earnest admonition from his pastor to hold fast that which he has and be faithful unto death. The whole congregation, together with the pastor, lift their hearts in earnest intercessory prayer to God for His continuous blessing and protection on the young confessor; and, the catechumen kneeling at the altar, the pastor directs the intercessions of the Church to each kneeling one in turn, by laying his hands on him and offering up for him a fervent petition in inspired words.
This is the simple and appropriate ceremony we call confirmation. We claim for it no magical powers. It is not a sacrament. It adds nothing to the sacrament of baptism, for that is complete in itself. There is no conferring of Grace by the pastor's hands, but simply a directing of the Church's prayers to the individual.
The confirming, strengthening and establishing of—the catechumen in Grace, is effected primarily alone through Christ's own means of Grace, viz.: the Word and the Sacraments. The Word has been applied to mind and heart all along from tenderest childhood. It is now brought home in the review and admonition of the pastor, amid specially solemn surroundings. The previous administering of baptism, and the perpetual efficacy of that sacrament, are now vividly recalled and impressed. And this unusually impressive application of the power of Word and Sacrament confirms and strengthens the divine life in the catechumen. Thus the means of Grace do the confirming, or rather the Holy Spirit through these means. Instrumentally also the pastor may be said to confirm, since he, as Christ's ambassador or agent, applies His means of Grace.
In still another, though inferior sense, the catechumen confirms. He receives the offered means of Grace, assents to their truth and efficacy, obtains divine virtue and strength through them, and with this imparted strength lays hold on Christ, draws nearer to Him, is united to Him as the branch to the vine, and thus confirms and establishes the covenant and bond that unites him to his Saviour.
We do not claim for the rite of confirmation a "thus saith the Lord." We do not claim that it possesses sacramental efficacy, or that it is absolutely essential to salvation. We do claim, however, that there is nothing unevangelical or anti-scriptural in this ceremony. On the contrary, we believe it is in perfect harmony with the whole tenor and spirit of the Gospel. If we cannot trace it to apostolic usage, we can find it in all its essential features in the pure age of the Church immediately succeeding the Apostles. In some form or other it has been practiced in the Church ever since.
True, it has often been and is still grossly abused. It has often been encumbered and entangled with error and superstition; and therefore there have not been wanting radical purists who have not only set it aside, but cried it down as Romish and heathenish. The more sober and conservative churches have been content to purge it of its error and superstition. In its purified form they prize it highly, cherish its use, practice it, and find it attended by God's richest blessing.
It is a significant fact also that some of those who were once its most bitter opponents are gradually returning to its practice. We find, for example, that certain Presbyterian churches confirm large classes of catechumens every year. Certain Methodist book concerns and publishing houses also-publish confirmation certificates, from which we infer that some of their churches also must practice this rite. Again, we find in certain "pastors' record books," gotten up to suit all denominations, columns for reporting the number of confirmations.
All churches must indeed have some kind of a ceremony for the admission of the young among the communicants of the church. And there certainly is no more befitting, beautiful and touching ceremony than confirmation, as described above and practiced in the Lutheran Church.
CHAPTER XIII.
THE LORD'S SUPPER—PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS.
Our catechumen has now been confirmed. The pastor has given him, in the name of the congregation, the right hand of fellowship, and also publicly authorized him to join with the congregation in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. For the first time, then, the young Christian is to partake of this holy sacrament, in order that thereby he may be still further strengthened and confirmed in the true faith.
This sacred institution, also, is a part of God's Way of Salvation. It is one of the means of Grace appointed and ordained by Christ. It "hath been instituted for the special comfort and strengthening of those who humbly confess their sins and who hunger and thirst after righteousness."
It is true that multitudes do not regard it as a means or channel of Grace. To them it is only an ancient rite or ceremony, having no special significance or blessing connected with it. It is at most a symbol, a sign, or representation of something, entirely absent and in no way connected with it. If there is any blessing at all attached to it, it consists in the pious thoughts, the holy emotions and sacred memories, which the communicant tries to bring to it and which are in some way deepened by it. At best, it is a memorial of an absent Saviour, and in some form a representation of His sufferings and death.
Now if this were all that we could see in the Lord's Supper, we would not regard it as a part of God's Way of Salvation. But our Church sees much more in it. With her it is indeed an essential and integral part of that Way. And since this is another of the few points on which the Lutheran Church differs materially from many others, it will be well for us to devote some space and time to its study.
Much has been written on this important subject. We may not have anything new to add, but it is well often to recall and re-study the old truths, so easily forgotten. Before we consider the nature of this sacrament, we will make a few preliminary observations that will help us to guard against false views, and to arrive at correct conclusions.
We observe first, the importance of bearing in mind the source from which this institution has come. Who is its author? What is the nature or character of its origin? Our views of any institution are generally more or less influenced by thus considering its origin. Whence then did the Church get this ordinance which she has ever so conscientiously kept and devoutly celebrated? Did it emanate from the wisdom of man? Did some zealous mystic or hermit invent it, because forsooth he supposed it would be pleasant and profitable to have such an ordinance in the Church? Or did some early Church Council institute it, because those earnest fathers in their wisdom deemed it necessary that the Church should have such a service? Can it, in short, be traced to any human origin? If so, then we can deal with it as with any other human institution. We are then at liberty to reason and speculate about it. We can apply to it the rules of human science and learning. We can test it, measure it, sound it by philosophy, logic, and the laws of the mind. Each one then has a right to his own opinion about it. Each one can apply to it the favorite test of common sense, and draw his own conclusions.
But now, we know that this is not a human institution. The Church has received it from the hands of the Son of God. It was ordained by Him who could say, "All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth," and, "In whom dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;" who even before his birth in human form was called "the Mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." When we come to deal with an institution of His, we dare never expect to fathom or test it by our poor, short-sighted and sin-blinded reason, philosophy, science, or common sense. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Whenever, therefore, we come to deal with anything that comes from His hands, it is no longer of the earth, earthy, and is not subject to earthly laws and human rules. His acts, His deeds, His words, belong to the realm of faith, and not of reason. Reason must ever be taken captive and made to bow before the heavenly things connected, with Him. Or shall we try to reason out His human birth, His growth, His nature, His deeds? Shall we reason out the feeding of the multitudes with those few barley loaves and fishes? No; they came through His hands, and the power of those hands we cannot comprehend. We cannot comprehend how that afflicted woman could receive virtue, health and life, by touching the hem of His garment—a mere fabric of cloth—or how the clay and spittle from His hands could open the eyes of one born blind.
Whenever, therefore, we come to study this ordinance, let us ever bear in mind its divine origin. It is the Lord's Supper. This precaution will be a safeguard against error, and a help to the truth.
We notice secondly the time of institution. It was "in the night in which He was betrayed." That awful night, when the clouds of divine wrath were gathered over Him, and were ready to burst upon Him; when the accumulated guilt of a sinful race was all to be laid on Him, borne by Him as though it were His own, and its punishment endured as though He had committed every sin. Then, when the strokes of justice were about to fall, our blessed Saviour, "having loved His own, He loved them to the end." He gathered His little band of chosen ones about Him for the last time before His crucifixion. He spoke to them His farewell words, uttered His high-priestly prayer, instituted and administered to them this holy sacrament. All the surroundings conspired to throw round it a halo of heavenly mystery. Everything was calculated to impress that little band that what He now ordained and made binding on the Church, till He would come again, was something more than an empty sign or ceremony. Thus the time, the circumstances, and all the surroundings of the institution of this holy sacrament, prepare us in advance to believe that there must be in it or connected with it some heavenly gift of Grace that can be obtained nowhere else.
We notice thirdly the significant term by which Jesus designates this institution. When he administered the cup He said: "This cup is the New Testament in my blood." He calls it a testament. A testament is a last will.
Jesus was about to go forth to die. Before he departed, He made His will. He bequeathes to the Church an inheritance. The legacy that He leaves is this sacrament. Before we undertake to study the words of the institution, we wish to impress this thought. A will is the last place where one would use ambiguous or figurative language. Every maker or writer of a will strives to use the clearest and plainest words possible. Every precaution is taken that there may be no doubtful or difficult expression employed. The aim of the maker is to make it so plain that only one meaning can be taken from it.
Neither is any one permitted to read into it any sense different from the clear, plain, literal meaning of the words. Fanciful, metaphorical, or far-fetched interpretations are never applied to the words of a will. Much less is any one permitted to change the words by inserting or substituting other words than those used by the maker. Christ's words of institution are the words of His last Will and Testament.
We will consider the nature of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper in the next chapter.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE LORD'S SUPPER—CONTINUED.
In the former chapter we made some preliminary observations, intended to be helpful, as guards against false conclusions, and as guides to a correct understanding of the subject under consideration. It is important that we always keep these in mind in our study of the doctrine of the Lord's Supper; Let us ever keep before us therefore the Author or Founder of this institution, the time and circumstances of the institution, and its testamentary character.
We are now ready to inquire further into the nature and meaning of this holy ordinance. And in order to determine this we desire to go directly to the law and to the testimony. We want to know, first of all: what does the Word of God teach on the subject?
Before we proceed, however, to note and examine the passages of Scripture bearing on the matter, let us recall what we said, as to the interpretation of Scripture, in one of the chapters on the Sacrament of Baptism. We there stated that our Church has certain plain and safe principles of interpretation that are always to guide the searcher after the truth of God's word, viz.:
1. "A passage of Scripture is always to be taken in its plain, natural and literal sense, unless there is something in the text itself, or in the context, that clearly indicates that it is meant to be figurative."
2. "A passage is never to be torn from its connection, but it is to be studied in connection with what goes before and follows after."
3. "Scripture is to be interpreted by Scripture, the dark passages are to be compared with the more clear, bearing on the same subject."
4. "We can never be fully certain that a doctrine is Scriptural until we have examined and compared all that the Word says on the subject."
On these principles we wish to examine what the Word teaches as to the nature of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. We note first the accounts of the institution as given by the three Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In Matthew xxvi. 26-28, we read, "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.'" With this the accounts in Mark xix. 22-24, and in Luke xxii. 19, 20, substantially agree. There is a slight variation of the words, but the substance is the same.
We notice only this difference: Luke adds the words, "This do in remembrance of Me." On this point let us notice, in passing, that St. Luke's was the last written of the three. The Gospels of Matthew and Mark had been written and were read and used in the churches several years before St. Luke's. And yet the two former do not contain the words, "Do this in remembrance of Me." Now we submit right here, if to remember Christ were all that is in this sacrament, or even the chief thing, why did those who wrote the first Gospels, and knew that there were no others, leave out these words? But we go on.
Almost thirty years after the time of the institution of this sacrament, the great apostle of the Gentiles wrote a letter to the Church at Corinth. That Church was made up of a mixed multitude—Jews and Gentiles, freemen and slaves. Many of them were neither clear nor sound on points of Christian doctrine and practice. In his fatherly and affectionate letters to the members of this Church, Paul, among other things, gives them instruction concerning this sacrament; and, lest some of them might perhaps suppose that he is giving them merely his own wisdom and speculation, he takes especial care to disavow this: "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," etc., giving in substance the same words of institution as given by the Evangelists (1 Cor. xi. 23, 24, 25).
After thus giving them the words of institution, Paul goes on to instruct them about worthy and unworthy communing. In these instructions we cannot help but notice how he takes the real presence of Christ's body and blood for granted all the way through. Notice his language. Verse 27: "Whosoever shall eat of this bread and drink of this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." Verse 29: "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." Going back to chapter ten, verse sixteen, we find the Apostle giving the doctrine of the Lord's Supper in a few words thus: "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?"
We have now noted all the passages that speak directly on this subject. There are other strong passages that are often quoted in defence of the doctrine of the real presence, and which we doubtless have a right to use in corroboration of those above quoted. We refer to John vi. 53-56: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life ... for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me, and I in him."
As it is a disputed point, however, whether this passage refers to the Lord's Supper or not, we are willing to waive it here. We are content to take those passages quoted above, which every one acknowledges as referring directly to our subject. These we would have the reader carefully examine. Note particularly the language, the words employed. In the four accounts given of the institution, three by the Evangelists and one by Paul, we have the same clear, plain words concerning the bread and wine—words of the last will and testament of the Son of God, our Saviour—"This is my body." "This is my blood of the New Testament;" or "the New Testament in my blood." Note the language of Paul: "Guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." "Not discerning the Lord's body." The cup is called the communion of the blood, and the bread, the communion of the body of Christ. The word communion is made up of two Latin words, con and unio, meaning union with, or connection with. The marginal reading in our family Bibles, as well as in the revised version, is "participation in." The plain English of the verse then is, the bread is a participation in, or a connection with Christ's body, and the wine with His blood.
We are now ready to take all these passages together, to compare them one with another, and to ask, What do they teach? What is the Bible doctrine of the Lord's Supper? Is it transubstantiation? Is it consubstantiation? Is it that the bread and wine are mere representations or memorials of the absent body and blood of Christ? Or do these passages teach "That the body and blood of Christ are truly present under the form of bread and wine and are communicated to those that eat in the Lord's Supper?" (Augsburg Confession, Art. X.)
CHAPTER XV.
THE LORD'S SUPPER—CONCLUDED.
We have quoted, noted, collected and compared the words of Scripture that speak of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. We now wish to ask and examine the question: What do these passages taken together and compared with one another teach? Or, in other words, what is the Bible doctrine of the Lord's Supper?
Does the Bible teach the doctrine of Transubstantiation, as held and confessed by the Roman Catholic Church? If our investigation of the teachings of the Holy Scriptures convinces us that they teach Transubstantiation, we will be ready to believe and confess that doctrine, no matter who else may believe or disbelieve it. What we want to know, believe, teach and confess, is the Bible doctrine.
What is Transubstantiation? The word means a change of substance. The doctrine of the Romish Church is that after the consecration by the priest, the bread in the sacrament is changed into the material body of Christ, and the wine into His blood—so entirely changed in substance and matter, that after the consecration there is no more bread or wine there; what was bread has been converted into the flesh of Christ, and what was wine has been converted into His blood. Is this the doctrine of God's word? Does the Word anywhere tell us that the bread and wine are thus changed? Does it call the bread flesh, either before or after the consecration? Let us see. "Jesus took bread." "I will not drink of the fruit of the vine." "The bread which we break." "For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup." Such is the language of inspiration. Now we ask, if the Holy Spirit desired that plain and unprejudiced readers should find the doctrine of Transubstantiation in His words, why does He call the earthly elements bread and wine before, during and after the consecration Why does He not say, "as often as ye eat this flesh and drink this blood?" Evidently because the bread is, and remains plain, natural bread, and so with the wine. There is no change in the component elements, in the nature, matter, or substance of either. Transubstantiation is not the doctrine of God's word; neither was it the doctrine of the early Church. It is one of the human inventions and corruptions of the Church of Rome.
Do then these words of Scripture teach the doctrine of Consubstantiation? There are persons who talk a great deal about Consubstantiation, and yet they know not what it means. What is it? It is a mingling or fusing together of two different elements or substances, so that the two combine into a third. A familiar example, often given, is the fusing or melting together of copper and zinc until they unite and form brass. Applied to the sacrament of the altar, the doctrine of Consubstantiation would teach that the flesh and blood of Christ are physically or materially mingled and combined with the bread and wine; so that what the communicant receives is neither plain, real bread, nor real flesh, but a gross mixture of the two.
Again we ask, is this the teaching of the Word? The very same proofs that convince us that the divine Word does not teach Transubstantiation, also convince us that it does not teach Consubstantiation. The simple fact that the earthly elements are called bread and the fruit of the vine, before, during and after consecration, satisfies us that they remain plain, simple bread and wine, without physical change or admixture. Consubstantiation is not the teaching of the Word; neither is it, nor has it ever been, the teaching of the Lutheran Church. It often has been, and is still called the Lutheran doctrine of the Lord's Supper, but it is found in none of her confessions. It was never taught by a single recognized theologian of our Church. One and all, they have repudiated it and repudiate it still. The question then is still unanswered What is the doctrine of the divine Word?
There are many who have a ready and easy answer as to this doctrine. They say it is only a Church ceremony, one of the old, solemn rites by which Church members are distinguished from outsiders. There is indeed no special significance or Grace connected with it. There is really nothing in it but bread and wine. There is no presence of Christ at all in this sacrament in any way different from His general presence. The bread represents or signifies, is a sign, or symbol, or emblem of Christ's body, and the wine of His blood. The communicant receives nothing but bread and wine, and while he partakes of these he remembers Christ's sufferings and death. Whatever special benefit he is to derive from this sacrament he must first put into it, by bringing to it pious thoughts, good feelings, deep emotions, tender memories, and a faith that swings itself aloft and holds communion with Christ far off in heaven.
This is about the current, popular view of this subject as held and taught in nearly all the Protestant Churches of to-day, outside of the Lutheran Church. As a natural consequence of this superficial view, the whole matter is treated very lightly. There is little, if any, solemn, searching preparation. In many places there is no formal consecration of the elements. The table is thrown open to any one who desires to commune. There are no regulations, no guards, no disciplinary tests, connected with it. Even unbaptized persons, and persons who have never made a public profession of faith, are often permitted to commune. But we digress.
We return to the question: Is the view just noticed in harmony with and based on the Word? Let us see. If there is nothing on the altar but bread and wine, why does Christ say, "This is My body ... My blood?" Why not say, This is bread, this is wine? If Christ wanted us to understand that the bread and wine merely represent or are emblems of His body and blood, why did He not say so? Did He not know how to use language? Did He use dark or misleading words in His last Will and Testament? Why does Paul, in speaking of worthy and unworthy communing, speak of the body of Christ as present, as a matter of course? Was he inspired to misunderstand Christ and lead plain readers astray? If there is nothing more in the sacrament than to remember Christ, why—as already noticed—did not the writers of the first two Gospels put in the words, "Do this in remembrance of Me?" Or why did not Christ plainly say, "Take, eat this bread, which represents My body, in remembrance of Me?" Clearly, the doctrine in question is not based on the words of Scripture. It cannot be supported by Scripture. Neither do its defenders attempt to support it by the passages that clearly speak of this sacrament. If they try to bring in any Scripture proof, they quote passages that have nothing to do with the subject. They draw their proofs and supports principally from reason and philosophy.
Surely a doctrine that changes the words of the institution, wrests and twists them out of their natural sense, and does violence to all sound rules of interpretation that must bolster itself up by the very same methods of interpretation that are used to disprove the divinity of Christ, the resurrection of the body, and the eternity of future punishment, is not the doctrine of Christ.
We have not found the Bible doctrine in any of the views examined. Can we find it? Let us see. We are satisfied, from our examination of the passages that have to do with our subject, that there must be earthly elements present in this sacrament. They are bread and wine. They remain so, without physical change or admixture. We also find from these passages that there is a real presence of heavenly elements. These are the body and blood of Christ. Not indeed that body as it was in its state of humiliation, when it was subject to weakness, hunger, thirst, pain and death. But that glorified, spiritual, resurrection body, in its state of exaltation, inseparably joined with the Godhead, and by it rendered everywhere present. And this body and divinity, we remark in passing, were already present, though veiled, when the God-man walked this earth. Peter and James and John caught a glimpse of it on the Mount of Transfiguration. It is of this body, and blood, of which Peter says, 1 Peter i. 18, 19, that it is not a corruptible thing, and of which the Apostle says, Heb. ix. 12, "By his own blood he entered in once into the Holy Place" (that is, into heaven), and of which Jesus spoke when He said, "Take eat, this is my body ... this is my blood."
Of this body and blood, the Scriptures affirm that they are present in the sacrament. The passage which sets forth the double presence, that of the earthly and heavenly elements, which indeed sums up and states the Bible doctrine in a few words, is 1 Cor. x. 16. There Paul affirms that the bread is the communion of Christ's body, not of His Spirit or His influence. If the bread is the communion of, participation in, or connection with His body, then bread and body must both be present. It takes two things to make a communion. They must both be present. It would be absurd to speak of bread as a communion of something in no way connected with it.
As we have already said, the plain sense of the words of this passage is, that the bread is a connection with, or a participation in Christ's body, and so with the wine; so much so that whoever partakes of the one must, in some manner, also become a partaker of the other. The bread, therefore, becomes the medium, the vehicle, the conveyance, that carries to the communicant the body of Christ, and the wine likewise His blood. And this, we repeat, without any gross material transmutation or mixing together. The bread and wine are the earthen vessels that carry the Heavenly treasures of Christ's body and blood, even as the letters and words of the Scriptures convey to the reader or hearer the Holy Spirit. This is the clear, plain, Bible doctrine of the Lord's Supper. There is nothing gross, carnal, Capernaitish or repulsive about it.
And exactly this is the teaching and doctrine of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Article X., Augsburg Confession, says, "Of the Lord's Supper they teach that the true body and blood of Christ are truly present, under the form of bread and wine, and are there communicated to those that eat in the Lord's Supper." And Luther's Catechism says, "The sacrament of the altar is the true body and blood of Jesus Christ, under the bread and wine, given unto us Christians to eat and drink, as it was instituted by Christ Himself."
We therefore find that on this point also our dear old Church is built impregnably on the foundation of Christ and His Apostles. And though she may here differ from all others, she cannot yield one jot or tittle without proving false to her Lord and His truth. It is not bigotry. It is not prejudice, that makes her cling so tenaciously to this doctrine. She knows, as the great Reformer knew, that the very foundations are at stake; that if she gives up on this point, and changes the Scriptures to suit human reason, she will soon have to give up other doctrines, and by and by the rock on which the Church is built will be removed, and the gates of hell will prevail.
And further, if there is any risk of being mistaken—which she, however, does not admit—she would rather run that risk, by taking her Master at His word, than by changing His word. In childlike confidence and trust, she would rather believe too much than not enough. She would rather trust her dear Master too far than not far enough. And therefore here she stands; she cannot do otherwise. May God help her! Amen.
Others may still say, "This is a hard saying, who can bear it? The idea of eating and drinking the body and blood of our Lord offends us."
Well, it also offended the late Henry Ward Beecher, that his salvation should depend on the literal shedding of the literal blood of Jesus. This idea was repulsive to the great Brooklyn divine. But it does not offend us. On the contrary, this same doctrine is to us the very heart of the whole Gospel, and is therefore more precious than life itself.
Neither does it offend us that the mother, whose pure and tender love to her infant child is an emblem of the divine love to us poor sinners, while she presses to her bosom that little one, soothes away its frettings and sings away its sobbings, at the same time feeds and nourishes that feeble life with her own physical life, giving it literally her body and blood. This is no offense to us.
And why should it offend us that our dear loving Saviour comes so close to us, leads us into His banqueting house, where His banner over us is love, speaks to us words that are the out-breathings of the yearning love of His divine heart, and, at the same time, feeds us with His own spiritual and glorified body and blood, and thus makes us partakers of the divine nature.
Instead of being offended, let us rather bow down, and worship, and adore, and sing: