The Reformation and the Lord’s Supper

Young friends, the Lord Jesus said, “This is My body.” What does the word is mean? Does it mean that the bread and wine really turn into the actual body and blood of Christ, or did the Lord Jesus mean it differently?

The Reformer Zwingli distanced himself far away from what was taught in the Roman Catholic Church. He viewed the elements of the Lord’s Supper as only signs but not as seals. He viewed the Lord’s Supper as a meal of remembrance. For example, it would be like family members being together and reminiscing about a father who no longer is alive. Zwingli interpreted the words “This is my body” which Christ spoke at the Lord’s Supper to mean a meal whereby to remember His body, and nothing more. This is like a picture that reminds us of a loved one who has passed away. Thus, Zwingli taught that the Lord Jesus is not physically present at the Lord’s Supper.

I am sure you know that the Roman Catholic Church teaches something completely different. They teach that Christ is bodily present in the sacrament. They say that as soon as the priest, during the mass, says, “This is My body,” the body immediately changes into the body of the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus, a change of substance comes about, and this teaching is called transubstantiation. You probably would say, “But can you not see that the bread remains bread?” “Yes,” their reply would be, “even though the appearance does not change; yet there is a change of substance.” This is something we will never be able to understand. Now we do not teach transubstantiation; you soon would understand how terrible it would be if a crumb would break off and fall to the ground. That is also why the Roman Catholics do not use bread but, rather, a wafer that does not crumble. It is for this same reason that they do not allow people to drink the wine, but the priest does this for all the people. Just imagine how awful it would be if a drop of the Lord Jesus’ blood would run off the cup. You can now see all the repercussions this had. Yet, at the institution of the Lord’s Supper the Lord Jesus said, “Drink ye all of it.”

The Lutheran church has yet another view of this. Luther did not teach that the bread changed into the body of Christ. Yet, he taught “This is My body.” How are we to understand this? Luther taught that after the ascension of Christ, His human nature became omnipresent. Therefore, His body is present everywhere— also in the bread. Just like a flame glows throughout a piece of metal, or as water is in a sponge, or as there is leaven in bread, in this way Christ is in the bread. Christ is in, with, and by the signs of the Lord’s Supper. This is called consubstantiation, and that is why it can be said, “This is My body.”

Both of these teachings derive comfort from the bodily presence of the Lord Jesus. We do not believe that the Lord Jesus is bodily present at the Lord’s Supper. Can the bread become the body of the Lord Jesus? No, absolutely not! The bread remains bread, and the wine remains wine. This is the same with the water of baptism. The water does not become blood. Actually, it is contradiction in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church that it does not teach this. One would expect that, if the wine changes to blood, the water in baptism would also change into blood, but that is not what they teach. This is remarkable because they do teach that the water in baptism has special power and that it washes away original sin. Neither do we teach this—plain water, plain bread, and plain wine.

Here it can be seen that when one sacrament is overestimated, the other will be, also. Often, when a person overestimates the Lord’s Supper, he will also overestimate baptism. The signs are but signs. The bread is a sign and seal—the bread does not become the body of Jesus. More than likely you think, “We agree 100%, you don’t have to spend much time on that; we are not Roman Catholic!” This I believe, but to say that among us the signs are not overestimated, I do not dare to say. I would not dare to say that eating the bread and drinking the wine in the Lord’s Supper is never overestimated in our circles. Overestimating the signs is pure Roman Catholicism. The question ought not to be, “May I partake?” Really, this is not a proper question, but for many this is the most important thing. “How can I become a partaker; how can I go?” Really, that question is not important. The most important question is, “How can I be united to Christ; how can Christ become my possession?” This is what the Lord’s Supper is about. If being united to Christ is missing in our life, then the Lord’s Supper will have no meaning, and a person will not derive any benefit from it. Stronger still, one then eats and drinks damnation to himself. It is, therefore, good to stay close to the old doctrines and in the light thereof to see how fallacies have penetrated throughout the church of the Reformation. Roman Catholicism has not completely died out.

The bread in the Lord’s Supper is not changed into the very body of Christ though agreeably to the nature and properties of sacraments, it is called the body of Christ Jesus (Lord’s Day 29). It is true, the bread is called the body of Christ and the wine is called the blood of Christ, but these are similes—a speaking by means of a figure. This is the same as with circumcision; circumcision was called a covenant. The water in baptism is called the blood of Christ; it is not actually His blood but points to it. If Jesus’ body actually changes, how could that have taken place at the first Lord’s Supper? Nowhere in the teachings of the Roman Catholics or Lutherans can you find an answer to this question, but this is to be expected because it goes against the teachings of the Bible. Luther’s teaching goes against Scripture, for the Bible says that Christ ascended in His human nature and will remain in heaven until He returns again.

Is Christ, then, not present at all during the Lord’s Supper? Do we follow Zwingli’s thinking that it is only a meal of remembrance? No, we are Calvinists. Calvin taught that Christ certainly is present at the Lord’s Supper. He is not present bodily but spiritually. At the Lord’s Supper He fulfills His promises spiritually. Once He said, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” When we are conscious of His presence, the partaking of the Lord’s Supper will become holy. Young friends, when the Lord’s Supper is administered, the Lord Jesus is present, not bodily; bodily He is in heaven. He is present spiritually in the signs of bread and wine in order to strengthen His people thereby. A hypocrite does not realize Christ’s presence, and neither does he worry about this; for him it is only about the sign itself. He does not understand the depth of the sacrament.

This is why it is so beneficial that we are pointed continually to the doctrines of the Reformation. To attend the Lord’s table is, in its deepest sense, a sitting at the table where Christ is present. This can and may only take place if we have personally been invited by Him.

Rev. A. Schot, Nunspeet, the Netherlands

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen