A Critique of the
Doctrine of the Real Presence
in the Communion Hymns of the Hymnal Supplement 98
Background
Our congregation uses the Hymnal Supplement 98. I have had a positive attitude to the committee and the people on it. (That continues to be my approach to the present Hymnal committee.)� Many of the hymns in HS 98 are very good.� However, I have recently examined the new communion hymns for expressions of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.� Sadly, there is a weakness there that many do not see to be a problem.� But any false or weak doctrine is a problem.
It is my judgment that, as in the doctrines of women's role in church, closed communion, unionism and church and ministry, there seems to be a deliberate closing of the mind to brotherly criticism on the subject of the classical doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine, even on the part of some confessional pastors.� It appears that there is a doctrine that is either added on to the Lutheran position or exists alongside it.� That is that Christ Himself, wholly and completely, is in the elements that we receive at the Supper.
This is very close to the Roman Catholic doctrine of concomitance. (Council of Trent, Chapter III, canons III, IV - see endnotes for complete text.)� Concomitance is the humanly conceived notion that Jesus Himself is wholly and completely, body and soul, in each of the elements of the sacrament.� He is in the bread and in the wine.� They can do this because they break a key rule of Bible interpretation: Take doctrine from texts that speak about the issue at hand.� They, instead, like some Lutherans, construct their doctrine of the Real Presence from texts that speak of the person and nature of Christ in the human flesh.� They end up effectively interpreting Jesus word "body" in the Words of Institution as "Myself." Lutherans often say that Jesus meant: "Take, eat, this is my body and Me. Take, drink, this is My blood." This is, as Herman Sasse, says "unteneble."
The most obvious abusive result of this doctrine is the withholding of the cup from the people at communion, since they believe they are getting all of Christ in the bread, as it is.� In spite of his patience with the practice in the early years of the Reformation, Luther came down hard on this later as he studied and wrote more deeply concerning� the Sacrament, as he did on the other significant abuse, the adoration of the host as Jesus Himself on the altar and in processions.
Just how the Lutheran reincarnation of this false doctrine differs from concomitance has not been revealed as yet.
In the latter stages of the Reformation Lutherans dealt with the Zwinglians and Anabaptists� (generally grouped as "Sacramentarians") also.� These denied the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine, though they adopted language that sounded good, but was only a smoke screen.� (FC, Epitome, VII, 4)� They wanted to discuss the Presence of Christ in the Supper, but the Lutherans wanted to discuss only the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.� Quite different topics!� One presence or two?� Two elements or four? Lutherans said, There are two presences in the Supper: a personal presence and a sacramental presence, not to be confused with each other.� The sacramental presence involved four substantial or real elements: the earthly bread and wine and the divine (or heavenly) body and blood of Christ.� (FC, SD, VII, 34-40)
After World War II, the liberal Lutherans began introducing the "Christ Present" in addition to the genuine expressions of the Real Presence.� We can speculate that already then there were ecumenical reasons for reducing the classical Lutheran Doctrine of the Real Presence.� They wanted to get closer to the Reformed, so they adopted language that was Reformed.� Now we see the evolution in the ELCA that has also drawn them into desiring closer ties to the Roman Catholics, since the Reformed and Romans share some sacramental phraseology and vocabulary.� Their pride appears to lead them to want to be a catalyst that will bring the Reformed and the Catholics together in one big, happy, united, faithless organization.�
In recent years, particularly since the arrival of the liturgical movement, the LCMS has begun to be comfortable with the language of Christ Present in the elements.� This is reflected in the hymnals that we are using.� What better way to "indoctrinate" the laity, than with hymns?� Luther used them to teach the truth, now Satan can use them to undermine the simple, clear and plain teachings of the Scriptures, if we are not aware of what is going on. (FC, SD, VII, 43 - 53; note the use of the words "simple," "well founded," "clear," "plain," "explicit," "earnest," "indubitable," "strict and commonly accepted meaning," "faithful," "trustworthy," "appropriate," and "truthful" to describe how the reformers came to accept the Words of Institution and Paul's words about the Supper.)
Let me confess that I am not an expert in hymnody.� As an everyday pastor, I am familiar with the Bible and the Confessions of the Lutheran Church and am fully committed to them.� My education and critical approach was enhanced by studying and majoring in English literature, so I read a lot of poems for their meaning. I am open to correction on any errors of history, logic and doctrine.�
A Brief Examination of Current Hymnals
First, let us quickly scan the common hymnals of the LCMS to see if there are any weak expressions of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.
Only two of the 15 Communion hymns of The Lutheran Hymnal contain weak expressions of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.� An Awe-full Mystery Is Here, 304, by Matthias Loy, contains the phrase
"The Savior comes as food divine,
Concealed in forms of bread and wine."�
In other words, under a "strict and commonly accepted meaning" of the words, we eat "the Savior" Himself in the bread and wine.� Now, well instructed Lutherans might understand this to be shorthand for the classical doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.� But the words do not say that.
Stanza 3, however, contains a very clear statement of the Real Presence:
"But Jesus' words are strong and clear:
'My body and my blood are here.'"
"Lord Jesus Christ, We Humbly Pray
That we may feed on Thee today
Beneath these forms of bread and wine
Enrich us with thy grace divine."
TLH Hymn 314
The classical Lutheran expression is that "we may feed on Your body and blood beneath the forms of bread and wine."
Stanza 2 has a clearer and more Biblical description of the Real Presence: "Thy body broken and Thy blood."
The hymns of TLH often refer to that which we receive in the Supper in the plural.� "Gifts" is a frequent descriptor of what the communicant receives.� This contrasts with the singular that would describe the Person of Christ.
Lutheran Worship, Divine Service II, the mini-eucharistic prayer, contains the phrase "...Prepare us joyfully to remember our Redeemer and receive him who comes to us in his body and blood."�� Jesus does indeed come to us spiritually in the Supper, but there is no Biblical indication that He comes to us as a person, wholly and completely, body and soul, in his body and blood that is in, with and under the bread and wine.� His spiritual and "personal presence" is different than the Real Presence of His body and blood in the bread and wine, the "sacramental presence."� This has been greatly improved in the Divine Service in Hymnal Supplement 98.
LW 241 Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence, stanza 2, contains:
"Lord of Lords in
human vesture,
In the body and the
blood,
He will give to all
the faithful
His own self for heavenly food."
One hates to disagree with the Liturgy of St. James or the translator, but what kind of sense can we make of this from a Biblical standpoint?� Jesus did indeed take on "human vesture," "body and blood" from the Virgin Mary.� The Bible is clear on that.� But where does it say plainly that He is giving "his own self for heavenly food" in the bread and wine?� Nowhere that I can find.� He gives His body and blood in bread and wine.
LW 243 Here,� O My Lord, I See You Face to Face gives a fairly good description of how Jesus is present personally with the communicant in the Supper.� He is not in the elements, but with the guest.� Stanza 6 is very good.� It tells how the vessels and elements of bread and wine are removed from the altar, but in spirit Christ remains with the believer, but not through some mystical ingestion of the person of Christ!
.
LW 250 "Lord Jesus Christ, We Humbly Pray That we may feast on you today."� What kind of cannibalistic images does this phrase bring forth?� We do not feast on Him, but as He says, His body and blood in the bread and wine.
The Hymnal Supplement 98
848 Now the Silence - This hymn is a good devotional hymn for preparing for Communion.� It does not contain any reference to the Real Presence.
849 Thee We Adore, O Hidden Savior - Stanza 1 is somewhat ambiguous. "Who in Thy Sacrament art pleased to be" may be understood either correctly or incorrectly.� Jesus is personally present "in the use and action of the Sacrament," but in a spiritual mode, as He is present at any divine service.� This phrase could be interpreted as: "Who in (the elements, the bread and wine of) Thy Sacrament art pleased to be" and would carry the seeds of a wrong understanding.
Stanza 2 expresses a clear and correct, that is, Lutheran, view of the Real Presence.� "In this memorial of Thy death, O Lord" points to the death of Christ as the biblical link with the Supper of our Lord.� "Thy body and Thy blood Thou here afford" sings what Christ offers - nothing less than that which Holy Scripture clearly says, "the body and blood of Christ."� "Oh, may our souls forever feed on Thee"prays that our faith will feed on Christ, even as John 6 says, while our physical mouths receive the body and blood from the cross.� While it could be a little clearer, a properly instructed Lutheran would have no problem with this stanza.
Stanza 3 uses the legend of the pelican to illustrate that Christ gives us His own body and blood for the forgiveness of sins.� Stanza 4 prays for cleansing and echoes "The blood of Christ cleanses us from all our sins."� It also reflects the hope and peace the spiritual, hidden, presence of Jesus brings.�
Stanza 5 is problematic.� "O Christ, whom now beneath a veil we see" could be understood as referring to the elements of bread and wine that we see beneath the corporal veil at communion.� Jesus is not there.� His body and blood are under the veil in the bread and wine that are used at the Supper.� "Unveiled" might be understood as seeing presently "through the glass darkly" and in eternity we will see the face of Jesus that is hidden in His spiritual mode of presence. It is doubtful that Roman Catholic Thomas Aquinas, the author of this hymn, had that view.
850� What Is This Bread?
Supposedly based on Luther's Small Catechism, stanza 1 gets off to a rocky start.� "What Is This Bread?� Christ's body risen from the dead."� Where in Scripture or Luther's Catechism is there any notion that we receive the "risen" body of Christ in the Supper from heaven?� Or in Scripture?� "This bread we break - This life we take" is either extreme allegory or a hint at the sacrifice of the mass that Lutherans are supposed not to believe in.� Either way, it is a wrong expression of what is going on.� We don't take His life either by killing Him again or by receiving it with our mouths in the bread.� We receive spiritual life through faith, and that faith is strengthened by receiving the Sacrament.
Stanzas 2 and 3 are fine.� The question needs to be asked, however, in connection with stanza 1: "If the body we receive is alive and risen in the bread, is not the living blood we get coursing through Christ's living arteries and veins?"� No one has suggested this, since it is clear that the blood was separated from the body of Jesus when He died.� It was part of what caused his expiration. Without blood, the body dies.�� Roman Catholics believe that the complete Christ, body, blood and soul, is in the living body of Christ that was the bread, now changed into the living body of Christ. Since the blood is in the living body of Christ, the communicants only need the body.� They also believe that the whole Christ is in each element.� So the complete Christ is also in the blood, but they never offer the sacrament with just wine, do they?�
There is a big error in stanza 4.� "In mouth and soul He makes us whole - Christ truly present in this meal."� Nowhere in Scripture is there the idea that Christ Himself is present in our mouths in the Holy Meal.� Where this mysticism comes from is unknown, but it is certainly not in Luther's Catechisms.� His body and blood are there, but not the living person of the Christ.� Christ is personally present invisibly in His spiritual mode of presence at the Supper, but the Real (True) Presence is the presence of His body in the bread and His blood in the wine.
Stanza 5 returns to the Lutheran understanding of the Real Presence.� Why is all this confusion about the Presence of Christ in the elements and the mouths of the communicants introduced through these hymns?�
851� Alleluia! Sing to Jesus
This is a praise hymn of Christ.� The only confusing part in the hymn itself is the end of stanza 4:
"As within the
veil You entered,
Robed in flesh, our
great high priest,
Here on earth both
priest and victim
In the eucharistic feast."
Here is an allusion to the Holy of Holies in the Temple.� Christ, the High Priest, true man and true God, enters to secure forgiveness of sins by His sacrifice and prayers on our behalf.� In His earthly life of active obedience and in his passive obedience on the cross, He was indeed priest and victim.� But is this true of the sacrament we celebrate today?� What sacrifice is a priest making at our "eucharistic feast?"� What victim is being offered "here on earth" at our "eucharistic feast?"� This has all been done for us!� Years ago!� We receive today the body and blood of Christ in bread and wine and the forgiveness of sins that His priestly, sacrificial death on the cross� (the Holy of Holies) earned for us.� There is no priest or victim in the eucharistic feast today, simply the body and blood of Christ from almost two millennia ago in some humble bread and wine.
The explanatory note to this hymn says, "... He remains with us in His Word and in His body and blood."� But He does not remain in the body and blood of the Sacrament.� He has taken his full humanity to be with the Father in the heavenly realms.� His personal presence remains with us in spirit.� "I will be with you always."� "Where two or three are gathered, there I am."� On wonderful occasions He gives us from the cross of death, not from His living body from heaven, but His body and blood in the bread and wine of the Supper.� Mysticism again rears its head.� Why can't we just believe the Word of Jesus and express that in our hymns in a simple, yet poetic way?
852� Now My Tongue the Mystery Telling
Another hymn by Thomas Aquinas, the "Angelic Doctor," the Roman Catholic expert on Aristotle.� The singer is supposed to excuse stanza 3, if stanza 4 gives� a very fine reflection of the Bible's teaching of the Real Presence.� But stanza 3 is unbiblical in saying the He "gives Himself with His own hand."� If Aquinas were using the very occasional shorthand of the Formula of Concord, we could perhaps forgive his phraseology; but the Formula was another 3 centuries in the future.� He is using the words of the early church Fathers, particularly the Eastern ones, whose devotional and mystical works finally worked their way into the dogma of the Roman Church and against whom Luther reacted with his biblical doctrine of the "Real Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in the Bread and Wine."
853� The Infant Priest Was Holy Borne
This hymn is rich in appropriate Biblical imagery.� Its expression of the Real Presence is good, save for a reference in stanza 5:
"God's unveiled
presence now we see,
As at the rail on
bended knee
Our hungry mouths from
Him receive
The bread of immortality."
What is this "unveiled presence" of God that we now see?� Is it the elements of the Supper?� I don't think so. That would be a rather puny and common vision of God.� I prefer to think that the author is asking us to believe in the Triune God and to "see" by faith the eternal life Jesus won for us on the cross and now delivers in the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine that are placed in our mouths.
854� Eat This Bread
Based partly on John 6, we can understand why there is the poor and unbiblical substitution of the word "flesh" for "body" in stanza 3. John 6 has not been recognized by Luther and the Confessors who followed his doctrine as speaking of the Real Presence. Otherwise this is a good expression of the Lutheran doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.
855� You Satisfy the Hungry Heart
The refrain of this hymn contains the phrase "Come give us, O saving Lord, the bread of life to eat."� This can be properly understood as the "eating by faith" of John 6, especially since the "bread of life" is not capitalized to indicate the person of Christ.� Stanza 3 has an adequate expression of the Real Presence of Christ's blood in the wine, but lacks the same clear expression for the body of Christ in the bread.� Stanza 4 speaks of
"The myst'ry of
Your presence, Lord,
No mortal tongue can
tell:
Whom all �the world cannot contain
Comes in our hearts to dwell."
"Your presence" is not indicated to mean the Real Presence, since "comes in our hearts to dwell" excludes understanding this to mean "Your presence ... comes in our mouths to dwell."
"You give
Yourself to us, O Lord;
Then selfless let us
be,
To serve each other in
Your name
In truth and charity."
"You gave Yourself for us, O Lord" would have erased all doubt about this hymn's accurate reflection of the Lutheran doctrine of the Real Presence.� However, the presence tense and the fact that this is a Lord's Supper hymn give rise to confusion as to the doctrinal intent of the Roman Catholic author and those who, without recognizing the doctrines of concomitance, chose this hymn for the supplement.� At least, we hope that this was an accidental oversight, rather than a statement of the editors� doctrine.
856 �Come Risen Lord
There are no mystical implications that we are receiving the risen Christ in our mouths in this hymn.�� It is a prayer to the risen and living Lord to be the host of the sacrament of bread and wine.� "This is My body" is directly quoted, although the verba about the blood of Christ are not quoted.� The risen Christ is making Himself known to us in the Sacrament, as He did in the breaking of the bread on the way to Emmaus.�
Summary
While The Lutheran Hymnal never uses the word "veiled" or "hidden" in a communion hymn, the supplement uses them a number of times.� Perhaps the best construction is that this is only to try to describe the truth that there is under the appearance of bread and wine, the body and blood of Christ, that we cannot see with our human eyes. I truly hope that we are not being hymnicly taught that Jesus Himself is under the communion veil in the vessels or under the appearance of bread and wine.� That would be clearly adding something to or, more accurately, alongside of the genuine, simple Lutheran teaching of the Real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the bread and wine.
John 6 is often used to defend the idea that we eat Christ in the body and blood and the bread and wine.� John 6 is used in FC, SD, VII, 61ff to demonstrate that there is a "spiritual eating of the flesh of Christ" by faith that precedes the "sacramental eating" of the body and blood of Christ in the Supper.� As noted above, John 6 is not regarded by the �Confessors as a passage that speaks about the Sacrament of the Altar.� However, the Hymnal Supplement 98 contains 3 hymns out of the 8 new hymns that are based in part on John 6.� Some are obviously confusing the personal and sacramental presence, contrary to FC, SD, VII, 34-40 and questioning the Reformer's interpretation of John 6.
Pastor A. J. Loeschman
Bethlehem Lutheran Church
North Zulch, TX
September 7, 2001
From Examination of the Council of Trent, Martin Chemnitz, tr. Fred Kramer, Part II, p. 241
� SECTION III
Concerning the Superiority of the Eucharist
over the Other Sacraments,
That Is, Whether the Rule Is True
That the Sacraments, Apart from
Their Divinely Instituted Use,
Do Not Have the Nature of a Sacrament
Chapter lii
The
most holy Eucharist indeed has this in common with the other sacra�ments, that
it is a sign of a sacred thing, and a visible form of an invisible grace.
Indeed, there is found in it this excellent and peculiar thing, that the other
sacra�ments have power to sanctify only when someone uses them but in the
Eucharist the Author of holiness is present before its use. For the apostles
had not yet received the Eucharist from the hand of the Lord when He
nevertheless Himself affirmed that that which He presented to them was His
body. And this belief has always been in the Church of God, that immediately
after the consecration the true body of our Lord and His true blood, together
with His soul and divinity, are there under the form 12 bread and wine; the body
under the form of bread, and the blood under the form of wine, through the
power of the words; however, the body also under the form of wine, and the
blood under the form of bread, and the soul under both, by the power of that
natural connection and concomitance by which the parts of Christ the Lord, who
has now risen from the dead to die no more, are mutually joined together;
furthermore, the divinity on account of its wonderful personal union with His
body and soul. Therefore it is most true that as much is contained under one
form as under both, for the whole and undivided Christ is under the form of
bread and under any part whatsoever of that form; likewise the whole Christ
under the form of the wine and under its parts.
CANON III
If anyone denies that in the
venerable sacrament of the Eucharist the whole
Christ is contained under each form and, when a
separation is made, under every
part of each form, let him he anathema.
12 The Latin word translated here and in the following with �form� is species. The word means �outward
appearance or form.�
Roman Catholic theologians have often simply used the English word �species� to translate the Latin species. On account of the common present-day use of the term
�species� in biological science we preferred to translate it with �form.�