THE LORD’S SUPPER
2004-2005
LESSON TWO
What kind of descriptive terminology it is when it is asserted that the bread of the Supper is the body of Christ and that the wine of the Lord’s Supper is the blood of Christ.
A. The most important aspect of controversy:
1. Lies in question whether we must accept the words of institution in their proper and natural sense.
2. Therefore, useful to note any point that disturbs many.
a. One question concerns individual words in a statement as to whether they retain proper and natural meaning.
b. A second question concerns descriptive terminology regarding mysteries.
(1) Pertains not to natural human reason.
(2) Pertains to divine wisdom and power.
(3) Not judged according to common rules of nature.
(4) Judged according to word and ordinance of divine wisdom and power.
(5) e.g. “God is man”/“The Son of Man is the Son of God”.
(a) Union of two separate entities.
(b) Does not agree with usual modes of predication.
(c) Correctly called an unusual mode.
(6) The bread is the body of Christ.
(a) “bread” retains its own proper meaning.
(b) “body” retains its own proper and natural sense.
(c) “is” the copulative verb denotes what obtains, what is present.
(d) Words therefore retain their own proper and natural meaning without being changed by a figure of speech.
3. Other question concerns the mode or form of predication, because bread is described as being the body of Christ.
a. Question should not be turned over to schools such that answer determined by preconceptions.
b. Surest way is to judge answer to question by the clear teaching of His Word.
1. Have descriptive terms which they call the regular or proper type (those in agreement with one of 5 modes of predication), but we say that the regular type of predication does not agree with the modes used of exalted things.
a. e.g. “The man is God” – they would make it a union of two entities.
b. However, One Person, Two Natures.
2. They also have figures of speech or tropes.
a. There are many in Scripture.
b. Either the subject or the predicate or both have been changed from their proper and natural meaning into something else.
c. e.g. “The lion of the tribe of Judah has prevailed”.
d. In words of institution, both the subject and predicate retain their proper and natural meaning (all admit).
e. Calvinists say words of institution involve a figure of speech called “metonymy” in which by the use of a symbolic word a name is given to the thing designated.
(1) But metonymy is not used for any kind of complete statement.
(2) Used only in the case of a change of one of the words.
(3) e.g. “scepter” for “rule”.
(4) Also, is unheard of to consist of a complete statement which by name expresses both the sign and the thing signified through the copula “is”.
3. In third place, there is another kind of predication in Scripture.
a. Opponents argue among themselves about how to use vs. Lutherans.
b. In Scripture, when a parable occurs, customary to interpret it under this kind of predication: “The field is the world (Mt 13:38)”.
c. Zwingli, Schwenkfeld and others argue that this type applies here.
d. Words of institution contain no story, parable or vision.
4. In fourth place, papalists (to strengthen “transubstantiation”) argue concerning the bread that His body is predicated of it in a twofold sense.
a. 1st, through conversion.
b. 2nd, after transubstantiation, there is a predication of identity.
c. But, after the blessing Paul still mentions the bread and says that it is the body of Christ.
5. Finally, are there any other modes of predication in Scripture by which comparison with words of Supper can be made?
a. Must not be derived from conjecture but from actual points themselves.
b. Scripture has special kind of predication where
(1) Two things are joined together without confusion or mixing.
(2) But in way that they are and remain distinct.
(3) Yet at same time both are present and distributed at same time.
(4) Particularly true when one is visible, subject to senses, and serves as medium through which the other is shown to be truly present, but at same time is invisible.
(5) 1st (the visible) is the subject.
(6) 2nd is in the predicate position and is the chief thing.
(7) E.g. “This [dove] is the Holy Spirit” (Mt 3:13ff).
(8) Common kind in Scripture, but union is not always the same (e.g. the personal union in Christ).
C. Words of institution.
1. Demonstrate that Supper consists of two things (bread and body).
2. 1Co 10:16: shows both being distributed.
3. Therefore, can determine correct kind of predication.
4. Though not a regular predication, it is not necessary that the words give up their proper and natural meaning both in subject and predicate.
5. Some call this a “sacramental predication” or an “irregular predication”.
6. Therefore we believe that the Supper consists of two entities:
a. the bread and the body.
b. the wine and the blood of Christ.
I. Chapter Five
Concerning the physical eating of the bread and concerning the twofold eating of the body of Christ, the sacramental and the spiritual, in the Supper.
1. Contend that body is eaten only by faith and in a spiritual way.
2. If disagree with them, they accuse us next of:
a. Capernaitic eating of His body (cutting Him up in pieces).
b. A Scythian slurping of His blood (cannibalism).
3. Human reason knows of only kind of eating.
a. But, this kind must not be attributed to His body.
b. Therefore, they say there is only a spiritual eating.
c. They are unwilling to grant any 3rd kind of eating between the physical and the spiritual.
1. It is certain we eat bread. (Mt 26:26).
2. Also certain we also eat His body, but not only with our minds and spirit through faith alone.
a. If only through faith, no need for any external reception into mouth.
b. He said “to eat” “Take” “Eat”.
c. Also said “This is My body”.
3. Impossible that the same word in the same statement at the same time possesses both its own proper meaning and a figurative meaning.
4. Therefore, “eat” is not a spiritual eating.
5. The spiritual eating is not described in “Take, eat” but in the other words of the Supper which follow.
a. Is done in memory of Christ.
b. Because His body sanctifies the new covenant to us.
c. Necessary for the salutary benefit.
6. Therefore, there is a threefold eating in the Supper.
a. The eating of the bread – a physical eating.
b. The eating of His body.
(1) takes place orally.
(2) Called a “sacramental eating”.
c. The spiritual eating of His body.
C. The physical eating.
1. Well known and manifest.
2. The bread (and wine).
1. Question is as to mastication, swallowing and digestion.
2. Is not in a visible or perceptible way.
3. Easier to show what it is not.
a. Not merely figurative or imaginary.
b. Does occur through a supernatural, heavenly and unsearchable mystery.
4. It suffices for faith to believe His words in their proper and natural sense.
a. It is bread with His body truly and substantially (although in a supernatural way) present and distributed.
b. Not by some outward mixing of the substances or by joining something to the food in our stomach.
c. But in a way whereby it becomes a heavenly and spiritual nourishment for both body and soul of believers.
5. Manner known to Him alone.
6. Some light shed by comparison.
a. Holy Spirit and dove.
b. Flaming cloven tongues.
c. Is 6:1.
(1) Lord both manifested locally, and
(2) Remained omnipresent.
E. Spiritual eating.
1. Can take place either outside of or within celebration of Lord’s Supper.
2. Outside.
a. When faith lays hold of Christ.
b. And applies to itself His benefits.
c. Is a spiritual eating (Jn 6).
3. Within celebration.
a. Must not turn away from the celebration taking place.
b. Faith believes His words.
c. His new testament of grace sanctifies, confirms and seals the benefits to you.
d. He bestows His whole being in an intimate union such that He joins Himself to you.
Copyright © 2004 CrossTies Counseling
Ministries, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
