Sacramental union - Revision history

InternetArchiveBot: Rescuing 3 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5

2025-07-25T10:43:02Z

Rescuing 3 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5

← Previous revision		Revision as of 10:43, 25 July 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:

	== Type of union ==		== Type of union ==
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021072005/http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php \|date=2019-10-21 }}; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence]], which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence]], which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021072005/http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php \|date=2019-10-21 }}</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>{{Cite web \|url=http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php \|title=''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983. \|access-date=2017-11-13 \|archive-date=2019-10-21 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021072005/http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php \|url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

	== Words of Institution ==		== Words of Institution ==

Pisarz12345: /* Bibliography */

2025-05-28T18:20:17Z

Bibliography

← Previous revision		Revision as of 18:20, 28 May 2025
Line 43:		Line 43:
	{{Lutheran Church}}		{{Lutheran Church}}
	{{Lutheran Divine Service}}		{{Lutheran Divine Service}}
			{{Real presence}}

	[[Category:Christian terminology]]		[[Category:Christian terminology]]

Skyerise: /* Bibliography */ refine cats

2025-04-10T04:10:58Z

Bibliography: refine cats

← Previous revision		Revision as of 04:10, 10 April 2025
Line 44:		Line 44:
	{{Lutheran Divine Service}}		{{Lutheran Divine Service}}

	[[Category:~~Martin~~ ~~Luther~~]]		[[Category:Christian terminology]]
	[[Category:Lutheran Eucharistic theology]]		[[Category:Lutheran Eucharistic theology]]
		⚫	[[Category:Mystical union]]
	[[Category:Sacraments]]		[[Category:Sacraments]]
⚫	[[Category:~~Christian~~ ~~terminology~~]]

Dirkwillems: Clarify reformed use of the same term

2024-03-09T19:47:46Z

Clarify reformed use of the same term

← Previous revision		Revision as of 19:47, 9 March 2024
Line 22:		Line 22:

	The Lutheran doctrine of the sacramental union is also distinct from the [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Reformed view]]. The [[Calvinistic]] view of Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper (a real, spiritual presence) is that Christ is truly present at the meal, though not substantially and particularly joined to the elements. This is in line with their general belief that "the finite cannot contain the infinite" (''finitum non est capax infiniti''). Lutherans, on the other hand, describe the Personal Union of the two natures in Christ (the divine and the human) as sharing their predicates or attributes more fully. The doctrine of the sacramental union is more consistent with this type of Christology. The [[Lutheran scholastics]] described the Reformed Christological position which leads to this doctrine as the ''[[extra calvinisticum]]'', or "Calvinistic outside," because the [[Logos]] is thought to be outside or beyond the body of Christ.<ref>Francis Pieper, ''Christian Dogmatics'', 4 vols., (Saint Louis: CPH, 1950-1957), 2:124.</ref>		The Lutheran doctrine of the sacramental union is also distinct from the [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Reformed view]]. The [[Calvinistic]] view of Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper (a real, spiritual presence) is that Christ is truly present at the meal, though not substantially and particularly joined to the elements. This is in line with their general belief that "the finite cannot contain the infinite" (''finitum non est capax infiniti''). Lutherans, on the other hand, describe the Personal Union of the two natures in Christ (the divine and the human) as sharing their predicates or attributes more fully. The doctrine of the sacramental union is more consistent with this type of Christology. The [[Lutheran scholastics]] described the Reformed Christological position which leads to this doctrine as the ''[[extra calvinisticum]]'', or "Calvinistic outside," because the [[Logos]] is thought to be outside or beyond the body of Christ.<ref>Francis Pieper, ''Christian Dogmatics'', 4 vols., (Saint Louis: CPH, 1950-1957), 2:124.</ref>

			[[Reformed theology]] also uses the term "sacramental union", not as an explanation of Christ's presence but in reference to the union between "sign and thing signified."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Westminster Confession of Faith \|url=https://reformedstandards.com/westminster/wcf.html?a=article-27-2 \|access-date=2024-03-09 \|website=reformedstandards.com \|at=27.2}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|title=The Sign and the Thing Signified \|url=https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/sign-and-thing-signified \|access-date=2024-03-09 \|website=Ligonier Ministries \|language=en-US}}</ref>

	==See also==		==See also==

WikiCleanerBot: v2.05b - Bot T12 CW#548 - Fix errors for CW project (Punctuation in link)

2024-02-26T18:20:12Z

v2.05b - Bot T12 CW#548 - Fix errors for CW project (Punctuation in link)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 18:20, 26 February 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence,]] which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence]], which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}

ChickenJockey21: Linked to full article

2024-02-10T12:42:00Z

Linked to full article

← Previous revision		Revision as of 12:42, 10 February 2024
Line 21:		Line 21:
	Martin Luther distinguished this doctrine from that of transubstantiation and impanation in this way: {{quote\|… we do not make Christ's body out of the bread … Nor do we say that his body comes into existence out of the bread [i.e. impanation]. We say that his body, which long ago was made and came into existence, is present when we say, "This is my body." For Christ commands us to say not, "Let this become my body," or, "Make my body there," but, "This is my body."<ref>Martin Luther, ''Luther's Works'', American Edition, Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann, gen. eds., 55 vols., (St. Louis and Philadelphia: CPH and Fortress Press, 1955-86), 37:187,</ref> }}		Martin Luther distinguished this doctrine from that of transubstantiation and impanation in this way: {{quote\|… we do not make Christ's body out of the bread … Nor do we say that his body comes into existence out of the bread [i.e. impanation]. We say that his body, which long ago was made and came into existence, is present when we say, "This is my body." For Christ commands us to say not, "Let this become my body," or, "Make my body there," but, "This is my body."<ref>Martin Luther, ''Luther's Works'', American Edition, Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann, gen. eds., 55 vols., (St. Louis and Philadelphia: CPH and Fortress Press, 1955-86), 37:187,</ref> }}

	The Lutheran doctrine of the sacramental union is also distinct from the [[~~Eucharistic~~ ~~theology#~~Reformed ~~churches~~\|Reformed view]]. The [[Calvinistic]] view of Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper (a real, spiritual presence) is that Christ is truly present at the meal, though not substantially and particularly joined to the elements. This is in line with their general belief that "the finite cannot contain the infinite" (''finitum non est capax infiniti''). Lutherans, on the other hand, describe the Personal Union of the two natures in Christ (the divine and the human) as sharing their predicates or attributes more fully. The doctrine of the sacramental union is more consistent with this type of Christology. The [[Lutheran scholastics]] described the Reformed Christological position which leads to this doctrine as the ''[[extra calvinisticum]]'', or "Calvinistic outside," because the [[Logos]] is thought to be outside or beyond the body of Christ.<ref>Francis Pieper, ''Christian Dogmatics'', 4 vols., (Saint Louis: CPH, 1950-1957), 2:124.</ref>		The Lutheran doctrine of the sacramental union is also distinct from the [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Reformed view]]. The [[Calvinistic]] view of Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper (a real, spiritual presence) is that Christ is truly present at the meal, though not substantially and particularly joined to the elements. This is in line with their general belief that "the finite cannot contain the infinite" (''finitum non est capax infiniti''). Lutherans, on the other hand, describe the Personal Union of the two natures in Christ (the divine and the human) as sharing their predicates or attributes more fully. The doctrine of the sacramental union is more consistent with this type of Christology. The [[Lutheran scholastics]] described the Reformed Christological position which leads to this doctrine as the ''[[extra calvinisticum]]'', or "Calvinistic outside," because the [[Logos]] is thought to be outside or beyond the body of Christ.<ref>Francis Pieper, ''Christian Dogmatics'', 4 vols., (Saint Louis: CPH, 1950-1957), 2:124.</ref>

	==See also==		==See also==

ChickenJockey21: The page on Real Presence includes Spiritual Presence, which does not hold to the Eating of the Unworthy. That inconsistency was corrected.

2024-02-10T12:39:06Z

The page on Real Presence includes Spiritual Presence, which does not hold to the Eating of the Unworthy. That inconsistency was corrected.

← Previous revision		Revision as of 12:39, 10 February 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as ~~well~~ as ~~any~~ ~~other~~ ~~doctrine~~ ~~affirming the~~ [[~~Real~~ Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence,]] which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}

ChickenJockey21: Changed "physical" for "true" to avoid confusion with carnal or Capernaitic eating, and more accurately reflect the Book of Concord's description of the Lord's Supper

2024-02-09T21:33:51Z

Changed "physical" for "true" to avoid confusion with carnal or Capernaitic eating, and more accurately reflect the Book of Concord's description of the Lord's Supper

← Previous revision		Revision as of 21:33, 9 February 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the ~~physical~~ body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as well as any other doctrine affirming the [[Real Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as well as any other doctrine affirming the [[Real Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}

2603:7080:9301:A7D:30BB:4C82:10DB:65F at 04:41, 29 April 2023

2023-04-29T04:41:14Z

← Previous revision		Revision as of 04:41, 29 April 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Short description\|Lutheran doctrine of the real presence}}		{{Short description\|Lutheran doctrine of the real presence}}
	{{Eucharist\|expanded=Theology}}		{{Eucharist\|expanded=Theology}}
	'''Sacramental union''' ([[Latin]]: ''unio sacramentalis''; [[Martin Luther]]'s [[German Language\|German]]: ''Sacramentliche Einigkeit'';<ref name=Weimar>''Weimar Ausgabe'' 26, 442.23; ''Luther's Works'' 37, 299-300.</ref> German: ''sakramentalische Vereinigung'') is the [[Lutheranism\|Lutheran]] [[theology\|theological]] [[doctrine]] of the [[Real Presence]] of the body and blood of [[Jesus\|Christ]] in the [[Christianity\|Christian]] [[Eucharist]] (see [[Eucharist in Lutheranism]]).		'''Sacramental union''' ([[Latin]]: ''unio sacramentalis''; [[Martin Luther]]'s [[German Language\|German]]: ''Sacramentliche Einigkeit'';<ref name=Weimar>''Weimar Ausgabe'' 26, 442.23; ''Luther's Works'' 37, 299-300.</ref> German: ''sakramentalische Vereinigung'') is the [[Lutheranism\|Lutheran]] [[theology\|theological]] [[doctrine]] of the [[Real Presence]] of the body and blood of [[Jesus in Christianity\|Christ]] in the [[Christianity\|Christian]] [[Eucharist]] (see [[Eucharist in Lutheranism]]).

	== Type of union ==		== Type of union ==

InternetArchiveBot: Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.3) (Eastmain - 13441

2023-04-27T10:55:50Z

Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.3) (Eastmain - 13441

← Previous revision		Revision as of 10:55, 27 April 2023
Line 8:		Line 8:
	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the physical body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as well as any other doctrine affirming the [[Real Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the physical body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as well as any other doctrine affirming the [[Real Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15]; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}

	== Words of Institution ==		== Words of Institution ==
Line 17:		Line 17:
	[[File:Reaalipreesens.jpg\|thumb\|A note about the [[:en:real presence of Christ in the Eucharist\|real presence]] in Mikael Agricola Church, Helsinki.]]		[[File:Reaalipreesens.jpg\|thumb\|A note about the [[:en:real presence of Christ in the Eucharist\|real presence]] in Mikael Agricola Church, Helsinki.]]

	This view is sometimes erroneously identified as [[consubstantiation]] in that it asserts the simultaneous presence of four essences in the [[Eucharist]]: the consecrated bread, the body of Christ, the consecrated wine, and the blood of Christ; but it differs in that it does not assert a "local" (three-dimensional, circumscribed) presence of the body and blood in the sacramental bread and wine respectively, which is rejected as "gross, carnal, and Capernaitic" in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20Supper ''FC Epitome'', VII, 42; Solid Declaration, VII, 127; ''Triglot Concordia'', 817, 1015.]</ref> The term "consubstantiation" has been associated with such a "local" inclusion of the Body and Blood of Christ in the sacramental bread and wine as has the term "[[impanation]]." Lutherans have also rejected the designation of their position as consubstantiation because they believe it, like [[transubstantiation]], is a philosophical explanation of the [[Real Presence]], whereas the sacramental union provides a description of the Real Presence.		This view is sometimes erroneously identified as [[consubstantiation]] in that it asserts the simultaneous presence of four essences in the [[Eucharist]]: the consecrated bread, the body of Christ, the consecrated wine, and the blood of Christ; but it differs in that it does not assert a "local" (three-dimensional, circumscribed) presence of the body and blood in the sacramental bread and wine respectively, which is rejected as "gross, carnal, and Capernaitic" in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>{{Cite web \|url=http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20Supper \|title=''FC Epitome'', VII, 42; Solid Declaration, VII, 127; ''Triglot Concordia'', 817, 1015. \|access-date=2007-04-02 \|archive-date=2008-10-10 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20Supper \|url-status=dead }}</ref> The term "consubstantiation" has been associated with such a "local" inclusion of the Body and Blood of Christ in the sacramental bread and wine as has the term "[[impanation]]." Lutherans have also rejected the designation of their position as consubstantiation because they believe it, like [[transubstantiation]], is a philosophical explanation of the [[Real Presence]], whereas the sacramental union provides a description of the Real Presence.

	Martin Luther distinguished this doctrine from that of transubstantiation and impanation in this way: {{quote\|… we do not make Christ's body out of the bread … Nor do we say that his body comes into existence out of the bread [i.e. impanation]. We say that his body, which long ago was made and came into existence, is present when we say, "This is my body." For Christ commands us to say not, "Let this become my body," or, "Make my body there," but, "This is my body."<ref>Martin Luther, ''Luther's Works'', American Edition, Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann, gen. eds., 55 vols., (St. Louis and Philadelphia: CPH and Fortress Press, 1955-86), 37:187,</ref> }}		Martin Luther distinguished this doctrine from that of transubstantiation and impanation in this way: {{quote\|… we do not make Christ's body out of the bread … Nor do we say that his body comes into existence out of the bread [i.e. impanation]. We say that his body, which long ago was made and came into existence, is present when we say, "This is my body." For Christ commands us to say not, "Let this become my body," or, "Make my body there," but, "This is my body."<ref>Martin Luther, ''Luther's Works'', American Edition, Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann, gen. eds., 55 vols., (St. Louis and Philadelphia: CPH and Fortress Press, 1955-86), 37:187,</ref> }}

← Previous revision		Revision as of 18:20, 26 February 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence,]] which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence]], which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}

← Previous revision		Revision as of 12:39, 10 February 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as ~~well~~ as ~~any~~ ~~other~~ ~~doctrine~~ ~~affirming the~~ [[~~Real~~ Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine over and against the Reformed idea of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology\|Spiritual Presence,]] which teaches that only believers partake of Christ in the Supper. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}

← Previous revision		Revision as of 21:33, 9 February 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>		The sacramental union is distinguished from the other "unions" in theology like the "[[Hypostatic union\|personal union]]" of the two natures in Jesus Christ, the "mystical union" of Christ and his [[Christian Church\|Church]], and the "natural union" in the [[human]] person of [[Human body\|body]] and [[soul]]. It is seen as similar to the personal union in the analogue of the uniting of the two perfect natures in the person of Jesus Christ in which both natures remain distinct: the integrity of the bread and wine remain though united with the body and the blood of Christ.<ref>''Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII.36-38 (''Triglot Concordia'', 983, 985 [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php]; Theodore G. Tappert, ''The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church'', (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 575-576.</ref>

	In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the ~~physical~~ body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as well as any other doctrine affirming the [[Real Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}		In the sacramental union the consecrated bread is united with the body of Christ and the consecrated wine is united with the blood of Christ by virtue of Christ's original institution with the result that anyone eating and drinking these "elements"—the consecrated bread and wine—really eats and drinks the true body and blood of Christ as well. Lutherans maintain that what they believe to be the biblical doctrine of the ''[[manducatio indignorum]]'' ("eating of the unworthy") supports this doctrine as well as any other doctrine affirming the [[Real Presence]]. The ''manducatio indignorum'' is the contention that even unbelievers eating and drinking in the [[Eucharist]] really eat and drink the body and blood of Christ.<ref>[[s:Bible (King James)/1 Corinthians#Chapter 11\|1 Corinthians 11:27-29]]</ref> This view was put forward by [[Martin Luther]] in his 1528 [[Confession Concerning Christ's Supper]]:{{quote\|Why then should we not much more say in the Supper, "This is my body," even though bread and body are two distinct substances, and the word "this" indicates the bread? Here, too, out of two kinds of objects a union has taken place, which I shall call a "sacramental union," because Christ’s body and the bread are given to us as a sacrament. This is not a natural or personal union, as is the case with God and Christ. It is also perhaps a different union from that which the dove has with the Holy Spirit, and the flame with the angel, but it is also assuredly a sacramental union.<ref name=Weimar />}}

	It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}		It is asserted in the [[Wittenberg Concord]] of 1536 and in the [[Formula of Concord]].<ref>[http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC ''Formula of Concord Epitome'' VII, 7, 15] {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010210532/http://www.bookofconcord.com/fc-ep.html#VII.%20The%20Lord's%20SupperFC \|date=2008-10-10 }}; [http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Formula of Concord Solid Declaration'' VII, 14, 18, 35, 38, 117; ''Triglot Concordia'', 811-813, 977, 979, 983-985, 1013.]</ref> The [[Formula of Concord]] couples the term with the circumlocution ("in, with, and under the forms of bread and wine") used among [[Lutheranism\|Lutherans]] to further define their view: {{quote\|For the reason why, in addition to the expressions of Christ and St. Paul (the bread in the Supper is the body of Christ or the communion of the body of Christ), also the forms: under the bread, with the bread, in the bread [the body of Christ is present and offered], are employed, is that by means of them the papistical [[transubstantiation]] may be rejected and the sacramental union of the unchanged essence of the bread and of the body of Christ indicated.<ref>[http://bookofconcord.org/sd-supper.php ''FC Solid Declaration'' VII, 35; ''Triglot Concordia'', 983.]</ref>}}