10. The necessity of holy communion.
Holy Communion is not an indifferent thing, but divine order, which is to apply in the church until the Last Day. This has already been explained in detail.1436) It is part of God's will of grace that Christians, who are able to examine themselves and to distinguish the body of the Lord, use the Lord's Supper. Likewise, it has already been explained1437) that the Christian has a special consolation in the Lord's Supper against his need of sin, because in the Lord's Supper there is not only an individual promise of grace, but this individual promise of grace is also confirmed and sealed in a unique way, namely by the presentation of the body of Christ, which is given for us, and by the presentation of the blood of Christ, which is shed for us. Nevertheless, there is not to be taught an absolute necessity of the Lord's Supper for salvation, because the forgiveness of sins is not distributed among the various means of grace, but each of them presents the whole forgiveness of sins available through Christ's satisfactio vicaria, and works, or rather strengthens, faith.1438) It stands
1435) Cf. Luther's classic exposition on confession in the "Sermon on Confession and the Sacrament," XI, 585-590, on the three confessions, of which the first (confession of sin before God) and the second (confession of sin before the offended neighbor) are divine orders, but not the third. "The third is that commanded by the pope, which is done secretly in the ears of the priests. The same is not commanded by God." (585.) "But yet it is advised and good. … For it is a wretched thing when the conscience is troubled and lies in anguish and knows neither counsel nor consolation. Therefore it is a noble and precious work that two come together and one gives counsel, help and comfort to the other, and it is done in a fine, brotherly and loving way: one discovers his illness, and the other heals his wounds. Therefore I would not do without this for the good of all the world. Although it should not be commanded, lest one make a conscience of it, as if one must first confess before going to the sacrament."
1436) p. 340 ff.
1437) Especially under the sections "The Relationship of the Lord's Supper to the Other Means of Grace," pp. 343 ff, and "The Purpose of the Lord's Supper," pp. 435 ff.
1438) Cf. the detailed explanation: "All means of grace have the same purpose and the same effect", p. 127 ff.
457 > The Lord's Supper. [English ed. ~ 392-393]
therefore, a man who has become faithful to the preached or read word of the gospel has forgiveness of sins and salvation, even if he did not use the sacraments due to circumstances. Luther rightly rejects the absolute necessity of baptism,1439) and also of the Lord's Supper. When Luther learned that Carlstadt's attack on the Christian doctrine of the Lord's Supper had caused some Christians to doubt the Real Presence, he gave them the counsel to suspend themselves from the Lord's Supper during the time of doubt, with the reasoning: "You are not condemned if you remain without the sacrament"; "otherwise practice in the Word of God, in faith and in love; let those handle it who are secure in their conscience".1440) Furthermore, as resolutely as Luther fought the Reformed doctrine of absence as a rejection of the Scriptural words of the Lord's Supper and, because of this rejection of the Lord's Supper words, denied the Reformed the Christian Lord's Supper altogether, he was far from denying salvation to those who, because of weakness in knowledge, did not believe the Real Presence. "We must nevertheless confess that the enthusiasts have the Scriptures and the Word of God in other articles, and whoever hears it from them and believes it will be saved, even though they" (the stiff-necked seducers) "are unholy heretics and blasphemers of Christ."1441) This explanation of Luther is repeated in the preface to the Book of Concord. There, on the one hand, it is said that "the condemnationes, suspension and condemnation of false and impure doctrine" could not be avoided, "so that men would know to beware of the same"; on the other hand, it is not doubted "that many pious, innocent people are to be found even in the churches, which have not hitherto compared themselves with us, who walk in the simplicity of their hearts, do not understand the matter rightly, and have no pleasure at all in the blasphemies against Holy Communion".1442) If the absolute necessity of the Lord's Supper is referred to John 6:53: "If ye eat not the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you," it must be remembered that this passage does not address the Lord's Supper at all.1443) In short, Luther and the Lutheran theologians rightly apply Augustine's dictum: Contemptus sacramenti damnat, non privatio, as to baptism, so also to the Lord's Supper.
1439) p. 329 f.<w:t xml:space="preserve"> 1440) St. L. XX, 201. 734.
1441) St. L. XVII, 2212. 1442) M. 16 ff. [Trigl. 19 🔗]
1443) pp. 385 ff.
458 > The Christian Church. [English ed. ~ 393-397]
At what time and how often Holy Communion is to be used is not certain in Scriptures. The diligent use, however, is not only indicated by the οσάκις in binding with the preceding imperative: "Do this in remembrance of me!",1444) but also results from the nature and purpose of the Lord's Supper and from the need of the Christians. The more or less diligent use of the Lord's Supper is rightly counted among the measures of the spiritual life of a Christian congregation. As far as the diligent use of the Lord's Supper is concerned, it would be hard to find a better explanation of it, covering the whole situation, than that given by Luther in the Large Catechism.1445)