Site icon LCMS Resources

Formula of Concord Study: Article VII

by Rev. Michael Schuermann

The seventh article in the Formula of Concord deals chiefly with the controversy stirred up within the churches of the Lutheran confession by the Sacramentarians. According to the Christian Cyclopedia, the term “Sacramentarian” was “applied by Martin Luther to Hulrich Zwingli, Johannes Oecolampadius, and others (cf. St. L. ed., XVII, 2176) who held that in Communion bread and wine are Christ’s body and blood only in a “sacramental” (i. e., metaphorical) sense.”

Bente, in his “Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confession”, labels the controversy which prompted the writing of Article VII (as well as Article VIII) the Crypto-Calvinist Controversy. About this, particularly in regard to Article VII, he writes:

Both articles, the seventh as well as the eighth, were incorporated in the Formula of Concord in order thoroughly to purify the Lutheran Church from Reformed errors concerning the Lord’s Supper and the person of Christ, which after Luther’s death had wormed their way into some of her schools and churches, especially those of Electoral Saxony, and to make her forever immune against the infection of Calvinism (Crypto- Calvinism)–a term which, during the controversies preceding the Formula of Concord did not, as is generally the case to-day, refer to Calvin’s absolute decree of election and reprobation, but to his doctrine concerning the Lord’s Supper, as formulated by himself in the Consensus Tigurinus (Zurich Consensus), issued 1549.[1]

Note that Article VII and Article VIII ultimately deal with the errors introduced by the subtle infiltration of Calvin’s teaching concerning the Lord’s Supper into the teaching of the Faith in Lutheran parishes. This controversy caught up, amongst other Lutheran teachers, none other than Philip Melanchthon (after Luther’s death).

Bente summarizes the content of Article VII of the Formula of Concord in this way:

The Seventh Article teaches the real and substantial presence of the true body and blood of Christ; their sacramental union in, with, and under the elements of bread and wine; the oral manducation or eating and drinking of both substances by unbelieving as well as believing communicants. It maintains that this presence of the body and blood of Christ, though real, is neither an impanation nor a companation, neither a local inclusion nor a mixture of the two substances, but illocal and transcendent. It holds that the eating of the body and the drinking of the blood of Christ, though truly done with the mouth of the body, is not Capernaitic, or natural, but supernatural. It affirms that this real presence is effected, not by any human power, but by the omnipotent power of Christ in accordance with the words of the institution of the Sacrament.[2]

Let’s dig in:

1. Read FC Epitome VII, par. 3-5 and Solid Declaration VII, par. 2

Note that 2 kinds of Sacramentarians are defined here: Those who are open about their opinion that the elements in the Lord’s Supper are purely symbolic, and those who profess to believe that there is a true presence of Christ’s body spiritually through faith.

2. Read Solid Declaration VII, par. 9-10; skim par. 11-27

3. We find our trust and confession of the Lord’s Supper in the words of Holy Scripture.

4. Read Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.

5. In the passages about the Lord’s Supper above, what words do you see repeated each time? What phrases?

6. Read Solid Declaration VII, par. 61-65.

7. Read Solid Declaration VII, par. 74.

8. Read Solid Declaration VII, par. 75, 79-85.

The Rev. Michael Schuermann is pastor of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Sherman, Ill.

[1]   Bente, F. Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, p. 404

[2]   ibid., p. 403-404

Exit mobile version