8 111. THE EUCHARISTIC THEORIES COMPARED. 675
2. The ubiquity of Christ’s body involves an important element of truth, but is a dogmatic hypothesis without sufficient Scripture warrant, and cannot well be reconciled with the fact of the ascension, or with the nature of a body, unless it be resolved into a mere potential or dynamic presence which makes it possible for Christ to make his divine-human power and influence felt wherever he pleases.'
The illustrations which Luther uses —as the sun shining everywhere, the voice resounding in a thousand ears and hearts, the eye seeing different objects at once —all lead to a dynamic presence, which Calvin fully admits.
3. The historic argument might prove too much (for transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass), unless we are satisfied with the substance of truth which underlies the imperfect human theories and formulas. The real presence ot Christ with his people is indeed a most precious truth, which can never be surrendered. It is the very life of the church and the comfort and strength of believers from day to day. He promised the perpetual presence not only of his spirit or influence, but of his theanthropic person: “I am with you alway.” It is impossible to make an abstract separation of action is symbolical. At that time Christ, living and speaking to the disciples with his body yet unbroken, and his blood not yet shed, could not literally offer his body to them. They would have shuddered at such an idea, and at least expressed their surprise. Kahnis, an orthodox Lutheran, came to the conclusion (1861) that ‘‘the literal interpretation of the words of institution is an impossibility, and must be given up.’’ (See the first ed. of his Luth. Dogmatik, I. 616 sq.) Dorner says (Christl. Glaubenslehre, II. 853), ‘‘ That ἐστί may be understood figuratively is beyond a doubt, and should never have been denied. It is only necessary to refer to the parables.”’ Martensen, an eminent Danish Lutheran (Christl. Dogmatik, p. 491), admits Zwingli’s exegesis, and thinks that his ‘‘sober common-sense view has a greater importance than Lutheran divines are generally disposed to accord to 11.
1 The Lutheran divines were divided between the idea of an absolute ubiquity (which would prove too much for the Lutheran doctrine, and run into a sort of Panchristism or Christo-Pantheism), and a relative ubiquity or multivolipresentia (which depends upon the will). The Formula of Con-
cord inconsistently favors both views. See Dorner’s History of Christology, II. 710 sqq. (Germ. ed.), and Schaff, Creeds, I. 322, 325 sq., and 848,
676 THE GERMAN REFORMATION. A.D. 1517 To 153
the divine and human in the God-man. He is the Head of the church, his body, and * filleth all in all.” Nor can the church give up the other important truth that Christ is the bread of hfe, and nourishes, in a spiritual and heavenly manner, the soul of the believer which is vitally united to him as the branch is to the vine. This truth is symbolized in the miraculous feeding of the multitude, and set forth in the mysterious discourse of the sixth chapter of John.
As far as Luther contended for these truths, he was right against the Sacramentarians, though he erred in the form of conception and statement. His view is mystical but profound ; Zwingli’s view is clear but superficial. The former commends itself to devout feeling, the latter to the sober understanding and intellect. 3
I]. THE ZWINGLIAN THEORY. — The Lats Supper is a solemn commemoration of the atoning death of Christ, according to his own command: “Do this in remembrance of me,” and the words of Paul: “ As often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he come.”?} Zwingli emphasized this primitive character of the institution as a gift of God to man, in opposition to the Roman mass as a work or offering which man makes to God. He compares the sacrament to a wedding-ring which seals the marriage union between Christ and the believer. He denied the corporal presence, because Christ ascended to heaven, and because a body cannot be present in more than one place at once, also because two substances cannot occupy the same space at the same time; but he admitted his spiritual presence, for Christ is eternal God, and his death
1 Zwingli calls the sacrament ein Wiedergedéchtniss und Erneuern dessen was einst geschehen und in Ewigkeit kraftig ist. His views on the Lord’s Supper are conveniently put together by Usteri and Vogelin, in Zwingli’s Sadmmtliche Schriften im Auszuge, vol. 11. 70-167.
2 Dorner (Geseh. der protest. Theol., p. 300): ‘‘ Das Charakteristische in allen Schriften Zwingli’s vor 1524 ist sein Gegensatz gegen das heil. Abend- mahl als Opfer und Messe.’”? So also Ebrard.