The Anti-Lutheran Polemic of Westminster

WCF 29:7  Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament,(1) do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive, and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then,

not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine;

yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance,  

as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.(2)

(1) 1 Cor. 11:28
(2) 1 Cor. 10:16

This paragraph is based on the confessional Lutheran description of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist as being "in, with and under" the bread and wine.  The Westminster Assembly is saying that this means a corporal or carnal presence.  Most Reformed folks, then and now, say that this Lutheran description "in, with and under" means consubstantiation, or a physical union of the bread and Christ's body, or the wine and Christ's blood.

However, expert testimony from both Lutheran and Reformed sources indicates that this is clearly not correct, and in fact can only be construed as common though false imputation of the Reformed, who ought to know better.  The historic and continuing purpose of the Lutheran description of the presence of Christ's body as being "in, with and under" the bread is to teach against transubstantiation and consubstantiation.  In other words, confessional Lutheranism does not teach that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ, nor that the bread and wine become partly the body and blood of Christ, and yet they continue to teach that the body and blood of Christ are present "in, with and under" the bread and wine.

Furthermore, the Lutheran notion of the presence of the body and blood is described by them as spiritual, not carnal.

Since the Reformed also use the word "spiritual" to describe the Reformed notion of "real presence," the meanings of the two uses of the word "spiritual" must be distinguished.

The confessional Lutherans believe that by means of the divine power of the Person of the Incarnate Son, he makes himself spiritually present in the Eucharist as the whole Christ in both his natures (since they cannot be separated), even though the body and blood are not present carnally in the Eucharist.  In fact, his body remains seated all the while on the throne of heaven.  In this view, the body and blood of Christ are spiritually present, not carnally present, in connection with the use of the bread and wine, whether the recipient receives them savingly by faith or not.

The high (Calvinian) confessional Reformed generally seem to mean that Christ is present to believers only, in both his natures, by the mediation of the Holy Spirit from heaven, and that the Lord's presence with them does not occur directly in connection with the handling of the bread and cup as instruments.  In other words, there is (only) a parallelism between the handling of the bread and cup by the believer and the work of the Holy Spirit to communicate to the believer the fruits of his union with Christ.  This seems to be the clear teaching of the article from the WCF quoted above.  This is also the implication of the Heidelberg Catechism.

These are different conceptions and uses of the word "spiritual."

As you study this subject (for 5 years or more) you'll begin to see

1) Why the Calvinists say that our argument with the Lutherans is a technicality about the mode of the presence (though, at the same time, the Calvinists will still zealously object to the special Lutheran "presence" "in, with and under" the bread and wine.)  And,

2)  Why the Lutherans try to say that we don't have a "real presence" at all.

Actually, we all have the "real presence," even the Zwinglians.  The only questions have to do with whether it is admitted and how it is described.

The answer depends on discerning the proper way to interpret passages like these:

1 Cor 10:16-17   16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?  17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.

1 Corinthians 11:23-29  23 ¶ For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread;  24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me."  25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."  26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes.  27 ¶ Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.  28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.