Social Icons

Showing posts with label Martin Luther. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martin Luther. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Martin Luther and The Lord's Prayer


[This paper was written for my Reformation and Enlightenment class at Capital University, where I am seeking a minor degree in religion.]

Jesse Harmon
RELIG 321
April 19, 2012
Martin Luther and the Lord’s Prayer
            “O Almighty God, in your unmerited goodness to us and through the merit and mediation of your only beloved Son, Jesus Christ, you have permitted and even commanded and taught us to regard you and call upon you as one Father of us all.”  Martin Luther wrote these words in his Personal Prayer Book, published in 1522 (Luther 44).  This paper will be discussing Martin Luther’s view on the Lord’s Prayer, as well as discussing how he came to these conclusions through the use of Scripture readings.  Even though all seven petitions will be discussed, we will be delving into the fifth petition, which is the petition of sin and forgiveness.  Also to be discussed will be several ultimate examples of forgiveness.  The two primary sources used in this paper will be a sermon given by Martin Luther called “An Exposition of the Lord’s Prayer,” published in 1519 (known hereafter as the “sermon,”) and the Personal Prayer Book.  The Personal Prayer Book is a small book published by Luther just days after returning to Wittenberg from hiding in Wartburg.  This book is printed in a diary format that was common among the time (Tunseth 25).
            The Lord’s Prayer, or sometimes called the Model Prayer (Golloday 157), is an easy and short prayer that Jesus offered to his disciples after they asked him about prayer.  Jesus states that one should not “sound trumpets” or pray loudly.  One should not use long sophisticated phrases or, as Jesus called it, empty phrases, when praying as to impress people.  Instead, one should go to a quiet area and pray quietly.  In the gospel of Luke, an unnamed disciple asked Jesus how to pray.  Jesus then gave a more intimate and smaller form of the Lord’s Prayer than what Matthew had in his gospel.  There are only about sixty-seven words in the prayer, making it very easy to memorize if used with a poetic meter.  Jesus does not give long exaggerated words, but instead makes it very simple and easy to remember (we will be looking at the format of the Lord’s Prayer near the end of this paper).  We should be careful, however, not to take “simple” as meaning being “dumbed down” or “shallow.”  That wasn’t the point of Jesus giving such easy words in the prayer.  The point was to make it simple to memorize, and to make it easy to come up with your own version of it if needed (Golloway 158).  The Lord’s Prayer is to be memorized in Lutheran Catechism classes, along with Luther’s explanations in The Small Catechism
            The first line of the Lord’s Prayer is not a petition.  It is an address to God.  Luther states that the word father is intimate, warm, and friendly (Luther 22).  Other words such as God, Lord, and Judge are too harsh in a situation like this.  This prayer is to bring peace and comfort to those who are praying it.  Luther states that since this prayer is said directly by Jesus, it is a necessity to pray it.  Throughout his sermon, Martin Luther gave “modern-day” explanations of each petition using new words and phrases.  Luther uses the following words to describe the “Our Father,” section of the Lord’s Prayer.  “Our Father, you are in heaven, while I, your poor child, am in misery on earth, far away from you surrounded by many perils, in need and want among devils, the greatest enemies and in such danger,” (Luther 23).  These little phrases really help explain what Luther is trying to say in not only his sermon, but also in later articles and resources he published. 
Those who are praying should notice the use of plural possessive forms in this prayer (our Father), giving a sense of community to those who pray this prayer.  Luther tells us to pray this prayer from the heart, and not to “count the beads…while [the] mind wanders far from the confession of [the] lips,” (Luther 23), for God said in the book of Isaiah 29:13, “’These people come near me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.  Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men,’” (Bible Across America 1238)  (this scripture is also quoted in the gospel of Matthew 15:6-9). 
            The first petition of the Lord’s Prayer is, “Hallowed be thy name.”  This states that God’s name is holy unto itself.  To hallow something is to hold something sacred (Schramm 128), or something regarded as holy (Simcox 44).  In Luther’s Personal Prayer Book, he states to God, “In this wretched vale of tears your holy name is sadly profaned, blasphemed, and reviled in so many ways.  In so many instances it is regarded without honor to you and is often misused in sinning, so that to live a disgraceful life might well be regarded as the same as disgracing and dishonoring your holy name,”  (Tunseth 45).  Here, Luther is trying to say that God is everything, and man in nothing.  In his sermon, Luther states that humans use God’s name to justify war, sinning, and breaking the second commandment, which is, “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name,” (Bible Across America 142). Using God’s name to justify these things is taking his name in vain according to Luther.  One of the more interesting things that Luther stated in his sermon is that, “if anyone were to hallow God’s name perfectly, then we [wouldn’t] need the Lord’s Prayer,” because we would be sinless (Luther 33).
            “Thy kingdom come,” is the second petition.  According to Luther, this petition humbles us (Luther 37).  As mentioned before, Luther “rewrote” the petitions to help people understand what they are saying.  “O dear Father…I confess and am sorry that I have dishonored your name so often and that in my arrogance I still defile your name by honoring my own,” (Luther 35-36).  The fourth commandment states, “You shall honor your father and your mother,” (McCain 452).  Luther stated that to honor your own name is to honor your father and mother since your last name is generally your family name.  It is a commandment to honor your father and mother (or your own name), but you should not honor your name more than you honor God’s name.    
            The third petition is “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”  Whose will needs to be done?  God’s will, according to this petition.  Luther states in the Personal Prayer Book that compared to God’s will, the will of humans is never good and always evil (Tunseth 48).  Martin Luther states in his sermon several things about this petition.  First, he discusses the meaning of the petition.  Luther states that without a teacher, people must learn to not follow their own wills.  In fact, people need to run counter to their own will because it is usually the will of God.  However, we are sinners who cannot do God’s will, for it is difficult for us to surrender our own wills (Luther 44). 
            Martin Luther gives a great example of this.  King David wanted to build God a temple, but God refused David for doing it.  God said to David, “You are not to build a house for my name, because you are a warrior and have shed blood,” (Bible Across America 814).  After this, God set Solomon on the throne to build the temple.
            The “daily bread” mentioned in the fourth petition (“Give us this day our daily bread), could have several meanings.  The first meaning is obvious; God wants us to be fed and stay healthy.  During ancient times when the people of Moses were wandering the wilderness, God provided manna to keep the people fed.  Could the “daily bread” mentioned in this petition have something to do with being fed by God?  This could be possible, but it doesn’t seem to fit the theme of the Lord’s Prayer.  According to the old outdated food pyramid, humans should generally eat 6-11 servings of bread per day (1 slice of bread is a serving) ("Pyramid Servings: How Much? How Many?").  It seems that bread signifies life.  Jesus broke bread during the Last Supper and gave it to his disciples.  It would make more sense to see the “daily bread” as the Word of God.  The Word, mentioned in the first chapter of the Gospel of John, is Jesus.  “In the beginning was the Word, and Word was with God [Jesus is God], and the Word was God [Jesus is the Word].  He was with God in the beginning,” (Bible Across America 1844).  According to the fourth petition, we need Jesus everyday to get through our lives, since Jesus is the Word, and the Word is the bread of life.  We are reminded that Jesus is the bread in Luke 22:19, “[He] took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to [his disciples] saying, ‘This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me,’” (Bible Across America 1834). 
            Luther, who is explaining the fourth petition in his own words, says, “Oh Father…comfort me, a poor and miserable wretch.  I cannot bear your hand and yet I know that it works to my damnation if I do not bear it.  Therefore, strengthen me, my father, lest I despair,” (Luther 51).
The fifth petition states, “And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.” Luther states simply that we cannot lie to God.  He knows what we want before we pray.  Matthew 6:8 states, “…your Father knows what you need before you ask him,” (Bible Across America 1667).  Ironically, this verse is just one phrase before the start of what is known as the Lord’s Prayer in the Bible, which is Matthew 6:9-13.  What does this petition mean?  According to Luther’s Small Catechism, it means that we should pray that God not hold our sins against us if we forgive others for their sins toward us. 
            A very good example of forgiving someone is the assassination attempt of Pope John Paul II (1920-2005).  On May 13, 1981, Pope John Paul II was struck with a bullet while traveling in St. Peter’s Square in the “Pope Mobile.”  Mehmet Ali Agca had in fact shot him twice (Tanner).  Three months after the shooting, the Pope visited his attacker in jail to discuss the situation.  Even though the Pope never revealed the conversation between the two, one can only guess that the Pope prayed with his attacker, and forgave him.  This is a prime example of someone forgiving someone’s trespasses against them.
            Another great example of forgiveness is the story of Nelson Mandela.  In 1962, Mandela was arrested for organizing a national worker’s strike.  He was sent to prison for five years, but was sent back to trial in 1963.  This trial led him to be sent to prison for life, for which he spent nearly 20 years.  While still in prison, he somehow managed to earn a bachelor of law degree, and in 1981, an international campaign was set up to help release Mandela from prison.  Mandela refused to recant his beliefs on armed struggle.  However, when former President P.W. Botha of South Africa had a stroke in 1990, his replacement, Fredrick Willem de Klerk released Mandela.  President de Klerk released Mandela.  In 1994, after a series of negotiations with President Klerk, Mandela was elected the first black president of South Africa (“bio”).  Mandela tried to unify South Africa and encourage forgiveness among the people.  Mandela could have held a grudge against the people who put in him prison in the first place, but instead he decided the best thing to do was to forgive them and encourage other people to forgive others. 
Matthew 18:21-22 says, “Peter came to Jesus and asked, ‘Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me?  Up to seven times?’  Jesus answered, ‘I tell you not seven times, but seventy-seven times,” (Bible Across America 1698).  Jesus didn’t specifically mean we should forgive someone only seventy-seven times, and then not forgive them the seventy-eighth time.  He was saying we should always forgive someone, no matter what he or she does to us or to God.  Martin Luther says in his sermon that, “Christ does not say, ‘because of your sins you must fast this much or pray this much or donate this much or do this or that.’  Rather does he say, ‘if you would render satisfaction and atone for your guilt and wipe out your sins, listen to my advice, yes, to my command.  The only thing for you to do is to forgive and to renew your heart…As long as you forgive, all will be well,” (Luther 65). 
The Old Testament story of Jacob and his twin brother, Esau, found in Genesis 25-33, provides another example.  Esau, the “manly man,” came in one day from the fields.  He asked Jacob to make him some food.  Jacob, who was “Mr. Mom,” sold Esau some beans in exchange for the larger inheritance.  When their father, Isaac, was dying, Isaac ordered two deer to be killed and eaten before dividing up the inheritance.  Jacob and their mother deceived Isaac into giving Jacob the larger inheritance (which involved filleting the flesh of the deer and putting it on Jacob’s hands).  Jacob ended up having to run for his life to a foreign land.  Many years passed before Jacob returned to his home, before God told Jacob to return to his homeland.  When he did, his brother, Esau, came running at him and hugged and kissed him.  Esau had forgiven his brother.
In 1543 Martin Luther made mention of the Judensau, or Jew Pig, at Wittenberg.  The Judensau is usually a depiction of Jews in various disgusting activities involving swine.  These Judensau are considered anti-Semitic.  The Nazis revived the Judensau in the late 1930s.  As we all know, the Nazis tragically exterminated millions of Jews in the early part of the 20th century.  A most surprising thing happened in 1988 when a debate began on whether to remove the Judensau that is located at the Wittenberg church because of the horrible nature the Jews faced fifty years before.  Consequently, a bronze plaque was placed in the pavement of the walkway memorializing the death and torture of the Jews under the name of God (Lopez).  The Jewish community believes it’s very important to forgive someone because God doesn’t forgive our sins until we forgive those who have sinned against us (which sounds familiar) (Graubart).  The Jewish community forgave the Germans by permitting them to leave the sculpture up, but also installing a bronze plaque to memorialize the millions of deaths the Jews faced under the Christians.  This plaque also states that Germans and Jews today are tolerant of each other and respectful of each other (Winkler).  It’s very ironic that Martin Luther seemed to have some very anti-Semitic views.  He believed all Jews needed to be banished from Christian society (Trachtenberg 219). 
It’s very dangerous to assume that we are without sin.  1 John 1:8 states, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.  If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness,” (Bible Across America 2151).  Those who do not worship fall into this sort of deceit.  We as humans cannot recover knowing ourselves unless we know God (Simcox 74).  At the conclusion of this paper, we will discuss the importance to reciting the Lord’s Prayer regularly.
The sixth petition, “Lead us not into temptation,” is pretty self-explanatory.  We pray to God to not let us fall back on our sins anymore.  There are two types of temptations (or trials as Luther calls it).  The first temptation is the “left hand” temptation, or the one that incites us to have anger, hatred, and impatience.  The most famous story about impatience in the Bible is the when the people of Moses were wandering the wilderness for forty years.  During those forty years, Moses’ patience was tested many times.  Moses said in Exodus 16:8, “’You will know that it was the Lord when he gives you meat to eat in the evening and all the bread you want in the morning, because he has heard your grumbling against him,’” (Bible Across America 134).  The “right hand” temptation is one of unchastity, lust, pride, and greed.  These ideas come from Psalm 91:7, which states that a thousand men may fall at the left hand, but ten thousand fall at the right hand. 
Later, in the Personal Prayer Book (which was published after his excommunication from the Catholic Church), Luther states that there are three temptations: of the flesh, of the world, and of the devil.  He prays to God to help people not overeat (sin of gluttony), not get drunk, not sleep too much, or be lazy: all of these are sins of the flesh.  He prays to God to protect us from seeking honor and power on the earth.  He even asks God to keep us from getting into positions of power.  Does Luther pray that we should not seek positions in government offices?  Shouldn’t there be some sort of hierarchy or order?  Without some sort of government, there would be anarchy.  Luther was not stating this.  He was referring to the honor and the “messiah” complex or the “god” complex that some people in authority positions get when they have been in a position of power for a long time. 
Erwin Kurth, in his book called Catechetical Helps, wrote that temptation is a test put upon us by God to prove and improve our strength.  “A weight is attached to a rope, not to break it, but to prove it.  Pressure is applied to a boiler, not to burst it, but to certify its power of resistance.  Temptations are intended to do more than merely prove; they are meant to improve,” (Kurth 129).
The very last petition, “but deliver us from evil,” sums up the entire Lord’s Prayer.  Luther says in his sermon that, “we should pray for deliverance from evil so that trials [or temptations] and sin may cease and that God’s will may be done, and his kingdom come,” (Luther 76).  In Luther’s Personal Prayer Book, he states, “Deliver us… in death and on Judgment Day, from your severe condemnation,” (Tunseth 53).  He goes on to pray to God to protect us from sudden death, fire and flood, lighting, hail, hunger, famine, war, and bloodshed.  He asks God to protect us from plagues, pestilence, disease, and other sicknesses.
It’s very important to say this prayer in church, since it’s from Scripture, and that Jesus, who is God in the flesh, gave it to his disciples to pray.  The Lord’s Prayer is God’s own way of showing us how to pray.  These things give us a glimpse of what is in Jesus’ mind, and how important they are compared to other things Jesus believes (Golloday 156).  The entire Lord’s Prayer seems to push you forward as you recite it (Schramm 133). 
Our Father who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us,
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.
Each line seems to push you toward the next one, and finally ending with the word, Amen, which means, “verily,” or, “Yes, Lord, let it be so.”  It seems to have a poetic feel to it, and is generally portrayed as an ancient poem.  The meter is irregular, but if set correctly, it could be sung. 
One should note that the final three lines of the Lord’s Prayer aren’t actually petitions, since they didn’t come from Christ himself.  These lines seem to come from 1 Chronicles 29:11, which says, “Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours,” (Bible Across America 816).  A common theme in Chronicles is that God is portrayed as a king (Harper Collins Study Bible 644), and this verse very clearly shows this.  The worshipping community added this to the Lord’s Prayer.  We should be careful, however, not to dismiss this last portion (Simcox 104).  It is a very valuable part of the prayer, and even brings a nice refreshing ending to a prayer of pleading.
The Lord’s Prayer is simple, easy to memorize, and very important to the life of Christians.  As mentioned before, Jesus himself gave this prayer to humans to recite, tweak, and pray to God.  Martin Luther made this prayer much easier to understand throughout his ministry.  Without him, who knows how we would be interpreting this Lord’s Prayer today.




Works Cited
Bible Across America. New International Version. Grand Rapids. Zondervan, 2008, Print.
Graubart, Jean. "A Jewish Perspective on Forgiveness." Journey Films. Fezter Institute, n.d. Web. 4 Apr 2012. <http://www.journeyfilms.com/files/A Jewish Perspective on Forgiveness.pdf>.

Golloday, Roberto. Sermons On The Catechism: The Lord's Prayer. Columbus: Lutheran Book Concern, 1921. 155-67. Print.
Harper Collins Study Bible. 1 ed. Wayne A. Meeks. London: HarperCollins Publishers 1989. Print.

"Judensau." Zionism and Israel - Encyclopedic Dictionary. Zionism and Israel Information Center, 10 Mar 2009. Web. 4 Apr 2012. <http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Judensau.htm>.

Kurth, Erwin. Catechetical Helps. 4th. New York: The Studio Press, 1935. 129. Print.
Lopez, Billie. Traveler's guide to Jewish Germany. Pelican Publishing, 1998. Web. <http://books.google.com/books?id=WDnbzk4-BmkC&pg=PA259

Luther, Martin. "An Exposition of the Lord's Prayer." Luther's Works. 42. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969. 19-81. Print.

__________. "The Small Catechism." Concordia. Ed. Paul Timothy McCain. Pocket. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006. 452. Print.

__________. "Personal Prayer Book." Praying For Reform. Ed. Scott Tunseth. Augsburg Fortress Press: Minneapolis, 2005. 25. Print.

"Luther's Relationship with the Jews." A Mighty Fortress Is Our God: Martin Luther. KDG Wittenberg, 07 July 2003. Web. 4 Apr 2012.  <http://www.luther.de/en/kontext/juden.html>.

"Nelson Mandela Biography-Facts, Life, Birthday, Life Story." bio. A&E Television Networks, LLC, n.d. Web. 3 Apr 2012. <http://www.biography.com/people/nelson-mandela-9397017?page=4>.

Schramm, W.E. What Lutherans Believe. Columbus: The Lutheran Book Concern, Print.
Simcox, Carroll E. Living The Lord's Prayer: A Study of Basic Christianity. New York: Morehouse-Gorham Co., 1951. Print.

Tanner, Henry. "POPE IS SHOT IN CAR IN VATICAN SQUARE; SURGEONS TERM CONDIION; TURK, AN ESCAPED MURDERER, IS SEIZED 'GUARDED'; 2 BULLETS HIT PONTIFF." New York Times 14 May 1981, n. pag. Web. 2 Apr. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/14/world/pope-shot-car-vatican-square-surgeons-term-condiion-turk-escaped-murderer-seized.html>.

Trachtenberg, Joshua. The Devil and The Jews. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1943. 219. Print.

United States. USDA. Pyramid Servings: How Much? How Many?. Web. <http://www.fns.usda.gov/tn/Resources/nibbles/pyramid_servings.pdf>.

Winkler, Matthias. "A Medieval Trace of German Anti-Judaism." DW n.d., n. pag. Web. 9 Apr. 2012. <http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,1537282,00.html>.

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Psalms 50-59

I think we just dealt with Psalm 51 in church last week.


According to my notes, this is a psalm of confession.  Both kinds of sin are documented in this psalm.

1.) Original sin
2.) Act of sin
Psalm 51:3For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.
Sin is always, and always will be, there.

Psalm 51:5Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

This is Original Sin, which is documented in Article II of the Augsburg Confession, which my church adult Sunday School is discussing at this time period.

Psalm 51:10Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me.

 This is a song that the Senior Choir at church does every so often.  It's a great one.  I can't seem to find a version of it on YouTube.

Psalm 55:2Listen to my prayer, O God, do not ignore my plea; hear me and answer my.   My thoughts trouble me and I am distraught.



Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Luther Versus Zwingli: A Critical Comparison of The Eucharist


[This paper was for my Reformation and Enlightenment class at Capital University, where I'm seeking a minor degree in religion.]

Jesse Harmon
RELIG 321
March 15, 2012
Luther Versus Zwingli: A Critical Comparison of the Eucharist
Luther and Zwingli’s views on the Eucharist, or communion, will be discussed.  This essay will compare Zwingli’s On True and False Religion, and Luther’s The Large Catechism.  Although both Luther and Zwingli were both very prominent protestant leaders who agreed on many things, Zwingli’s view on the Lord’s Supper was vastly different, and more liberal than Martin Luther’s view.
Martin Luther was born on November 10, 1483 in Eisleben, Germany.  He was originally a Catholic monk, who taught at the University of Wittenberg in Saxony, Germany. On July 17, 1505 after a near death experience, he decided to enter a monastery after studying law for a year.  As a professor, he lectured on various aspects of the Bible including Paul’s letters.  There were two specific verses that really struck him.  These verses were Romans 1:16-17, which states, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.  For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it written: ‘The righteous will live by faith.’” 
This verse, along with the writings of Erasmus, set off Luther to write the 95 Theses, which he famously nailed to the doors of the University of Wittenberg, thus beginning the protestant reformation Luther died shortly after a stroke stole his ability to speak (Gallar, 2002.)
Ulrich Zwingli was born just nearly six weeks after the birth of Martin Luther, in Wildhaus, Switzerland, on January 1, 1484.  He is considered the leader of the Swiss reformation movement, which later became known as the Anabaptist movement.   Zwingli was ordained at the age of twenty-two in 1506.  He and Luther famously debated in Marburg in 1529.  They both agreed on fourteen of the fifteen debate topics, but clearly clashed on the discussion about the Eucharist, or communion.  Zwingli, who was very heavily into the politics of the time, was very stern on his belief that communion was nothing but symbolism of the actual event that took place the day before Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane.  Zwingli died after being killed in a bloody battle fought by the Catholics against the Protestants in Switzerland.
            Martin Luther virtually started the reformation movement.  Even though Erasmus had previously written pamphlets on reforming the Catholic Church, Martin Luther really set things off by nailing his 95 Theses to the front doors of Wittenberg University in Germany.  Luther disagreed from withholding the cup from laity.  This practice began in 1416 AD ("Roman catholic doctrinal.”)  Martin Luther’s The Large Catechism, which was written to go a little more in depth on the Christian tradition, asked a question.  “What is the Sacrament of the Altar?”  Luther’s response is, “It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, in and under the bread and wine, which we Christians are commanded by Christ’s Word to eat and to drink.”  As stated, Luther obviously believed that both the host and the cup should be taken by the communed.  Luther also states, “Take, eat; this is My body…Drink of it, all of you; this is My blood of the new testament,” (Luther, 1529.)
            According to The Lutheran Confessions blog, the Council of Lambeth in 1281 outlawed the serving of the cup to parishioners (McCain 2007.)  Why would the church withhold the cup from the laity?  Paul Timothy McCain, author of The Lutheran Confessions blog, as well as editor of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod’s edition of the Book of Concord, stated that the bread, or host, was good enough to serve to the laity.  However, it appears to the reader that McCain didn’t quite state exactly why the cup was withheld. 
A History of Christianity holds the answer.  In this book, the author states that the denial of the cup to the laity was because of the danger of simply spilling the wine Since Catholics believe in transubstantiation (which is the actual conversion of bread and wine to flesh and blood), many were afraid of spilling the newly converted blood.  Thus, priests started only serving the bread to the laity.  (Latourette 1975.)  Luther believes that, “[just] as we have said that Baptism is not simply water, so here also we say that though the Sacrament is bread and wine, it is not mere bread and wine, such as are ordinarily served at the table,” Luther stated after answering the question, “Now, what is the Sacrament of the Altar?”  Luther believed all believers should receive both the body and the blood of Jesus Christ, just like the original apostles did. 
            Luther believed the only sacrifice that one should have was at the Lord’s Table, and nothing else.  He believed the Catholic Church’s view on “good works and a sacrifice” was the “most wicked of all,” according to Trevin Wax’s blog post called, “Luther vs. Zwingli 2: Luther on the Lord’s Supper,” (Wax, 2008.)
            Zwingli (1484-1531), a much more mild and subdued Swiss man, was at work also reforming the church.  In his book called, On True and False Religion, (from 1525), he states his positions on the Eucharist.  First, he believes that, “[the church] will not even brook the question whether the body of Christ is in the sacrament of the Eucharist in actual, physical, or essential form,” (Zwingli, 1525.)  He states, “…I do not think we have to listen to those who are so bold as to say, ‘I have always firmly believed that in this sacrament I eat the essential body, or the bodily and sensible flesh, of Christ.’”  Zwingli is saying that he believes we should not listen to those who believe in transubstantiation (Zwingli 1525.) 
The Catholic Church believed the bread and the wine changed form into the body and blood of Christ.  They believed the accidents, or the senses, sensed the consistency of bread and wine.  Luther believed that the bread and wine contained the body and blood of Christ, but wasn’t actually converted into flesh and blood (a term called consubstantiation).  Zwingli believed the bread and wine symbolized the body and blood of Christ, with no conversion of bread to flesh, and wine to blood at all.  Zwingli later said, “I have no use for that notion of a real and true body that does not exist physically, definitely and distinctly in some places, and that sort of nonsense got up by word triflers.”  The Gospel of St. John, chapter six, verse sixty-three tells us, “It’s the spirit that gives life; the flesh is of no avail.”  This text shows that Zwingli thinks that it’s only the spirit that will save people (Payne, 1984.)  Luther, Zwingli claimed that many of his views were normal trains of thought. 
Zwingli believed that since Jesus rose into Heaven (where there is no time), and no longer on Earth (where there is time), Jesus is no longer limited by space and time.  Thus, he cannot be both in Heaven and on Earth at the same time, proving that he cannot be part of the bread and the wine of communion. 
There was no need for ceremonies and rituals since the bread and wine weren’t actually flesh and blood (Wax, 2008.)  “It is eaten spiritually,” Zwingli wrote.  “For body and spirit are such essentially different things that whichever one you take, it cannot be the other,” (Zwingli, 1525.)
            One of the more interesting things in On True and False Religion is when Zwingli states, “They err…in applying faith to things of sense, and in saying that through these it brings us certainty.”  He is quite clearly stating here that our senses should not govern our faith.  Zwingli was not troubled by his own soul like Luther was.  Luther was paranoid about his sins, while Zwingli wasn’t.  Zwingli was more worried about the salvation of his people, while Luther was more worried about the salvation of himself.
            What’s the purpose of all of this?  It is to show that Zwingli really took things far when he started his own reformation movement.  He claims that the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not present in the Eucharist.  This is completely against scripture which says, “…he took bread, gave thanks, and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.’  In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, ‘this cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you,” (The Gospel of St. Luke, the twenty second chapter, versus nineteen through twenty.)  The word is is the third person singular present form of the infinitive to be.  Is does not mean “not really.”  Zwingli had it all wrong when he decided he had had enough with the Catholic Church himself.  If he hadn’t started his own, there would probably be only two church bodies in the world today: Holy Catholic Church, and the Lutheran Church. 



















Works Cited
Gallar, J. S. (2002, November 05). Martin Luther and the reformation. Retrieved from https://webspace.utexas.edu/gallerjs/www/LutherReformationLecture.html

Latourette, K. S. (1975). The history of Christianity: Volume 1. (p. 531). New York, NY:             HarperCollins Publishers. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=Q4pzuXCiDdYC&pg=RA1-PA231&lpg=RA1-PA231&dq=denying cup to             laity&source=bl&ots=iRpULaYCId&sig=dul-Zeau5SOIF1QQaDwAH9DPtCw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=g5FeT_maPIPc0QGt8oHJBw            &ved=0CCoQ6AEwAg

Luther, M. (2005). The large catechism. In P. McCain (Ed.), Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions (pp. 622-624). Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.
McCain, P. T. (2007, August 07). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://bookofconcord.blogspot.com/2007/08/round-table-23-various-abuses-corrected.html

Payne, J. B. (1984). Zwingli and Luther: The giant vs. Hercules. Christianity Today International/Christian History magazine, Retrieved from http://www.christiantodaylibrary.com

Roman catholic doctrinal evolution: Doctrinal flip flops. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.bible.ca/catholic-flip-flops-eucharist-withholding-communion-cup.htm
Wax, T. (2008, February 11). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2008/02/11/luther-vs-zwingli-2-luther-on-the-lords-supper/

Wax, T. (2008, February 12). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2008/02/12/luther-vs-zwingli-3-zwingli-on-the-lords-supper/

Zwingli, U. (1525). On true and false religion. In D. R. Janz (Ed.), A Reformation Reader (pp. 193-198)