ChiRho
12th April 2005, 12:25 PM
Rick Ritchie writes in a recent article on www.oldsolar.com about the Lord's Supper and highlights one of Luther's most hilarious responses to those Scripture-twisting rascals that insist on bowing before Reason, Prince of this world.
"Some of Luther's best writing is on this very subject. Luther said that Zwingli argued against him in the following manner. Zwingli argued that "This is my body" must be read to say "This represents my body." According to him, "is" means "represents" here. After claiming that this substitution of words is necessary, they argue that there is no passage of Scripture that says that Christ's body is in the Supper. Then they say that they are willing to be "humbly instructed" if the point can be proved from Scripture. Luther says that this is a sneaky way to argue, offering another example of how such reasoning might be used:
This is certainly an extraordinary situation! It is just as if I denied that God had created the heavens and the earth, and asserted with Aristotle and Pliny and other heathen that the world existed from eternity, but someone came and held Moses under my nose, Genesis 1 [:11] "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"; I would try to make the text read: "God" now should mean the same as "cuckoo," "created" the same as "ate," and "the heavens and the earth" the same as "the hedge sparrow, feathers and all." The word of Moses thus would read according to Luther's text, "In the beginning the cuckoo ate the hedge sparrow, feathers and all," and could not possibly mean, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." What a marvelous art this would be—one with which rascals are quite familiar! Or, if I denied that the Son of God had become man, and someone confronted me with John 1 [:14], "The word became flesh," suppose I were to say: Let "Word" mean "a gambrel" and "flesh" "a mallet," and thus the text must now read, "The gambrel became a mallet." And if my conscience tried to reproach me, saying, "You take a good deal of liberty with your interpretation, Sir Martin, but—but—" etc., I would press until I became red in the face, and say, "Keep quiet, you traitor with your 'but,' I don't want the people to notice that I have such a bad conscience!" Then I would boast and clap my hands, saying, "The Christians have no Scripture which proves that God's Word became flesh." But I would also turn around and, bowing low in humility, offer gladly to be instructed, if they would show me with the Scripture that I have just finished twisting around. Ah, what a rumpus I would stir up among Jews and Christians, in the New and the Old Testaments, if such brazenness were allowed me!"
Old Solar (http://www.oldsolar.com)
Pax Christi,
ChiRho
"Some of Luther's best writing is on this very subject. Luther said that Zwingli argued against him in the following manner. Zwingli argued that "This is my body" must be read to say "This represents my body." According to him, "is" means "represents" here. After claiming that this substitution of words is necessary, they argue that there is no passage of Scripture that says that Christ's body is in the Supper. Then they say that they are willing to be "humbly instructed" if the point can be proved from Scripture. Luther says that this is a sneaky way to argue, offering another example of how such reasoning might be used:
This is certainly an extraordinary situation! It is just as if I denied that God had created the heavens and the earth, and asserted with Aristotle and Pliny and other heathen that the world existed from eternity, but someone came and held Moses under my nose, Genesis 1 [:11] "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"; I would try to make the text read: "God" now should mean the same as "cuckoo," "created" the same as "ate," and "the heavens and the earth" the same as "the hedge sparrow, feathers and all." The word of Moses thus would read according to Luther's text, "In the beginning the cuckoo ate the hedge sparrow, feathers and all," and could not possibly mean, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." What a marvelous art this would be—one with which rascals are quite familiar! Or, if I denied that the Son of God had become man, and someone confronted me with John 1 [:14], "The word became flesh," suppose I were to say: Let "Word" mean "a gambrel" and "flesh" "a mallet," and thus the text must now read, "The gambrel became a mallet." And if my conscience tried to reproach me, saying, "You take a good deal of liberty with your interpretation, Sir Martin, but—but—" etc., I would press until I became red in the face, and say, "Keep quiet, you traitor with your 'but,' I don't want the people to notice that I have such a bad conscience!" Then I would boast and clap my hands, saying, "The Christians have no Scripture which proves that God's Word became flesh." But I would also turn around and, bowing low in humility, offer gladly to be instructed, if they would show me with the Scripture that I have just finished twisting around. Ah, what a rumpus I would stir up among Jews and Christians, in the New and the Old Testaments, if such brazenness were allowed me!"
Old Solar (http://www.oldsolar.com)
Pax Christi,
ChiRho