The Consensus of Tigurinus: John Calvin

 [This is a repost to correct any earlier mistakes].

The following confession of faith is an agreement made by the churches of the Swiss Reformation in Zurich, representing the Zwinglians, and Geneva, representing the Calvinists. James I. Packer has said that Cranmer and the other English Reformers of this period were not unaware of this agreement and probably had it in mind when formulating their own theology of the sacrament. Packer says,

 

Dix in reply (Cranmer Dixit et non timuit: Church Quarterly Review, April 1948, pp. 145ff.; July 1948, pp. 44ff., and published separately) tried to drive a wedge between Cranmer and Bucer, arguing that Cranmer's view of the eucharistic reception of Christ was (a) in harmony with that of the contemporary Swiss school, people like Hooper and Bullinger, and (b) out of line with Bucer's. He was more convincing on (a) than on (b), though he was wrong to think that by proving (a) he confirmed his thesis that Cranmer was a Zwinglian: Swiss doctrine had advanced well beyond memorialism by the 1540's. (Dix never noticed the Consensus Tigurinus, let alone saw its significance.) After this, Dr. C.C. Richardson (Zwingli and Cranmer on the Eucharist: Cranmer Dixit et Contradicixit, Evanston, 1949) maintained that it was nominalist philosophy which moved Cranmer and Zwingli to reject the real presence and corporal feeding on Christ, and Dr. Mascall would evidently like to agree (op. cit. pp. 117-21). But with Cranmer, at any rate, the motives prompting this rejection were not philosophical and rationalistic, but biblical and Christological: he was seeking to do justice to the view of the eucharist forced on him by the Bible and its patristic expositors, that it is a means whereby God makes present to our faith and savingly imparts to our souls (not a part of Christ, but) 'whole Christ', God, man, and Mediator, in all the power of His incarnation, passion, resurrection, and ascension; so that it is a means of grace in a far richer sense than expositors of the real presence ever suspected. (James I. Packer, "Cranmer in Some Recent Writing," The Work of Thomas Cranmer. Vol. 2. Ed. G.E. Duffield. (Berkshire: Sutton Courtney Press, 1964). Pp. xl-xli.

Clearly then, even the Anglo-Catholic theologian Dom Gregory Dix thought that Cranmer was a Zwinglian. Of course this means that Dix would never try to say that Cranmer taught or believed in real presence in the elements themselves. James I. Packer thought Dix was wrong but affirmed that Cranmer did not teach real presence and that Zwinglianism itself did not teach a bare memorial in the 1540's. The Consensus Tigurinus is proof enough that the distinctions between the Calvinist view, the Cranmerian view, and the Zwinglian view were not insurmountable and were in actuality closer than Anglo-Catholics are willing to admit.

 

The Consensus Tigurinus

 

John Calvin (1549) translated by Henry Beveridge

 
Mutual Consent in Regard to the Sacraments Between the Ministers of the Church of Zurich and John Calvin, Minister of the Church of Geneva. Now published by those who framed it.


Article 1. The Whole Spiritual Government of the Church Leads us to Christ.


Seeing that Christ is the end of the law, and the knowledge of him comprehends in itself the whole sum of the gospel, there is no doubt that the object of the whole spiritual government of the Church is to lead us to Christ, as it is by him alone we come to God, who is the final end of a happy life. Whosoever deviates from this in the slightest degree, can never speak duly or appositely of any ordinances of God.

Article 2. A True Knowledge of the Sacraments from the Knowledge of Christ.

As the sacraments are appendages of the gospel, he only can discourse aptly and usefully of their nature, virtue, office, and benefit, who begins with Christ: and that not by adverting cursorily to the name of Christ, but by truly holding for what end he was given us by the Father, and what blessings he has conferred upon us.

Article 3. Nature of the Knowledge of Christ.

We must hold therefore that Christ, being the eternal Son of God, and of the same essence and glory with the Father, assumed our flesh, to communicate to us by right of adoption that which he possessed by nature, namely, to make us sons of God. This is done when ingrafted by faith into the body of Christ, and that by the agency of the Holy Spirit we are first counted righteous by a free imputation of righteousness, and then regenerated to a new life: whereby being formed again in the image of our heavenly Father, we renounce the old man.

Article 4. Christ a Priest and King.

Thus Christ, in his human nature, is to be considered as our priest, who expiated our sins by the one sacrifice of his death, put away all our transgressions by his obedience, provided a perfect righteousness for us, and now intercedes for us, that we may have access to God. He is to be considered as a repairer, who, by the agency of his Spirit, reforms whatever is vicious in us, that we may cease to live to the world and the flesh, and God himself may live in us. He is to be considered as a king, who enriches us with all kinds of blessings, governs and defends us by his power, provides us with spiritual weapons, delivers us from all harm, and rules and guides us by the sceptre of his mouth. And he is to be so considered, that he may raise us to himself, the true God, and to the Father, until the fulfilment of what is finally to take place, viz., God be all in all.

Article 5. How Christ Communicates Himself to Us.

Moreover, that Christ may thus exhibit himself to us and produce these effects in us, he must be made one with us, and we must be ingrafted into his body. He does not infuse his life into us unless he is our head, and from him the whole body, fitly joined together through every joint of supply, according to his working, maketh increase of the body in the proportion of each member.

Article 6. Spiritual Communion. Institution of the Sacraments.

The spiritual communion which we have with the Son of God takes place when he, dwelling in us by his Spirit, makes all who believe capable of all the blessings which reside in him. In order to testify this, both the preaching of the gospel was appointed, and the use of the sacraments committed to us, namely, the sacraments of holy Baptism and the holy Supper.

Article 7. The Ends of the Sacraments

The ends of the sacraments are to be marks and badges of Christian profession and fellowship or fraternity, to be incitements to gratitude and exercises of faith and a godly life; in short, to be contracts binding us to this. But among other ends the principal one is, that God may, by means of them, testify, represent, and seal his grace to us. For although they signify nothing else than is announced to us by the Word itself, yet it is a great matter, first, that there is submitted to our eye a kind of living images which make a deeper impression on the senses, by bringing the object in a manner directly before them, while they bring the death of Christ and all his benefits to our remembrance, that faith may be the better exercised; and, secondly, that what the mouth of God had announced is, as it were, confirmed and ratified by seals.

Article 8. Gratitude.

Now, seeing that these things which the Lord has given as testimonies and seals of his grace are true, he undoubtedly truly performs inwardly by his Spirit that which the sacraments figure to our eyes and other senses; in other words, we obtain possession of Christ as the fountain of all blessings, both in order that we may be reconciled to God by means of his death, be renewed by his Spirit to holiness of life, in short, obtain righteousness and salvation; and also in order that we may give thanks for the blessings which were once exhibited on the cross, and which we daily receive by faith.

Article 9. The Signs and the Things Signified Not Disjoined but Distinct.

Wherefore, though we distinguish, as we ought, between the signs and the things signified, yet we do not disjoin the reality from the signs, but acknowledge that all who in faith embrace the promises there offered receive Christ spiritually, with his spiritual gifts, while those who had long been made partakers of Christ continue and renew that communion.

Article 10. The Promise Principally to Be Looked To in the Sacraments.

And it is proper to look not to the bare signs, but rather to the promise thereto annexed. As far, therefore, as our faith in the promise there offered prevails, so far will that virtue and efficacy of which we speak display itself. Thus the substance of water, bread, and wine, by no means offers Christ to us, nor makes us capable of his spiritual gifts. The promise rather is to be looked to, whose office it is to lead us to Christ by the direct way of faith, faith which makes us partakers of Christ.

Article 11. We Are Not to Stand Gazing on the Elements.

This refutes the error of those who stand gazing on the elements, and attach their confidence of salvation to them; seeing that the sacraments separated from Christ are but empty shows, and a voice is distinctly heard throughout proclaiming that we must adhere to none but Christ alone, and seek the gift of salvation from none but him.

Article 12. The Sacraments Effect Nothing by Themselves.

Besides, if any good is conferred upon us by the sacraments, it is not owing to any proper virtue in them, even though in this you should include the promise by which they are distinguished. For it is God alone who acts by his Spirit. When he uses the instrumentality of the sacraments, he neither infuses his own virtue into them nor derogates in any respect from the effectual working of his Spirit, but, in adaptation to our weakness, uses them as helps; in such manner, however, that the whole power of acting remains with him alone.

Article 13. God Uses the Instrument, but All the Virtue Is His.

Wherefore, as Paul reminds us, that neither he that planteth nor he that watereth is any thing, but God alone that giveth the increase; so also it is to be said of the sacraments that they are nothing, because they will profit nothing, unless God in all things make them effectual. They are indeed instruments by which God acts efficaciously when he pleases, yet so that the whole work of our salvation must be ascribed to him alone.

Article 14. The Whole Accomplished by Christ.

We conclude, then, that it is Christ alone who in truth baptizes inwardly, who in the Supper makes us partakers of himself, who, in short, fulfils what the sacraments figure, and uses their aid in such manner that the whole effect resides in his Spirit.

Article 15. How the Sacraments Confirm.

Thus the sacraments are sometimes called seals, and are said to nourish, confirm, and advance faith, and yet the Spirit alone is properly the seal, and also the beginner and finisher of faith. For all these attributes of the sacraments sink down to a lower place, so that not even the smallest portion of our salvation is transferred to creatures or elements.

Article 16. All Who Partake of the Sacraments Do Not Partake of the Reality.

Besides, we carefully teach that God does not exert his power indiscriminately in all who receive the sacraments, but only in the elect. For as he enlightens unto faith none but those whom he hath foreordained to life, so by the secret agency of his Spirit he makes the elect receive what the sacraments offer.

Article 17. The Sacraments Do Not Confer Grace.

By this doctrine is overthrown that fiction of the sophists which teaches that the sacraments confer grace on all who do not interpose the obstacle of mortal sin. For besides that in the sacraments nothing is received except by faith, we must also hold that the grace of God is by no means so annexed to them that whoso receives the sign also gains possession of the thing. For the signs are administered alike to reprobate and elect, but the reality reaches the latter only.

Article 18. The Gifts Offered to All, but Received by Believers Only.


It is true indeed that Christ with his gifts is offered to all in common, and that the unbelief of man not overthrowing the truth of God, the sacraments always retain their efficacy; but all are not capable of receiving Christ and his gifts. Wherefore nothing is changed on the part of God, but in regard to man each receives according to the measure of his faith.

Article 19. Believers Before, and Without the Use of the Sacraments, Communicate with Christ.

As the use of the sacraments will confer nothing more on unbelievers than if they had abstained from it, nay, is only destructive to them, so without their use believers receive the reality which is there figured. Thus the sins of Paul were washed away by baptism, though they had been previously washed away. So likewise baptism was the laver of regeneration to Cornelius, though he had already received the Holy Spirit. So in the Supper Christ communicates himself to us, though he had previously imparted himself, and perpetually remains in us. For seeing that each is enjoined to examine himself, it follows that faith is required of each before coming to the sacrament. Faith is not without Christ; but inasmuch as faith is confirmed and increased by the sacraments, the gifts of God are confirmed in us, and thus Christ in a manner grows in us and we in him.

Article 20. The Benefit Not Always Received in the Act of Communicating.

The advantage which we receive from the sacraments ought by no means to be restricted to the time at which they are administered to us, just as if the visible sign, at the moment when it is brought forward, brought the grace of God along with it. For those who were baptized when mere infants, God regenerates in childhood or adolescence, occasionally even in old age. Thus the utility of baptism is open to the whole period of life, because the promise contained in it is perpetually in force. And it may sometimes happen that the use of the holy Supper, which, from thoughtlessness or slowness of heart does little good at the time, afterward bears its fruit.

Article 21. No Local Presence Must Be Imagined.

We must guard particularly against the idea of any local presence. For while the signs are present in this world, are seen by the eyes and handled by the hands, Christ, regarded as man, must be sought nowhere else than in Heaven, and not otherwise than with the mind and eye of faith. Wherefore it is a perverse and impious superstition to inclose him under the elements of this world.

Article 22. Explanation of the Words "This Is My Body."

Those who insist that the formal words of the Supper, "This is my body; this is my blood," are to be taken in what they call the precisely literal sense, we repudiate as preposterous interpreters. For we hold it out of controversy that they are to be taken figuratively, the bread and wine receiving the name of that which they signify. Nor should it be thought a new or unwonted thing to transfer the name of things figured by metonymy [modern spelling: metonymy] to the sign, as similar modes of expression occur throughout the Scriptures, and we by so saying assert nothing but what is found in the most ancient and most approved writers of the Church.

Article 23. Of the Eating of the Body.

When it is said that Christ, by our eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood, which are here figured, feeds our souls through faith by the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are not to understand it as if any mingling or transfusion of substance took place, but that we draw life from the flesh once offered in sacrifice and the blood shed in expiation.

Article 24. Transubstantiation and Other Follies.

In this way are refuted not only the fiction of the Papists concerning transubstantiation, but all the gross figments and futile quibbles which either derogate from his celestial glory or are in some degree repugnant to the reality of his human nature. For we deem it no less absurd to place Christ under the bread or couple him with the bread, than to transubstantiate the bread into his body.

Article 25. The Body of Christ Locally in Heaven.

And that no ambiguity may remain when we say that Christ is to be sought in Heaven, the expression implies and is understood by us to intimate distance of place. For though philosophically speaking there is no place above the skies, yet as the body of Christ, bearing the nature and mode of a human body, is finite and is contained in Heaven as its place, it is necessarily as distant from us in point of space as Heaven is from Earth.

Article 26. Christ Not to Be Adored in the Bread.

If it is not lawful to affix Christ in our imagination to the bread and the wine, much less is it lawful to worship him in the bread. For although the bread is held forth to us as a symbol and pledge of the communion which we have with Christ, yet as it is a sign and not the thing itself, and has not the thing either included in it or fixed to it, those who turn their minds towards it, with the view of worshipping Christ, make an idol of it.

Addendum:  See also, Wikipedia, Consensus Tigurinus.  Note that the document was published in 1549, well within Archbishop Cranmer's time frame.  Cranmer would have been aware of it and Wikipedia says it was received well in England.


See also,  Phillip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII:  Modern Chrisitanity:  The Swiss Reformation, § 132. The Eucharistic Controversies. Calvin and Westphal. Christian Classics Ethereal Library.

D. Broughton Knox: Do the Sacraments Save?

. . . The soul feeds on Christ, the living bread. --David Broughton Knox

Do the Sacraments “Justify” or “Save”? Good Question!

Most of us with knee jerk reaction would immediately say that the sacraments do not save. We think that any idea of a sacrament saving anyone must be a Roman Catholic doctrine. At one time I would have denied that baptism and the Lord's supper were anything more than mere ceremonies reminding us of what Christ did in His ministry on earth and in His atoning death for the sins of the whole world. Since then I have become a Calvinist and later a Reformed Anglican.

Recently, I've been reading D. Broughton Knox: Selected Works, Volume III: The Christian Life, Tony Payne and Karen Beilharz, eds., (Kingsford: Matthias Media: 2006). I have major problems with several of D. Broughton Knox's theological positions including his tendency to emphasize following the example of Jesus more than justification by faith alone and his view that faith is more than assent. How can we assent to something we do not believe? I also have a problem with some statements Knox made about the sacraments being unnecessary in which he implied that we ought to throw out the sacraments. I got that feeling from the emphasis of Broughton Knox's son, David Paul Knox. I also strongly disagree with Broughton Knox on the issue of the extent of the atonement. Unfortunately, Knox was an Amyraldian and believed in a general atonement. However, in reading volume three I'm finding that perhaps David Knox has misunderstood or misinterpreted his father's views on the sacraments.

I was pleasantly surprised when I began reading the section on justification by faith only. The trouble with Broughton's theology is that it is often eclectic and disorganized. He never wrote a systematic theology himself and the Selected Works are basically an ad hoc collection of his lectures, radio addresses and papers. One gets the impression that the editors have influenced how Knox is understood and read by the order in which the material is presented and put together as well as what got put into the publication and what did not. What is worthy of note here is that Knox did emphasize the doctrine of justification by faith alone, although at times one has to wonder if Knox confuses Law with Gospel, particularly in the chapter where he says that the Gospel is “news” but not necessarly “good news”. While his exegetical point is well taken that the original language word for Gospel is often only “news” not necessarily “good” news. That's true of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament as well. The trouble is Knox thinks preaching judgment is part of the Gospel. That is in effect to confuse Law with Gospel.

But in reading the section on justification by faith Knox makes it clear that he does have a firm grasp of justification by faith alone. Sometimes I wonder if part of the problem is the way Australian theologians phrase things. At any rate, right in the midst of the chapter on justification by faith alone, Knox makes the astounding claim that the sacraments save! Before you holler, “Heresy!” take a long breath and consider the Reformed view of what a sacrament actually is. It seems that despite Knox's view that the sacraments are not necessary—his remark was in the context of world missions and cross cultural communication of the Gospel—he actually held to a Calvinist and Zwinglian view of the sacraments. In other words, the sacraments do save in one sense and they do not save in another. If we mean that the sacraments have some magical quality inherent within the elements of bread and wine, then that is the Roman Catholic view and is in fact heresy and unbiblical doctrine. However, if we understand that the sacraments are a metaphor for our spiritual union with Christ, then the sacraments do save. Without true faith baptism and the Lord's supper are meaningless and empty signs. For the Christian, however, the spiritual participation in Christ as the way to the Father, the water of life, the bread of heaven, etc., to eat and drink the blood of Christ is to focus on who Jesus Christ is and to feed on Him by faith. It is not the eating of bread and the drinking of wine that nourishes the soul but the spiritual union with Christ by faith that takes places in the sacrament. Bread and wine nourish the body but the sacrament nourishes and builds our faith in Christ because we spiritually eat and drink. It is our union with Christ that makes the sacrament salvific and effectual, not the physical eating and drinking of bread and wine.

Only a direct relation of the sacraments to the doctrine of justification by faith makes the sacraments justify, according to Broughton Knox:

A question suggests itself that, if works have no part in justification, why does the New Testament speak of the sacraments as bringing forgiveness and participation in Christ? For example, St Peter stated that baptism saves. [1 Peter 3:21] By it St Paul washed away his sins. [Acts 22:16] The Corinthians are told that, by partaking of the Lord's Supper, they participate in Christ himself. [1 Corinthians 10:16].

In baptism and the Lord's Supper, God's provision of forgiveness and spiritual sustenance in Christ is plainly depicted in the actions of the service and enunciated in the accompanying words. In these sacraments God holds out for acceptance his promises. They are, in fact, sacraments of the gospel. By them the gospel is preached and by them its benefits are appropriated. As faith takes hold of the promises, so God grants to the believer the promised blessing, as he has covenanted to do. . .

. . . The soul feeds on Christ, the living bread.

Thus the sacraments bring blessing because they are the exercise of faith toward God's promises which are exhibited in them. They only bring blessing so long as they are the expression of faith. As the expression of faith, they may properly be said to save, and are so spoken of in the New Testament. But if performed as merely works which God has enjoined, no promise is attached to them. For the performance of good works is not the way of a sinner's justification.

Selected Works, Volume Three, “Justification”, pp. 82-83.

In light of the this, it would do the reader well to read the entire Selected Works before jumping to any conclusions about the theology of D. B. Knox as a whole. Although I have strong disagreements with Broughton Knox at certain points—as I do as well with W. H. Griffith Thomas—the Selected Works is a necessary part of any Reformed Anglican's theological library. I highly recommend it to all.

May the peace of God be with you!

Charlie

The Selected Works is available at this link:  Selected Works.

--

Reasonable Christian Blog Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost; Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen. 1662 Book of Common Prayer

Sanctified by Sacraments? or Justified by Faith Alone? John Robbins Responds

[The following is an excerpt from the late John Robbins of The Trinity Foundation.  Robbins gave a talk on the presuppositional apologetics of Gordon H. Clark.  Amazingly, he mentions the issue of sanctified by sacraments, which had come up in a discussion I had with someone offline.  To read the original article click on, An Introduction to Gordon H. Clark. Charlie.]

Salvation is by faith alone. Faith is belief of the truth. God reveals truth. Faith, the act of believing, is a gift of God. “By his knowledge, my righteous servant shall justify many.”

Clark’s view of salvation, reflected in the Westminster Confession’s chapter on justification, is at odds with most of what passes for Christianity today. Popular Christianity decries knowledge. Clark points out that Peter says that we have received everything we need for life and godliness through knowledge. James says the Word of Truth regenerates us. Paul says we are justified through belief of the truth. Christ says we are sanctified by truth.

There are three popular theories of sanctification today: sanctification by works, sanctification by emotions, sanctification by sacraments. The first, sanctification by works, is sometimes expressed by those who claim to be Reformed or Calvinist: They teach that we are justified by faith, but we are sanctified by works. Calvin had no such view, and the Westminster Confession refutes it. The second view, sanctification by emotions, is the view of the Pentecostal, charismatic, and holiness groups. Roman Catholic and other churches that believe in the magical power of sacraments to regenerate or sanctify hold the third view, sanctification by sacraments. But just as we are regenerated by truth alone, and justified through belief of the truth alone, we are sanctified by truth alone as well.

Nota Bene:  Robbins rightly points out that the idea that communicants are "sanctified" by the sacraments is a Roman Catholic idea and not a Reformed view.  One has to wonder where this idea comes from in Reformed circles?

--
Reasonable Christian Blog Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost; Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen. 1662 Book of Common Prayer

John Calvin: A Short Treatise on the Lord's Supper

Cranmer's Catechism: Baptism

Wherefore you shall thank God with all your heart which hath brought you to baptism. And when you believe in the name of Christ, and love the Gospel, and are glad and diligent to hear the same, then this is a sure token that by the Gospel you have received the Holy Ghost.

***

Furthermore, he that is a sinner, and not baptized, although he had the Holy Ghost to this effect, to help him to fight against sin, yet oftentimes he is overcome and falleth to sin. And although he doth oftentimes overcome sin, yet this is a great unperfectness that he doth it not willingly, but that this fight against sin is tedious and grievous unto him. Wherefore he is ever in peril, lest he be overcome of sin. And in case he doth manfully withstand sin, yet he seeth that his justice and obedience be too weak and imperfect to stand before the judgment of God (as indeed no man, not the holiest, is able to stand before the judgment of God by his own righteousness). But when in baptism the righteousness of Christ is given and imputed to him, then he is delivered from all those perils. For he knoweth for a surety, that he hath put upon him Christ, and that his weakness and imperfection is covered and hid with the perfect righteousness and holiness of Christ.

Wherefore after baptism he doth not trust in his own righteousness, but in Christ only. And he is no more pensive or doubtful considering his own weakness, but he is joyful, because he considereth that he is made partaker of Christ's righteousness. And this again is a great alteration and renewing of the inward man.

These new affections and spiritual motions are in the souls of such as are born again by baptism, but they are unknown to worldly men and such as be not led by the Spirit of God. And when they, that believe and be baptized, do continue in this their faith to the end of their lives, then God shall raise them up from death to life, that they may be immortal and live everlastingly with Christ. And then when sin and the kingdom of death are utterly abolished and destroyed, we shall be perfectly holy and righteous both in body and soul. And for this cause our Saviour Christ doth call in the Gospel the rising again, from death, a regeneration or a second begetting. All these things doth baptism work in us, when we believe in Christ. And therefore Christ saith, " He that will believe and be baptized shall be saved, but he that will not believe shall be damned." Wherefore, good children, learn diligently, I pray you, the fruit and operation of baptism. For it worketh forgiveness of sin, it delivereth from death and power of the devil, it giveth salvation and everlasting life to all them that believe, as the words of Christ's promise do evidently witness.

Cranmer's Catechism

Thirdly, if a man ask you how can water bring to pass so great things ? ye shall answer, Verily, the water worketh not these things, but the word of God which is joined to the water, and faith which doth believe the word of God. For without the word of God, water is water and not baptism, but when the word of the living God is joined to the water, then it is baptism, and water of wonderful wholesomeness, and the bath of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, whom he poured upon us plenteously by Jesus Christ, our Saviour, that we, being made righteous by his grace, may be heirs of everlasting life.

Cranmer's Catechism

Obviously, Cranmer ties baptism to the word of God and the gospel, true faith and true repentance.

Charlie

The Fourth Sunday after Trinity.
The Collect.
O GOD, the protector of all that trust in thee, without whom nothing is strong, nothing is holy; Increase and multiply upon us thy mercy; that, thou being our ruler and guide, we may so pass through things temporal, that we finally lose not the things eternal: Grant this, O heavenly Father, for Jesus Christ's sake our Lord. Amen.

Reformed Anglican Response to a Lutheran Churchman on "The Means of Grace."

The following remarks are in reference to a Lutheran article posted at Reformation Today, A Lutheran Churchman: Ken Howes on "The Means of Grace."

Ken,

If anything, Cranmer was closer to Calvin and Zwingli on the sacraments, though I'm sure he was influenced by Luther on soteriology. Your implied remark that I'm more Puritan than Anglican is ridiculous. The English Reformers may not have been Puritans but they were every bit as concerned about reform as the Puritans and the Continental Reformers. This is why the 39 Articles soundly denounce justification by works, that works are acceptable to God before conversion, or that works can give Christians any sort of supererogatory status.

Also, Samuel Leuenberger's book, Archbishop Thomas Cranmer's Immortal Bequest makes it clear that there was at least one Puritan in Cranmer's panel of advisors--John Hooper. The Lutheran influence is limited at best as can be seen clearly in Cranmer's views on the Lord's supper, which you yourself admit were strongly against the Lutheran view in the 42 Articles and were softened in the 39 Articles because the Lutherans were no longer in contention at that time.

Luther was great on the soteriological issues but he completely blew it with his view that the body of Christ is divine after the resurrection rather than human. This is so obviously a monophysite error that almost anyone can figure it out. The human nature is not omnipresent. After the resurrection the glorified human nature of Christ remains human and is not divine. Christ is thus both divine and human perfectly united in one person as the Definition of Chalceon established.

Thus, the only way to partake of the body and blood of Christ, which is in heaven, is by faith. We lift up our hearts to the heavenly realms by faith because that is where Christ is in bodily form. While he may be present to us through the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ, this is not a bodily presence but only a divine presence in and with believers, not in and with the bread and wine. Cranmer called the consecrated bread and wine by the names of what they signfied or represented but he adamantly insisted that they were not the true body and blood of Christ, which can only be in heaven at the Father's right hand. The Supper is a spiritual "object lesson" where we feed by faith on the body and blood of Christ in heaven, though we physically eat bread and wine to feed and nourish our physical body. Let me quote from Cranmer to substantiate at least part of what I'm saying here:

For some of them say, that by this pronoun demonstrative, "this," Christ understood not the bread nor wine, but his body and blood.

And other some say, that by the pronoun, "this," he meant neither the bread nor wine, nor his body nor blood, but that he meant a particular thing uncertain, which they call individuum vagum, or individuum in genere, I trow some mathematical quiddity, they cannot tell what.

But let all these papists together show any one authority, either of Scripture, or of ancient author, either Greek or Latin, that saith as they say, that Christ called not bread and wine his body and blood, but individuum vagum; for my part I shall give them place, and confess that they say true.

And if they can show nothing for them of antiquity, but only their own bare words, then it is reason that they give place to the truth confirmed by so many authorities, both of Scripture and of ancient writers, which is, that Christ called very material bread his body, and very wine made of grapes his blood.

Now this being fully proved, it must needs follow consequently, that this manner of speaking is a figurative speech: for in plain and proper speech it is not true to say, that bread is Christ's body, or wine his blood. For Christ's body hath a soul, life, sense, and reason: but bread hath neither soul, life, sense, nor reason.

Likewise in plain speech it is not true, that we eat Christ's body, and drink his blood. For eating and drinking, in their proper and usual signification, is with the tongue, teeth, and lips to swallow, divide, and chaw in pieces: which thing to do to the flesh and blood of Christ, is horrible to be heard of any Christian.

So that these speeches, "To eat Christ's body," "and drink his blood," "To call bread his body," "or wine his blood," be speeches not taken in the proper signification of every word, but by translation of these words, "eating" and "drinking," from the signification of a corporal thing to signify a spiritual thing; and by calling a thing that signifieth, by the name of the thing which is signified thereby: which is no rare nor strange thing, but an usual manner and phrase in common speech.

[Archbishop Thomas Cranmer. A Defense of the True and Catholic Doctrine of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Our Saviour Christ. (East Essex: Focus Ministries Trust, 1987). Reprint.

This is why your accusation that the reformed view is actually semi-pelagian or based on feeling is completely off the mark. Zwingli, Cranmer and Calvin had it right while Luther went off the deep end, which is why there was never a reconciliation on the sacraments between the English/Continental Reformers and the Lutherans. At least the Continental Reformers came to the Consensus of Tigurinus, though that too failed to bring any lasting unity.

Faith is not a "feeling." It is a direct divine gift given directly to the soul simultaneously with regeneration, repentance, and conversion. The sacraments are there to make our faith outwardly manifest as a tangible object lesson that all can understand and to bind us together in the local church with a common faith. Baptism does not in and of itself save but it does initially make us members of the local church. Your quotation of Calvin is out of context on the issue of baptism as well. Reading Lutheran baptismal regeneration into the text is disingenuous at best.

You said, "Calvin wrote that 'it is beyond any question that we put on Christ in baptism, and that we are baptized for this end—that we may be one with him." He writes further that "by baptism we are admitted into a participation of (Christ's) grace.'"

Calvin's view is one of spiritual union with Christ by faith. So his remarks do not support your Lutheran view of baptismal regeneration. We are one with Christ through an act of faith, baptism. By faith we accept Christ and are baptized into the body of Christ, the church. This is a sign of our spiritual union with him, which is a real participation of grace. Baptism itself is merely an empty ritual without true regeneration and true faith.

In Calvin's discussion of icons and images he allows only two "images" for the Christian church:

A little farther on he says, "Images are more capable of giving a wrong bent to an unhappy soul, from having mouth, eyes, ears, and feet, than of correcting it, as they neither speak, nor see, nor hear, nor walk." This undoubtedly is the reason why John (1 John 5:21) enjoins us to beware, not only of the worship of idols, but also of idols themselves. And from the fearful infatuation under which the world has hitherto laboured, almost to the entire destruction of piety, we know too well from experience that the moment images appear in churches, idolatry has as it were raised its banner; because the folly of manhood cannot moderate itself, but forthwith falls away to superstitious worship. Even were the danger less imminent, still, when I consider the proper end for which churches are erected, it appears to me more unbecoming their sacredness than I well can tell, to admit any other images than those living symbols which the Lord has consecrated by his own word: I mean Baptism and the Lord's Supper, with the other ceremonies. By these our eyes ought to be more steadily fixed, and more vividly impressed, than to require the aid of any images which the wit of man may devise. Such, then, is the incomparable blessing of images—a blessing, the want of which, if we believe the Papists, cannot possibly be compensated!⁸⁹

⁸⁹ The French is "qu'il n'y ait nulle recompense qui vaille un marmouset guignant à travers et faisant la mine tortue;"—that no compensation can equal the value of a marmoset looking askance and twisting its face.

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1996). Institutes of the Christian religion (electronic ed.) (I, xi, 13). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems.

Calvin's allusion to fixing our eyes on baptism and the Lord's supper are parallel to fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2). If you will read the verse Calvin alludes to, you will see that it also says that Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father, which is also repeated in the Apostles' Creed.

Clearly, Calvin's view of spiritual union by faith is not one supporting baptismal regeneration as your secondary source seems to insist. Rather let Calvin speak for himself:

16. But as God has manifested himself more clearly by the advent of Christ, so he has made himself more familiarly known in three persons. Of many proofs let this one suffice. Paul connects together these three, God, Faith, and Baptism, and reasons from the one to the other—viz. because there is one faith he infers that there is one God; and because there is one baptism he infers that there is one faith. Therefore, if by baptism we are initiated into the faith and worship of one God, we must of necessity believe that he into whose name we are baptised is the true God. And there cannot be a doubt that our Saviour wished to testify, by a solemn rehearsal, that the perfect light of faith is now exhibited, when he said, "Go and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," (Mt. 28:19), since this is the same thing as to be baptised into the name of the one God, who has been fully manifested in the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Hence it plainly appears, that the three persons, in whom alone God is known, subsist in the Divine essence. And since faith certainly ought not to look hither and thither, or run up and down after various objects, but to look, refer, and cleave to God alone, it is obvious that were there various kinds of faith, there behaved also to be various gods. Then, as the baptism of faith is a sacrament, its unity assures us of the unity of God. Hence also it is proved that it is lawful only to be baptised into one God, because we make a profession of faith in him in whose name we are baptised. What, then, is our Saviour's meaning in commanding baptism to be administered in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, if it be not that we are to believe with one faith in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit?⁹⁸ But is this any thing else than to declare that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one God? Wherefore, since it must be held certain that there is one God, not more than one, we conclude that the Word and Spirit are of the very essence of God.

^{98 98} The French entirely omits the three previous sentences, beginning, "Then, as," &c.

Calvin, J., & Beveridge, H. (1996). Institutes of the Christian religion (electronic ed.) (I, xiii, 16). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems.

The means by which we are converted is the preaching of the Gospel, not through ex opere operato sacraments as you yourself said in your article. Even for Luther the sacraments are a means of preaching the Word. Thus, a sacrament without the Word is useless! Your paper only mentions the Word in union with the sacraments in passing while Luther tied the two together in union the one with the other as a Gospel principle. In other words, the sacraments are in essence another way of preaching the Word! Luther's understanding of real presence and baptismal regeneration are meaningless outside of his view of them as united with the Gospel and the Word.

Regarding absolution the English Reformers did not absolutely forbid private confession but they did forbid the sacrament of penance which contradicts the doctrine of justification by faith alone since the Roman doctrine of penance requires that justification must be restored inherently in the heart by works of merit. This is why in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer the only absolution you will find is in tandem with public and general confession of sin. The "absolution" is a public and general absolution precisely because Cranmer and the other Reformers saw that penitential sentences bring forth our guilt before God, we admit we have sinned in thought, word and deed daily and weekly, and we receive forgiveness by confessing our sins to God and receiving the grace of forgiveness in a restatement of the Gospel of grace and being justified by faith alone. Therefore, we may come boldly to the throne of grace together as the people of God and receive forgiveness together as the body of Christ. Private confessions are to be privately done between the believer and Christ Himself. The Roman doctrine of penance in essence downplays total depravity/inability and the perfect requirements of God's Law so that they can "appear" before men to be meriting their salvation.

In fact, this is why there is a reciting of the Decalogue or Ten Commandments every time the Lord's Supper was observed with each commandment being followed with the Augustinian prayer: "Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law." After the final commandment is read the final prayer reads, "Lord, have mercy upon us, and write all these thy laws in our hearts, we beseech thee." It is to show that we are miserable sinners and we deserve nothing no matter how much we repent. Thus, true repentance is not trusting in our own righteousness but in God's mercy in the Gospel! (See the Prayer of Humble Access).

Thus, the Law serves to convict us of our sins, followed by a general confession and a general absolution which are in tune with a Reformed and Augustinian understanding of Law and Gospel:

ALMIGHTY God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Maker of all things, judge of all men; We acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, Which we, from time to time, most grievously have committed, By thought, word, and deed, Against thy Divine Majesty, Provoking most justly thy wrath and indignation against us. We do earnestly repent, And are heartily sorry for these our misdoings; The remembrance of them is grievous unto us; The burden of them is intolerable. Have mercy upon us, Have mercy upon us, most merciful Father; For thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ's sake, Forgive us all that is past; And grant that we may ever hereafter Serve and please thee In newness of life, To the honour and glory of thy Name; Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

ALMIGHTY God, our heavenly Father, who of his great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them that with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto him; Have mercy upon you; pardon and deliver you from all your sins; confirm and strengthen you in all goodness; and bring you to everlasting life; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Holy Communion, 1662 BCP.

I have no problem with your Lutheran views as long as you properly represent those you have opposed, namely the Zwinglians and the Calvinists and the Anglicans on the Cranmerian side of the English Reformation. Hint, stop using secondary sources for your information and go straight to the original sources: the horse's mouth. I would have presented Zwingli's view if time had permitted but suffice it to say that Zwingli's view is not that of a "bare memorial." The Consensus of Tigurinus is proof enough of that:

Article 6. Spiritual Communion. Institution of the Sacraments.
The spiritual communion which we have with the Son of God takes place when he, dwelling in us by his Spirit, makes all who believe capable of all the blessings which reside in him. In order to testify this, both the preaching of the gospel was appointed, and the use of the sacraments committed to us, namely, the sacraments of holy Baptism and the holy Supper.
Article 7. The Ends of the Sacraments
The ends of the sacraments are to be marks and badges of Christian profession and fellowship or fraternity, to be incitements to gratitude and exercises of faith and a godly life; in short, to be contracts binding us to this. But among other ends the principal one is, that God may, by means of them, testify, represent, and seal his grace to us. For although they signify nothing else than is announced to us by the Word itself, yet it is a great matter, first, that there is submitted to our eye a kind of living images which make a deeper impression on the senses, by bringing the object in a manner directly before them, while they bring the death of Christ and all his benefits to our remembrance, that faith may be the better exercised; and, secondly, that what the mouth of God had announced is, as it were, confirmed and ratified by seals.
Consensus Tigurinus.

Charlie

----- Original Message -----

From: FCSD2@aol.com

To: cranmer1959@gmail.com

Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 5:47 PM

Subject: Re: Your article

I'm well aware that Cranmer adopted a Calvinist view on the Sacrament late in his life. That does not mean he bought the whole package or that the Church of England did. That's why there were Puritans and Separatists. People like you--including my own forebears--were dissatisfied with the compromises with Lutheranism and wanted a European-type Reformed church. They weren't going to get that from Elizabeth or her successors.

Luther did write in such a way in The Bondage of the Will as to suggest that he supported double predestination. This was by no means his last word on the subject.

Smalcald Articles III.IV

IV. Of the Gospel.

We will now return to the Gospel, which not merely in one way gives us counsel and aid against sin; for God is superabundantly rich [and liberal] in His grace [and goodness]. First, through the spoken Word by which the forgiveness of sins is preached [He commands to be preached] in the whole world; which is the peculiar office of the Gospel. Secondly, through Baptism. Thirdly, through the holy Sacrament of the Altar. Fourthly, through the power of the keys, and also through the mutual conversation and consolation of brethren, Matt. 18:20: Where two or three are gathered together, etc.


From the Large Catechism:

52] Therefore we pray here in the first place that this may become effective with us, and that His name be so praised through the holy Word of God and a Christian life that both we who have accepted it may abide and daily grow therein, and that it may gain approbation and adherence among other people and proceed with power throughout the world, that many may find entrance into the Kingdom of Grace, be made partakers of redemption, being led thereto by the Holy Ghost, in order that thus we may all together remain forever in the one kingdom now begun.
53] For the coming of God's Kingdom to us occurs in two ways; first, here in time through the Word and faith; and secondly, in eternity forever through revelation. Now we pray for both these things, that it may come to those who are not yet in it, and, by daily increase, to us who have received the same, and hereafter in eternal life. 54] All this is nothing else than saying: Dear Father, we pray, give us first Thy Word, that the Gospel be preached properly throughout the world; and secondly, that it be received in faith, and work and live in us, so that through the Word and the power of the Holy Ghost Thy kingdom may prevail among us, and the kingdom of the devil be put down, that he may have no right or power over us, until at last it shall be utterly destroyed, and sin, death, and hell shall be exterminated, that we may live forever in perfect righteousness and blessedness.

No, Luther wasn't a Calvinist.

If you're going to continue with the nonsense about "ignorance" and "trying to fool" people, just stop emailing me. I don't need that garbage in my inbox.

Ken

In a message dated 7/5/2009 4:19:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time, cranmer1959@gmail.com writes:

You might fool people who don't know their theology or the English Reformation but the fact of the matter is that Cranmer is the major force behind the English Articles of Religion and the 1662 Prayer Book. Read his theology on the Lord's Supper and get back to me.

The Anglican Reformation was somewhere between Zwingli and Calvin. It most certainly had nothing to do with Luther who had attacked the king and was therefore on the outs.

---

The Consensus Tigurinus

 

The following confession of faith is an agreement made by the churches of the Swiss Reformation in Zurich, representing the Zwinglians, and Geneva, representing the Calvinists. James I. Packer has said that Cranmer and the other English Reformers of this period were not unaware of this agreement and probably had it in mind when formulating their own theology of the sacrament. Packer says,

 

Dix in reply (Cranmer Dixit et non timuit: Church Quarterly Review, April 1948, pp. 145ff.; July 1948, pp. 44ff., and published separately) tried to drive a wedge between Cranmer and Bucer, arguing that Cranmer's view of the eucharistic reception of Christ was (a) in harmony with that of the contemporary Swiss school, people like Hooper and Bullinger, and (b) out of line with Bucer's. He was more convincing on (a) than on (b), though he was wrong to think that by proving (a) he confirmed his thesis that Cranmer was a Zwinglian: Swiss doctrine had advanced well beyond memorialism by the 1540's. (Dix never noticed the Consensus Tigurinus, let alone saw its significance.) After this, Dr. C.C. Richardson (Zwingli and Cranmer on the Eucharist: Cranmer Dixit et Contradicixit, Evanston, 1949) maintained that it was nominalist philosophy which moved Cranmer and Zwingli to reject the real presence and corporal feeding on Christ, and Dr. Mascall would evidently like to agree (op. cit. pp. 117-21). But with Cranmer, at any rate, the motives prompting this rejection were not philosophical and rationalistic, but biblical and Christological: he was seeking to do justice to the view of the eucharist forced on him by the Bible and its patristic expositors, that it is a means whereby God makes present to our faith and savingly imparts to our souls (not a part of Christ, but) 'whole Christ', God, man, and Mediator, in all the power of His incarnation, passion, resurrection, and ascension; so that it is a means of grace in a far richer sense than expositors of the real presence ever suspected. (James I. Packer, "Cranmer in Some Recent Writing," The Work of Thomas Cranmer. Vol. 2. Ed. G.E. Duffield. (Berkshire: Sutton Courtney Press, 1964). Pp. xl-xli.

Clearly then, even the Anglo-Catholic theologian Dom Gregory Dix thought that Cranmer was a Zwinglian. Of course this means that Dix would never try to say that Cranmer taught or believed in real presence in the elements themselves. James I. Packer thought Dix was wrong but affirmed that Cranmer did not teach real presence and that Zwinglianism itself did not teach a bare memorial in the 1540's. The Consensus Tigurinus is proof enough that the distinctions between the Calvinist view, the Cranmerian view, and the Zwinglian view were not insurmountable and were in actuality closer than Anglo-Catholics are willing to admit.

 

The Consensus Tigurinus

 

John Calvin (1549) translated by Henry Beveridge

 
Mutual Consent in Regard to the Sacraments Between the Ministers of the Church of Zurich and John Calvin, Minister of the Church of Geneva. Now published by those who framed it.


Article 1. The Whole Spiritual Government of the Church Leads us to Christ.


Seeing that Christ is the end of the law, and the knowledge of him comprehends in itself the whole sum of the gospel, there is no doubt that the object of the whole spiritual government of the Church is to lead us to Christ, as it is by him alone we come to God, who is the final end of a happy life. Whosoever deviates from this in the slightest degree, can never speak duly or appositely of any ordinances of God.

Article 2. A True Knowledge of the Sacraments from the Knowledge of Christ.

As the sacraments are appendages of the gospel, he only can discourse aptly and usefully of their nature, virtue, office, and benefit, who begins with Christ: and that not by adverting cursorily to the name of Christ, but by truly holding for what end he was given us by the Father, and what blessings he has conferred upon us.

Article 3. Nature of the Knowledge of Christ.

We must hold therefore that Christ, being the eternal Son of God, and of the same essence and glory with the Father, assumed our flesh, to communicate to us by right of adoption that which he possessed by nature, namely, to make us sons of God. This is done when ingrafted by faith into the body of Christ, and that by the agency of the Holy Spirit we are first counted righteous by a free imputation of righteousness, and then regenerated to a new life: whereby being formed again in the image of our heavenly Father, we renounce the old man.

Article 4. Christ a Priest and King.

Thus Christ, in his human nature, is to be considered as our priest, who expiated our sins by the one sacrifice of his death, put away all our transgressions by his obedience, provided a perfect righteousness for us, and now intercedes for us, that we may have access to God. He is to be considered as a repairer, who, by the agency of his Spirit, reforms whatever is vicious in us, that we may cease to live to the world and the flesh, and God himself may live in us. He is to be considered as a king, who enriches us with all kinds of blessings, governs and defends us by his power, provides us with spiritual weapons, delivers us from all harm, and rules and guides us by the sceptre of his mouth. And he is to be so considered, that he may raise us to himself, the true God, and to the Father, until the fulfilment of what is finally to take place, viz., God be all in all.

Article 5. How Christ Communicates Himself to Us.

Moreover, that Christ may thus exhibit himself to us and produce these effects in us, he must be made one with us, and we must be ingrafted into his body. He does not infuse his life into us unless he is our head, and from him the whole body, fitly joined together through every joint of supply, according to his working, maketh increase of the body in the proportion of each member.

Article 6. Spiritual Communion. Institution of the Sacraments.

The spiritual communion which we have with the Son of God takes place when he, dwelling in us by his Spirit, makes all who believe capable of all the blessings which reside in him. In order to testify this, both the preaching of the gospel was appointed, and the use of the sacraments committed to us, namely, the sacraments of holy Baptism and the holy Supper.

Article 7. The Ends of the Sacraments

The ends of the sacraments are to be marks and badges of Christian profession and fellowship or fraternity, to be incitements to gratitude and exercises of faith and a godly life; in short, to be contracts binding us to this. But among other ends the principal one is, that God may, by means of them, testify, represent, and seal his grace to us. For although they signify nothing else than is announced to us by the Word itself, yet it is a great matter, first, that there is submitted to our eye a kind of living images which make a deeper impression on the senses, by bringing the object in a manner directly before them, while they bring the death of Christ and all his benefits to our remembrance, that faith may be the better exercised; and, secondly, that what the mouth of God had announced is, as it were, confirmed and ratified by seals.

Article 8. Gratitude.

Now, seeing that these things which the Lord has given as testimonies and seals of his grace are true, he undoubtedly truly performs inwardly by his Spirit that which the sacraments figure to our eyes and other senses; in other words, we obtain possession of Christ as the fountain of all blessings, both in order that we may be reconciled to God by means of his death, be renewed by his Spirit to holiness of life, in short, obtain righteousness and salvation; and also in order that we may give thanks for the blessings which were once exhibited on the cross, and which we daily receive by faith.

Article 9. The Signs and the Things Signified Not Disjoined but Distinct.

Wherefore, though we distinguish, as we ought, between the signs and the things signified, yet we do not disjoin the reality from the signs, but acknowledge that all who in faith embrace the promises there offered receive Christ spiritually, with his spiritual gifts, while those who had long been made partakers of Christ continue and renew that communion.

Article 10. The Promise Principally to Be Looked To in the Sacraments.

And it is proper to look not to the bare signs, but rather to the promise thereto annexed. As far, therefore, as our faith in the promise there offered prevails, so far will that virtue and efficacy of which we speak display itself. Thus the substance of water, bread, and wine, by no means offers Christ to us, nor makes us capable of his spiritual gifts. The promise rather is to be looked to, whose office it is to lead us to Christ by the direct way of faith, faith which makes us partakers of Christ.

Article 11. We Are Not to Stand Gazing on the Elements.

This refutes the error of those who stand gazing on the elements, and attach their confidence of salvation to them; seeing that the sacraments separated from Christ are but empty shows, and a voice is distinctly heard throughout proclaiming that we must adhere to none but Christ alone, and seek the gift of salvation from none but him.

Article 12. The Sacraments Effect Nothing by Themselves.

Besides, if any good is conferred upon us by the sacraments, it is not owing to any proper virtue in them, even though in this you should include the promise by which they are distinguished. For it is God alone who acts by his Spirit. When he uses the instrumentality of the sacraments, he neither infuses his own virtue into them nor derogates in any respect from the effectual working of his Spirit, but, in adaptation to our weakness, uses them as helps; in such manner, however, that the whole power of acting remains with him alone.

Article 13. God Uses the Instrument, but All the Virtue Is His.

Wherefore, as Paul reminds us, that neither he that planteth nor he that watereth is any thing, but God alone that giveth the increase; so also it is to be said of the sacraments that they are nothing, because they will profit nothing, unless God in all things make them effectual. They are indeed instruments by which God acts efficaciously when he pleases, yet so that the whole work of our salvation must be ascribed to him alone.

Article 14. The Whole Accomplished by Christ.

We conclude, then, that it is Christ alone who in truth baptizes inwardly, who in the Supper makes us partakers of himself, who, in short, fulfils what the sacraments figure, and uses their aid in such manner that the whole effect resides in his Spirit.

Article 15. How the Sacraments Confirm.

Thus the sacraments are sometimes called seals, and are said to nourish, confirm, and advance faith, and yet the Spirit alone is properly the seal, and also the beginner and finisher of faith. For all these attributes of the sacraments sink down to a lower place, so that not even the smallest portion of our salvation is transferred to creatures or elements.

Article 16. All Who Partake of the Sacraments Do Not Partake of the Reality.

Besides, we carefully teach that God does not exert his power indiscriminately in all who receive the sacraments, but only in the elect. For as he enlightens unto faith none but those whom he hath foreordained to life, so by the secret agency of his Spirit he makes the elect receive what the sacraments offer.

Article 17. The Sacraments Do Not Confer Grace.

By this doctrine is overthrown that fiction of the sophists which teaches that the sacraments confer grace on all who do not interpose the obstacle of mortal sin. For besides that in the sacraments nothing is received except by faith, we must also hold that the grace of God is by no means so annexed to them that whoso receives the sign also gains possession of the thing. For the signs are administered alike to reprobate and elect, but the reality reaches the latter only.

Article 18. The Gifts Offered to All, but Received by Believers Only.


It is true indeed that Christ with his gifts is offered to all in common, and that the unbelief of man not overthrowing the truth of God, the sacraments always retain their efficacy; but all are not capable of receiving Christ and his gifts. Wherefore nothing is changed on the part of God, but in regard to man each receives according to the measure of his faith.

Article 19. Believers Before, and Without the Use of the Sacraments, Communicate with Christ.

As the use of the sacraments will confer nothing more on unbelievers than if they had abstained from it, nay, is only destructive to them, so without their use believers receive the reality which is there figured. Thus the sins of Paul were washed away by baptism, though they had been previously washed away. So likewise baptism was the laver of regeneration to Cornelius, though he had already received the Holy Spirit. So in the Supper Christ communicates himself to us, though he had previously imparted himself, and perpetually remains in us. For seeing that each is enjoined to examine himself, it follows that faith is required of each before coming to the sacrament. Faith is not without Christ; but inasmuch as faith is confirmed and increased by the sacraments, the gifts of God are confirmed in us, and thus Christ in a manner grows in us and we in him.

Article 20. The Benefit Not Always Received in the Act of Communicating.

The advantage which we receive from the sacraments ought by no means to be restricted to the time at which they are administered to us, just as if the visible sign, at the moment when it is brought forward, brought the grace of God along with it. For those who were baptized when mere infants, God regenerates in childhood or adolescence, occasionally even in old age. Thus the utility of baptism is open to the whole period of life, because the promise contained in it is perpetually in force. And it may sometimes happen that the use of the holy Supper, which, from thoughtlessness or slowness of heart does little good at the time, afterward bears its fruit.

Article 21. No Local Presence Must Be Imagined.

We must guard particularly against the idea of any local presence. For while the signs are present in this world, are seen by the eyes and handled by the hands, Christ, regarded as man, must be sought nowhere else than in Heaven, and not otherwise than with the mind and eye of faith. Wherefore it is a perverse and impious superstition to enclose him under the elements of this world.

Article 22. Explanation of the Words "This Is My Body."

Those who insist that the formal words of the Supper, "This is my body; this is my blood," are to be taken in what they call the precisely literal sense, we repudiate as preposterous interpreters. For we hold it out of controversy that they are to be taken figuratively, the bread and wine receiving the name of that which they signify. Nor should it be thought a new or unwonted thing to transfer the name of things figured by metonymy [modern spelling: metonymy] to the sign, as similar modes of expression occur throughout the Scriptures, and we by so saying assert nothing but what is found in the most ancient and most approved writers of the Church.

Article 23. Of the Eating of the Body.

When it is said that Christ, by our eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood, which are here figured, feeds our souls through faith by the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are not to understand it as if any mingling or transfusion of substance took place, but that we draw life from the flesh once offered in sacrifice and the blood shed in expiation.

Article 24. Transubstantiation and Other Follies.

In this way are refuted not only the fiction of the Papists concerning transubstantiation, but all the gross figments and futile quibbles which either derogate from his celestial glory or are in some degree repugnant to the reality of his human nature. For we deem it no less absurd to place Christ under the bread or couple him with the bread, than to transubstantiate the bread into his body.

Article 25. The Body of Christ Locally in Heaven.

And that no ambiguity may remain when we say that Christ is to be sought in Heaven, the expression implies and is understood by us to intimate distance of place. For though philosophically speaking there is no place above the skies, yet as the body of Christ, bearing the nature and mode of a human body, is finite and is contained in Heaven as its place, it is necessarily as distant from us in point of space as Heaven is from Earth.

Article 26. Christ Not to Be Adored in the Bread.

If it is not lawful to affix Christ in our imagination to the bread and the wine, much less is it lawful to worship him in the bread. For although the bread is held forth to us as a symbol and pledge of the communion which we have with Christ, yet as it is a sign and not the thing itself, and has not the thing either included in it or fixed to it, those who turn their minds towards it, with the view of worshipping Christ, make an idol of it.

Addendum:  See also, Wikipedia, Consensus Tigurinus.  Note that the document was published in 1549, well within Archbishop Cranmer's time frame.  Cranmer would have been aware of it and Wikipedia says it was received well in England.


See also,  Phillip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII:  Modern Chrisitanity:  The Swiss Reformation, § 132. The Eucharistic Controversies. Calvin and Westphal. Christian Classics Ethereal Library.

This version of the Consensus of Tigurinus was originally posted at the Westminster Seminary, California website.  It is now posted at the Heidelblog:  Consensus of Tigurinus