Communion - Revision history

SamSteiner at 14:08, 31 December 2018

2018-12-31T14:08:35Z

RichardThiessen: Text replace - "Mennonitisches Lexikon" to "''Mennonitisches Lexikon''"

2017-01-15T23:19:44Z

Text replace - "Mennonitisches Lexikon" to "''Mennonitisches Lexikon''"

RichardThiessen: Text replace - "" to ""

2014-04-13T21:06:27Z

Text replace - "" to ""

← Older revision Revision as of 21:06, 13 April 2014
Line 2: Line 2:

__TOC__

__TOC__

= 1955 Article =

= 1955 Article =

−
Communion (Lord's Supper, Abendmahl, ~~Nachtmahl~~) has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.
+
Communion (Lord's Supper, Abendmahl, Nachtmahl) has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.

During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This is my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This signifies my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."

During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This is my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This signifies my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."

Line 10: Line 10:

The [[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Articles]] speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" (Mennonite Quarterly Review 19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.

The [[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Articles]] speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" (Mennonite Quarterly Review 19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.

−
It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" (Fundament, 1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, Menno ~~~~Simons, 18-21, 139-142).
+
It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" (Fundament, 1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, Menno Simons, 18-21, 139-142).

Already in 1533 a booklet Bekentenisse . . . coming from the circle of Anabaptists in Holland, stated: "Two things are continually held before us in Christ, namely, that He is our Savior and example. We should remind ourselves in the Lord's Supper of what He has done for us and what we should do for Him. Thus we should contemplate these two things when we partake of the Lord's Supper, but not only reflect about them, but realize them with the highest expression of gratitude in our life" (v. d. Zijpp, Geschiedenis . . . , 1952, 117). Similar concerns and beliefs were expressed by other writers of the Netherlands during the 16th century (see D. Philips in Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica X, 111-134). During the 17th century the beliefs of the Mennonites of the Netherlands were formulated in [[Confessions, Doctrinal|confessions of faith]] including the teaching about the Lord's Supper. Basically they remained the same throughout the centuries. The changes which took place pertained to the form and circumstances of observing the Lord's Supper.

Already in 1533 a booklet Bekentenisse . . . coming from the circle of Anabaptists in Holland, stated: "Two things are continually held before us in Christ, namely, that He is our Savior and example. We should remind ourselves in the Lord's Supper of what He has done for us and what we should do for Him. Thus we should contemplate these two things when we partake of the Lord's Supper, but not only reflect about them, but realize them with the highest expression of gratitude in our life" (v. d. Zijpp, Geschiedenis . . . , 1952, 117). Similar concerns and beliefs were expressed by other writers of the Netherlands during the 16th century (see D. Philips in Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica X, 111-134). During the 17th century the beliefs of the Mennonites of the Netherlands were formulated in [[Confessions, Doctrinal|confessions of faith]] including the teaching about the Lord's Supper. Basically they remained the same throughout the centuries. The changes which took place pertained to the form and circumstances of observing the Lord's Supper.

RichardThiessen: Text replace - "Mennonitisches Lexikon., 4 v." to "Mennonitisches Lexikon, 4 vols."

2014-01-22T22:39:21Z

Text replace - "Mennonitisches Lexikon., 4 v." to "Mennonitisches Lexikon, 4 vols."

← Older revision Revision as of 22:39, 22 January 2014
Line 112: Line 112:

Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. Die Täufer. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.

Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. Die Täufer. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.

−
Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. Mennonitisches Lexikon., 4 v. Frankfurt & Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
+
Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. Mennonitisches Lexikon, 4 vols. Frankfurt & Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.

Kaufman, Gordon F. Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

Kaufman, Gordon F. Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

RichardThiessen at 06:02, 5 October 2013

2013-10-05T06:02:31Z

← Older revision Revision as of 06:02, 5 October 2013
Line 24: Line 24:

The vessels—cup, pitcher, and plates or baskets in which wine and bread were served—were originally very plain. They became more ornamental during the "Golden Age" (17th century) in the Netherlands. The cup and pitcher were originally earthenware or pewter and later sometimes silver, the first silver cups having been used at [[Zwolle (Overijssel, Netherlands)|Zwolle]] in 1661. Etchings were common. This was also the case among the Mennonites in Prussia and [[Russia|Russia]]. Some of the vessels for communion services in Prussia and Russia (including cups from [[Chortitza Mennonite Settlement (Zaporizhia Oblast, Ukraine)|Chortitza]] dated 1842) were brought to [[North America|North America]].

The vessels—cup, pitcher, and plates or baskets in which wine and bread were served—were originally very plain. They became more ornamental during the "Golden Age" (17th century) in the Netherlands. The cup and pitcher were originally earthenware or pewter and later sometimes silver, the first silver cups having been used at [[Zwolle (Overijssel, Netherlands)|Zwolle]] in 1661. Etchings were common. This was also the case among the Mennonites in Prussia and [[Russia|Russia]]. Some of the vessels for communion services in Prussia and Russia (including cups from [[Chortitza Mennonite Settlement (Zaporizhia Oblast, Ukraine)|Chortitza]] dated 1842) were brought to [[North America|North America]].

−
Originally not only elders ([[Bishop|bishops]]) performed the function of administering the Lord's Supper but also ministers, deacons, and possibly lay members. Gradually the practice developed that elders (bishops) only could be in charge of this function. In later centuries when in some countries and conferences the traditional function of an elder (bishop) was restricted to one congregation and his authority and function were reduced to that of a minister of one congregation, each local minister administered the Lord's Supper. This has been the case among the Mennonites of Holland for many generations and was the practice among most of the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]] and [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference]] congregations as well as other groups that have come from Europe to America during the 19th century. Among the groups of Swiss background such as the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonites (MC)]] and the [[Amish|Amish]], or the [[Old Colony Mennonites|Old Colony Mennonites]], where the bishop system was still the prevailing practice, only the bishop could be in charge of a communion service. The preachers and deacons assisted in the act. In Germany it was still the rule that only elders were in charge of the communion service.
+
Originally not only elders ([[Bishop|bishops]]) performed the function of administering the Lord's Supper but also ministers, deacons, and possibly lay members. Gradually the practice developed that elders (bishops) only could be in charge of this function. In later centuries when in some countries and conferences the traditional function of an elder (bishop) was restricted to one congregation and his authority and function were reduced to that of a minister of one congregation, each local minister administered the Lord's Supper. This has been the case among the Mennonites of Holland for many generations and was the practice among most of the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]] and [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference]] congregations as well as other groups that have come from Europe to America during the 19th century. Among the groups of Swiss background such as the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonites (MC)]] and the [[Amish Mennonites|Amish]], or the [[Old Colony Mennonites|Old Colony Mennonites]], where the bishop system was still the prevailing practice, only the bishop could be in charge of a communion service. The preachers and deacons assisted in the act. In Germany it was still the rule that only elders were in charge of the communion service.

Moral integrity, and unity and peace among the members were prerequisites for the observance of the Lord's Supper. For this reason it was always strongly emphasized that all differences and offenses should be removed between members before the Lord's Supper. This resulted in the practice among the Mennonites of [[Switzerland|Switzerland]], South [[Germany|Germany]], and Holland, of setting aside the Sunday before the observance of the Lord's Supper to cleanse the congregation as far as necessary and possible from all misunderstandings, and to clear all cases of necessary church discipline of individual members. If this was impossible some congregations would nor observe the Lord's Supper, or individuals not "at peace" with fellow men and God would stay away. In Holland this meeting was called enigheid houden. Mannhardt reports that the Danzig Mennonites up to the 19th century were invited by the Ansager or [[Umbitter|Umbitter]] (a sort of deacon) to come to the Lord's Supper and that the ministers inquired whether there was anything among the members of the congregation that needed to be cleared to have peace. In an Old Flemish congregation of the Netherlands in 1753 two brethren were asked to take off their [[Wigs|wigs]] for the communion service.

Moral integrity, and unity and peace among the members were prerequisites for the observance of the Lord's Supper. For this reason it was always strongly emphasized that all differences and offenses should be removed between members before the Lord's Supper. This resulted in the practice among the Mennonites of [[Switzerland|Switzerland]], South [[Germany|Germany]], and Holland, of setting aside the Sunday before the observance of the Lord's Supper to cleanse the congregation as far as necessary and possible from all misunderstandings, and to clear all cases of necessary church discipline of individual members. If this was impossible some congregations would nor observe the Lord's Supper, or individuals not "at peace" with fellow men and God would stay away. In Holland this meeting was called enigheid houden. Mannhardt reports that the Danzig Mennonites up to the 19th century were invited by the Ansager or [[Umbitter|Umbitter]] (a sort of deacon) to come to the Lord's Supper and that the ministers inquired whether there was anything among the members of the congregation that needed to be cleared to have peace. In an Old Flemish congregation of the Netherlands in 1753 two brethren were asked to take off their [[Wigs|wigs]] for the communion service.

Line 44: Line 44:

Since the Mass was celebrated every Sunday it can be assumed and is easily understandable that the early Anabaptists observed the Lord's Supper quite frequently, possibly at every meeting. Gradually the frequency must have decreased to twice a year. At times in the past the Lord's Supper could not be observed because of lack of unity and peace. During the time of extreme liberalism in Holland some congregations temporarily discontinued this practice altogether. In the Netherlands most congregations observed it only once a year. In most of the congregations in other countries it was observed at least twice a year, in a few four times, and occasionally even ten times a year, rarely only once.

Since the Mass was celebrated every Sunday it can be assumed and is easily understandable that the early Anabaptists observed the Lord's Supper quite frequently, possibly at every meeting. Gradually the frequency must have decreased to twice a year. At times in the past the Lord's Supper could not be observed because of lack of unity and peace. During the time of extreme liberalism in Holland some congregations temporarily discontinued this practice altogether. In the Netherlands most congregations observed it only once a year. In most of the congregations in other countries it was observed at least twice a year, in a few four times, and occasionally even ten times a year, rarely only once.

−
As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- ''Cornelius Krahn''
+
As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish Mennonites|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- ''Cornelius Krahn''

= 1990 Article =

= 1990 Article =

Line 68: Line 68:

The second stage in Mennonite eucharistic thought and practice begins with the transition to an established movement. The two most influential confessions of faith (Dordrecht in 1632 and the West Prussian [Flemish-[[Frisian Mennonites|Frisian]]-High German, later General Conference Mennonite] in 1660) perpetuate the plurality of Anabaptist eucharistic doctrines. The former articulates the memorial and covenant aspects (Loewen, Confessions, 67). The latter includes these but also teaches that Christ, "in his heavenly estate is the life-giving bread, food, and drink of our souls. In the keeping of this spiritual supper, Christ unites himself with all who truly believe" (Loewen, Confessions, 121/119). The [[Dordrecht Confession of Faith (Mennonite, 1632)|Dordrecht Confession]] articulated beliefs which were to be carried to the new world by Swiss Mennonites; the West Prussian confession articulated those which were carried by North German Mennonites to [[Russia|Russia]] and to North America. Both confessions included the ordinance of feetwashing.

The second stage in Mennonite eucharistic thought and practice begins with the transition to an established movement. The two most influential confessions of faith (Dordrecht in 1632 and the West Prussian [Flemish-[[Frisian Mennonites|Frisian]]-High German, later General Conference Mennonite] in 1660) perpetuate the plurality of Anabaptist eucharistic doctrines. The former articulates the memorial and covenant aspects (Loewen, Confessions, 67). The latter includes these but also teaches that Christ, "in his heavenly estate is the life-giving bread, food, and drink of our souls. In the keeping of this spiritual supper, Christ unites himself with all who truly believe" (Loewen, Confessions, 121/119). The [[Dordrecht Confession of Faith (Mennonite, 1632)|Dordrecht Confession]] articulated beliefs which were to be carried to the new world by Swiss Mennonites; the West Prussian confession articulated those which were carried by North German Mennonites to [[Russia|Russia]] and to North America. Both confessions included the ordinance of feetwashing.

−
This second period of Mennonite history led to the codifying of practices concerning communion. [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]] and [[Gerrits van Emden, Jan (1561-1617)|J. Gerrits van Emden]] wrote meditations on and instructions for the observance of the Lord's Supper (Vijf Stichtelijcke Predicatien, 1650, 37ff). [[Clock, Leenaert (d. after 1638)|Leenaert Clock]] composed a prayer formulary in 1625 (Formulier, 60ff). Its three communion prayers were used by Mennonites throughout Europe and are still used by the [[Amish|Amish]] in the late 20th century.
+
This second period of Mennonite history led to the codifying of practices concerning communion. [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]] and [[Gerrits van Emden, Jan (1561-1617)|J. Gerrits van Emden]] wrote meditations on and instructions for the observance of the Lord's Supper (Vijf Stichtelijcke Predicatien, 1650, 37ff). [[Clock, Leenaert (d. after 1638)|Leenaert Clock]] composed a prayer formulary in 1625 (Formulier, 60ff). Its three communion prayers were used by Mennonites throughout Europe and are still used by the [[Amish Mennonites|Amish]] in the late 20th century.

By the 17th century it had become usual for Mennonites in northern Europe to celebrate communion twice a year while Mennonites in south [[Germany|Germany]] and Switzerland celebrated it once a year (Mast, Letters, 69). There is no extant rationale for the establishment of this practice. The following is an interpretive hypothesis: added to the undercurrent of fear of unworthy communion and obligatory confession beforehand, common through much of Christian history, was the Mennonite stipulation that believers had to be reconciled not only to God but to fellow Christians before they could commune. As communion for Anabaptists was a celebration of the church as the body of Christ, it could be observed only when the whole community was together and of one mind. As persecuted believers went into hiding and differing factions solidified, there could hardly be communion.

By the 17th century it had become usual for Mennonites in northern Europe to celebrate communion twice a year while Mennonites in south [[Germany|Germany]] and Switzerland celebrated it once a year (Mast, Letters, 69). There is no extant rationale for the establishment of this practice. The following is an interpretive hypothesis: added to the undercurrent of fear of unworthy communion and obligatory confession beforehand, common through much of Christian history, was the Mennonite stipulation that believers had to be reconciled not only to God but to fellow Christians before they could commune. As communion for Anabaptists was a celebration of the church as the body of Christ, it could be observed only when the whole community was together and of one mind. As persecuted believers went into hiding and differing factions solidified, there could hardly be communion.

RichardThiessen at 06:01, 5 October 2013

2013-10-05T06:01:05Z

← Older revision Revision as of 06:01, 5 October 2013
Line 1: Line 1:

__FORCETOC__

__FORCETOC__

__TOC__

__TOC__

−
~~<h3>1953~~ Article~~</h3>~~ Communion (Lord's Supper, Abendmahl, Nachtmahl) has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.
+
= 1955 Article =

+
Communion (Lord's Supper, Abendmahl, Nachtmahl) has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.

During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This is my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This signifies my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."

During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This is my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This signifies my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."

Line 43: Line 44:

Since the Mass was celebrated every Sunday it can be assumed and is easily understandable that the early Anabaptists observed the Lord's Supper quite frequently, possibly at every meeting. Gradually the frequency must have decreased to twice a year. At times in the past the Lord's Supper could not be observed because of lack of unity and peace. During the time of extreme liberalism in Holland some congregations temporarily discontinued this practice altogether. In the Netherlands most congregations observed it only once a year. In most of the congregations in other countries it was observed at least twice a year, in a few four times, and occasionally even ten times a year, rarely only once.

Since the Mass was celebrated every Sunday it can be assumed and is easily understandable that the early Anabaptists observed the Lord's Supper quite frequently, possibly at every meeting. Gradually the frequency must have decreased to twice a year. At times in the past the Lord's Supper could not be observed because of lack of unity and peace. During the time of extreme liberalism in Holland some congregations temporarily discontinued this practice altogether. In the Netherlands most congregations observed it only once a year. In most of the congregations in other countries it was observed at least twice a year, in a few four times, and occasionally even ten times a year, rarely only once.

−
As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- Cornelius Krahn
+
As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- ''Cornelius Krahn''

−
~~<h3>1989~~ Article~~</h3>~~ [[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set'']] The primal act of the Christian church is its gathering to eat bread and drink wine in memory of Jesus. This ritual meal originated among the Jewish people as a reenactment of their exodus from Egyptian bondage. The Christian breaking of bread recalls Jesus' meals with seekers and friends before and after his resurrection (Mark 2:18-22; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 24:13-35; John 21:9-14) and, supremely, that Passover supper at which the Messiah announced a new covenant to be inaugurated by his death (Mark 14:12-25). The early Christians believed that even after his ascension the repeating of the meal Jesus had instituted at his death was a "communion of the body and blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16), i.e., a participation in his person and life.
+
= 1990 Article =

+

+
[[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set'']]

+

+
The primal act of the Christian church is its gathering to eat bread and drink wine in memory of Jesus. This ritual meal originated among the Jewish people as a reenactment of their exodus from Egyptian bondage. The Christian breaking of bread recalls Jesus' meals with seekers and friends before and after his resurrection (Mark 2:18-22; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 24:13-35; John 21:9-14) and, supremely, that Passover supper at which the Messiah announced a new covenant to be inaugurated by his death (Mark 14:12-25). The early Christians believed that even after his ascension the repeating of the meal Jesus had instituted at his death was a "communion of the body and blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16), i.e., a participation in his person and life.

It was not long before attempts were made to explain this mystery. Some (Irenaeus, fl. ca. 180-200; Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-86) emphasized the physical changing or conversion of the bread and wine as the means by which Christ is present; others (Clement of Alexandria, fl. ca. 200-215; Origen, ca. 185-254) concerned themselves more with the spiritual reality of this communion. At the time of the Protestant Reformation the former interpretation dominated in the western church. It was one of the central concerns of the Reformation to restore eucharistic practice and belief to their primitive simplicity. This involved a denial that priest and sacrament cause Christ to be present by the performance of the ritual whether or not there was a response of personal faith. All the reformers taught that nothing could or needed to be added sacramentally to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Many non-Lutheran reformers (Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican) put forth the claim that Christ could not be offered again because physically he was in heaven. Since the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, it was not to be celebrated at an [[Altar|altar]] but around a table.

It was not long before attempts were made to explain this mystery. Some (Irenaeus, fl. ca. 180-200; Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-86) emphasized the physical changing or conversion of the bread and wine as the means by which Christ is present; others (Clement of Alexandria, fl. ca. 200-215; Origen, ca. 185-254) concerned themselves more with the spiritual reality of this communion. At the time of the Protestant Reformation the former interpretation dominated in the western church. It was one of the central concerns of the Reformation to restore eucharistic practice and belief to their primitive simplicity. This involved a denial that priest and sacrament cause Christ to be present by the performance of the ritual whether or not there was a response of personal faith. All the reformers taught that nothing could or needed to be added sacramentally to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Many non-Lutheran reformers (Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican) put forth the claim that Christ could not be offered again because physically he was in heaven. Since the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, it was not to be celebrated at an [[Altar|altar]] but around a table.

Line 75: Line 80:

The spiritual and theological work of the ecumenical movement has transcended 16th-century formulations as the unassailable norm for how both Protestants and Catholics understood the Bible. Mennonite, like other Protestant, understandings of the Lord's Supper came into being in the controversies of the Reformation. In the late 20th century, Mennonites stand on the threshold of a revolution sure to be as significant for how the church breaks bread as was that of the 16th century.

The spiritual and theological work of the ecumenical movement has transcended 16th-century formulations as the unassailable norm for how both Protestants and Catholics understood the Bible. Mennonite, like other Protestant, understandings of the Lord's Supper came into being in the controversies of the Reformation. In the late 20th century, Mennonites stand on the threshold of a revolution sure to be as significant for how the church breaks bread as was that of the 16th century.

−
In summary, the Mennonite interpretation of Christian belief concerning the Lord's Supper has the following traits: It is opposed to speculation about metaphysical changes in the elements, yet often rationalistic in its arguments against such speculations. It has a spiritualistic tendency which is manifest in its inability to make positive claims for the relationship in communion between bread and the presence of Christ. At the same time the traditional piety of participants in communion indicates belief in a mysterious reality beyond what Mennonite teaching can explain. The Mennonite interpretation of communion has emphasized the human more than the divine action of grace. This has sometimes been a way of countering claims for divine action which Mennonites deem to be unbiblical. More often it has issued from the conviction that ethical response is the most profound act of gratitude for grace. -- John D. Rempel
+
In summary, the Mennonite interpretation of Christian belief concerning the Lord's Supper has the following traits: It is opposed to speculation about metaphysical changes in the elements, yet often rationalistic in its arguments against such speculations. It has a spiritualistic tendency which is manifest in its inability to make positive claims for the relationship in communion between bread and the presence of Christ. At the same time the traditional piety of participants in communion indicates belief in a mysterious reality beyond what Mennonite teaching can explain. The Mennonite interpretation of communion has emphasized the human more than the divine action of grace. This has sometimes been a way of countering claims for divine action which Mennonites deem to be unbiblical. More often it has issued from the conviction that ethical response is the most profound act of gratitude for grace. -- ''John D. Rempel''

See also [[Christology|Christology]]; [[Communion Call|Communion Call]]; [[Worship, Public|Worship, Public]]

See also [[Christology|Christology]]; [[Communion Call|Communion Call]]; [[Worship, Public|Worship, Public]]

RichardThiessen: Replaced the internal link to the Schleitheim Confession to the article of the same.

2013-08-27T05:52:37Z

Replaced the internal link to the Schleitheim Confession to the article of the same.

← Older revision Revision as of 05:52, 27 August 2013
Line 7: Line 7:

The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel ]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, 330).

The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel ]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, 330).

−
The [[Schleitheim Confession ~~(Anabaptist, 1527)~~|Schleitheim Articles]] speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" (Mennonite Quarterly Review 19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.
+
The [[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Articles]] speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" (Mennonite Quarterly Review 19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.

It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" (Fundament, 1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, Menno Simons, 18-21, 139-142).

It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" (Fundament, 1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, Menno Simons, 18-21, 139-142).

Line 53: Line 53:

The three tendencies of Anabaptist belief about communion are the following: (a) The relationship between God and humanity is unmediated; grace cannot be caused by material means. It is the immediate work of the Spirit through the response of faith which unites us to Christ. Bread and wine remain outward signs of an inward relationship. (b) The person of Christ, more than the words of institution, is the source for understanding what happens in communion. The church is the extension of his incarnate life. This presence is renewed in the Lord's Supper. Since his ascension, the Lord's physical body is in heaven. Because he is fully human and fully divine, Christ can be present only in one place at a time in his humanity, but he is present everywhere in his divinity. (c) The Gospel of John is the preeminent source for Anabaptist eucharistic thought. From it comes the emphasis on Christ's ascension, the description of the Lord's Supper as a meal of love, and the inclusion of feetwashing as the enactment of that love.

The three tendencies of Anabaptist belief about communion are the following: (a) The relationship between God and humanity is unmediated; grace cannot be caused by material means. It is the immediate work of the Spirit through the response of faith which unites us to Christ. Bread and wine remain outward signs of an inward relationship. (b) The person of Christ, more than the words of institution, is the source for understanding what happens in communion. The church is the extension of his incarnate life. This presence is renewed in the Lord's Supper. Since his ascension, the Lord's physical body is in heaven. Because he is fully human and fully divine, Christ can be present only in one place at a time in his humanity, but he is present everywhere in his divinity. (c) The Gospel of John is the preeminent source for Anabaptist eucharistic thought. From it comes the emphasis on Christ's ascension, the description of the Lord's Supper as a meal of love, and the inclusion of feetwashing as the enactment of that love.

−
Certain of these characteristics and tendencies dominated each of the three regions in which Anabaptism originated. The most far-reaching reformation of the Lord's Supper took place among the Swiss Brethren. They placed their emphasis on the body of Christ as the church and on the memorial/thanksgiving character of communion ([[Schleitheim Confession ~~(Anabaptist, 1527)~~|Schleitheim Confession]], articles 2, 3). [[Walpot, Peter (1521-1578)|Peter Walpot]] turned to rational arguments to prove the impossibility of the Catholic position and removed all mystery from communion (TA Oberdtsch. II, "Vom Abentmahl, 126-34, layoffs). [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], the most original and sophisticated representative of the Swiss Anabaptist view of communion, argued that the most profound sign function of the Lord's Supper was that it represented the church's pledge to give up its life just as Christ had done (Hubmaier, Schriften, 104, 317-18). Thus communion became primarily an ethical event; not so much a means of grace as a response to grace.
+
Certain of these characteristics and tendencies dominated each of the three regions in which Anabaptism originated. The most far-reaching reformation of the Lord's Supper took place among the Swiss Brethren. They placed their emphasis on the body of Christ as the church and on the memorial/thanksgiving character of communion ([[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Confession]], articles 2, 3). [[Walpot, Peter (1521-1578)|Peter Walpot]] turned to rational arguments to prove the impossibility of the Catholic position and removed all mystery from communion (TA Oberdtsch. II, "Vom Abentmahl, 126-34, layoffs). [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], the most original and sophisticated representative of the Swiss Anabaptist view of communion, argued that the most profound sign function of the Lord's Supper was that it represented the church's pledge to give up its life just as Christ had done (Hubmaier, Schriften, 104, 317-18). Thus communion became primarily an ethical event; not so much a means of grace as a response to grace.

Among South German Anabaptists, [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]] taught a mystical union with Christ which was symbolized by bread and wine but came about in the individual's willingness to suffer with Christ. [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]] reacted against the emphasis on the exclusively human and inward reality of communion, insisted on divine initiative in the celebration, and emphasized the outward form of the celebration. For him the Lord's Supper was not a static object but a dynamic event. In it the Holy Spirit takes the gathering of those who come in faith and love to break bread and unites it with Christ. Christ's incarnation is the model of how God reveals himself. he comes to us in outward realities to lead us to inward ones (CRR 2:76, 85, 99). Thus, our faith and the bread we share are made by the Spirit into a participation in Christ (CRR 2:194ff.; Marpeck, Verantwortung, in Marbeck-Schwenckfeld, ed. Loserth [1929], 501-515).

Among South German Anabaptists, [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]] taught a mystical union with Christ which was symbolized by bread and wine but came about in the individual's willingness to suffer with Christ. [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]] reacted against the emphasis on the exclusively human and inward reality of communion, insisted on divine initiative in the celebration, and emphasized the outward form of the celebration. For him the Lord's Supper was not a static object but a dynamic event. In it the Holy Spirit takes the gathering of those who come in faith and love to break bread and unites it with Christ. Christ's incarnation is the model of how God reveals himself. he comes to us in outward realities to lead us to inward ones (CRR 2:76, 85, 99). Thus, our faith and the bread we share are made by the Spirit into a participation in Christ (CRR 2:194ff.; Marpeck, Verantwortung, in Marbeck-Schwenckfeld, ed. Loserth [1929], 501-515).

GameoAdmin: CSV import - 20130823

2013-08-23T13:58:20Z

CSV import - 20130823

← Older revision Revision as of 13:58, 23 August 2013
Line 5: Line 5:

During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This is my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This signifies my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."

During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This is my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This signifies my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."

−
The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, 330).
+
The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel ]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, 330).

The [[Schleitheim Confession (Anabaptist, 1527)|Schleitheim Articles]] speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" (Mennonite Quarterly Review 19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.

The [[Schleitheim Confession (Anabaptist, 1527)|Schleitheim Articles]] speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" (Mennonite Quarterly Review 19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.

Line 15: Line 15:

During the early days of persecution, little attention could be paid to the outward form of the Lord's Supper. There was a very definite feeling and conviction that as much as possible of the outward form of the Catholic tradition should be done away with because of the idolatrous implications. Little attention was paid to uniformity of practice in the various parts of Europe where Anabaptists were located.

During the early days of persecution, little attention could be paid to the outward form of the Lord's Supper. There was a very definite feeling and conviction that as much as possible of the outward form of the Catholic tradition should be done away with because of the idolatrous implications. Little attention was paid to uniformity of practice in the various parts of Europe where Anabaptists were located.

−
Rembert (Wiedertäufer, 510) reported regarding the communion services among the Anabaptists of the [[Lower Rhine (Germany)|Lower Rhine]]in the late 16th century: "When the Lord's Supper was distributed the minister took the bread and broke a piece of it for each, and as soon as it was given out and each had a piece in his hand, the minister also took a piece for himself, put it into his mouth and ate it; and immediately, seeing this, the congregation did the same. The minister, however, used no words, no ceremonies, and no blessing. As soon as the bread was eaten, the minister took a bottle of wine or a cup. drank, and gave each of the members of it. On this wise they observe the breaking of bread."
+
Rembert (Wiedertäufer, 510) reported regarding the communion services among the Anabaptists of the [[Lower Rhine (Germany)|Lower Rhine ]]in the late 16th century: "When the Lord's Supper was distributed the minister took the bread and broke a piece of it for each, and as soon as it was given out and each had a piece in his hand, the minister also took a piece for himself, put it into his mouth and ate it; and immediately, seeing this, the congregation did the same. The minister, however, used no words, no ceremonies, and no blessing. As soon as the bread was eaten, the minister took a bottle of wine or a cup. drank, and gave each of the members of it. On this wise they observe the breaking of bread."

In the 16th century severe persecution made development along uniform lines difficult. One of the differences seems to have been whether the bread and wine were to be distributed by the officiating elder or minister while the members kept their seats, or whether the members were to come to the front of the meeting place to receive the bread and wine, seated around a table. Vos. [[Kühler, Wilhelmus Johannes (1874-1946)|Kühler]], [[Zijpp, Nanne van der (1900-1965)|van der Zijpp]], et al., are of the opinion that in the Netherlands it was the original practice to distribute the bread and wine to the participants in their seats, and that [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]], an elder of the [[Waterlanders|Waterlanders]], introduced the practice of handing the bread and wine to the participants seated at table in groups around 1580. Thus it became the practice of the Waterlanders to observe the Lord's Supper seated around a table, while the [[Flemish Mennonites|Flemish]] received it from the elder in their seats. Later. when Flemish and Waterlander congregations united, a compromise was usually made. At one time of the year the Lord's Supper would he served around the table and at another time in the seat, This was the practice of the Amsterdam Mennonite Church to the 1950s.

In the 16th century severe persecution made development along uniform lines difficult. One of the differences seems to have been whether the bread and wine were to be distributed by the officiating elder or minister while the members kept their seats, or whether the members were to come to the front of the meeting place to receive the bread and wine, seated around a table. Vos. [[Kühler, Wilhelmus Johannes (1874-1946)|Kühler]], [[Zijpp, Nanne van der (1900-1965)|van der Zijpp]], et al., are of the opinion that in the Netherlands it was the original practice to distribute the bread and wine to the participants in their seats, and that [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]], an elder of the [[Waterlanders|Waterlanders]], introduced the practice of handing the bread and wine to the participants seated at table in groups around 1580. Thus it became the practice of the Waterlanders to observe the Lord's Supper seated around a table, while the [[Flemish Mennonites|Flemish]] received it from the elder in their seats. Later. when Flemish and Waterlander congregations united, a compromise was usually made. At one time of the year the Lord's Supper would he served around the table and at another time in the seat, This was the practice of the Amsterdam Mennonite Church to the 1950s.

−
The widespread practice in certain groups of Mennonites in South and North [[Germany|Germany]] to have the members of the congregation come to the table in the front of the room to receive the bread has very likely no connection with this practice of the Waterlanders, but is due to Lutheran influences. The practice of putting the bread into a cloth or handkerchief until it is eaten in unison must be old, going back to the Catholic days when the actual presence of Christ in the bread and wine was a basic belief. According to Vos (De avondmaalsbediening . . .) this practice was observed among the early Dutch Mennonites but disappeared completely. Among some of the Mennonites of Prussian, Polish, and Russian background in America, it was still practiced in the 1950s ([[Beatrice (Nebraska, USA)|Beatrice]], [[Grace Hill Mennonite Church (Whitewater, Kansas, USA)|Gnadenberg]], Rosenort, and other congregations). When the cup is passed from member to member the one receiving it turns to his neighbor who has not yet been served, asking with a silent nod for permission to help himself, to which the neighbor responds with a nod. The origin and full meaning of this practice is not known to the writer. It may have been the intention by this practice to indicate brotherly love and recognition. The practice was still in use in [[Berlin (Germany)|Berlin]] as well as in [[Göttingen (Niedersachsen, Germany)|Göttingen]] in the 1950s, probably coming from [[West Prussia|West Prussia]].
+
The widespread practice in certain groups of Mennonites in South and North [[Germany|Germany]] to have the members of the congregation come to the table in the front of the room to receive the bread has very likely no connection with this practice of the Waterlanders, but is due to Lutheran influences. The practice of putting the bread into a cloth or handkerchief until it is eaten in unison must be old, going back to the Catholic days when the actual presence of Christ in the bread and wine was a basic belief. According to Vos (De avondmaalsbediening . . .) this practice was observed among the early Dutch Mennonites but disappeared completely. Among some of the Mennonites of Prussian, Polish, and Russian background in America, it was still practiced in the 1950s ([[Beatrice (Nebraska, USA)|Beatrice]], [[Grace Hill Mennonite Church (Whitewater, Kansas, USA)|Gnadenberg]], Rosenort, and other congregations). When the cup is passed from member to member the one receiving it turns to his neighbor who has not yet been served, asking with a silent nod for permission to help himself, to which the neighbor responds with a nod. The origin and full meaning of this practice is not known to the writer. It may have been the intention by this practice to indicate brotherly love and recognition. The practice was still in use in [[Berlin (Germany)|Berlin]] as well as in [[Göttingen (Niedersachsen, Germany)|Göttingen]] in the 1950s, probably coming from [[West Prussia|West Prussia ]].

The vessels—cup, pitcher, and plates or baskets in which wine and bread were served—were originally very plain. They became more ornamental during the "Golden Age" (17th century) in the Netherlands. The cup and pitcher were originally earthenware or pewter and later sometimes silver, the first silver cups having been used at [[Zwolle (Overijssel, Netherlands)|Zwolle]] in 1661. Etchings were common. This was also the case among the Mennonites in Prussia and [[Russia|Russia]]. Some of the vessels for communion services in Prussia and Russia (including cups from [[Chortitza Mennonite Settlement (Zaporizhia Oblast, Ukraine)|Chortitza]] dated 1842) were brought to [[North America|North America]].

The vessels—cup, pitcher, and plates or baskets in which wine and bread were served—were originally very plain. They became more ornamental during the "Golden Age" (17th century) in the Netherlands. The cup and pitcher were originally earthenware or pewter and later sometimes silver, the first silver cups having been used at [[Zwolle (Overijssel, Netherlands)|Zwolle]] in 1661. Etchings were common. This was also the case among the Mennonites in Prussia and [[Russia|Russia]]. Some of the vessels for communion services in Prussia and Russia (including cups from [[Chortitza Mennonite Settlement (Zaporizhia Oblast, Ukraine)|Chortitza]] dated 1842) were brought to [[North America|North America]].

Line 45: Line 45:

As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- Cornelius Krahn

As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- Cornelius Krahn

−
<h3>1989 Article</h3> [[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set
+
<h3>1989 Article</h3> [[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set'']] The primal act of the Christian church is its gathering to eat bread and drink wine in memory of Jesus. This ritual meal originated among the Jewish people as a reenactment of their exodus from Egyptian bondage. The Christian breaking of bread recalls Jesus' meals with seekers and friends before and after his resurrection (Mark 2:18-22; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 24:13-35; John 21:9-14) and, supremely, that Passover supper at which the Messiah announced a new covenant to be inaugurated by his death (Mark 14:12-25). The early Christians believed that even after his ascension the repeating of the meal Jesus had instituted at his death was a "communion of the body and blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16), i.e., a participation in his person and life.

−

−
'']] The primal act of the Christian church is its gathering to eat bread and drink wine in memory of Jesus. This ritual meal originated among the Jewish people as a reenactment of their exodus from Egyptian bondage. The Christian breaking of bread recalls Jesus' meals with seekers and friends before and after his resurrection (Mark 2:18-22; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 24:13-35; John 21:9-14) and, supremely, that Passover supper at which the Messiah announced a new covenant to be inaugurated by his death (Mark 14:12-25). The early Christians believed that even after his ascension the repeating of the meal Jesus had instituted at his death was a "communion of the body and blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16), i.e., a participation in his person and life.

It was not long before attempts were made to explain this mystery. Some (Irenaeus, fl. ca. 180-200; Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-86) emphasized the physical changing or conversion of the bread and wine as the means by which Christ is present; others (Clement of Alexandria, fl. ca. 200-215; Origen, ca. 185-254) concerned themselves more with the spiritual reality of this communion. At the time of the Protestant Reformation the former interpretation dominated in the western church. It was one of the central concerns of the Reformation to restore eucharistic practice and belief to their primitive simplicity. This involved a denial that priest and sacrament cause Christ to be present by the performance of the ritual whether or not there was a response of personal faith. All the reformers taught that nothing could or needed to be added sacramentally to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Many non-Lutheran reformers (Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican) put forth the claim that Christ could not be offered again because physically he was in heaven. Since the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, it was not to be celebrated at an [[Altar|altar]] but around a table.

It was not long before attempts were made to explain this mystery. Some (Irenaeus, fl. ca. 180-200; Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-86) emphasized the physical changing or conversion of the bread and wine as the means by which Christ is present; others (Clement of Alexandria, fl. ca. 200-215; Origen, ca. 185-254) concerned themselves more with the spiritual reality of this communion. At the time of the Protestant Reformation the former interpretation dominated in the western church. It was one of the central concerns of the Reformation to restore eucharistic practice and belief to their primitive simplicity. This involved a denial that priest and sacrament cause Christ to be present by the performance of the ritual whether or not there was a response of personal faith. All the reformers taught that nothing could or needed to be added sacramentally to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Many non-Lutheran reformers (Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican) put forth the claim that Christ could not be offered again because physically he was in heaven. Since the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, it was not to be celebrated at an [[Altar|altar]] but around a table.

Line 109: Line 107:

Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. Die Täufer. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.

Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. Die Täufer. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.

−
Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. Mennonitisches Lexikon., 4 v. Frankfurt & Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe; Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
+
Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. Mennonitisches Lexikon., 4 v. Frankfurt & Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.

Kaufman, Gordon F. Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

Kaufman, Gordon F. Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

GameoAdmin: CSV import - 20130820

2013-08-20T19:41:57Z

CSV import - 20130820

← Older revision Revision as of 19:41, 20 August 2013
Line 80: Line 80:

See also [[Christology|Christology]]; [[Communion Call|Communion Call]]; [[Worship, Public|Worship, Public]]

See also [[Christology|Christology]]; [[Communion Call|Communion Call]]; [[Worship, Public|Worship, Public]]

−

−

= Bibliography =

= Bibliography =

Clock, L. "Formulier Ethlicken Christlichen Gebaethe" in Christliche Glaubens-Bekentnus, ed. Tieleman T. Sittert. Amsterdam: Johan Paskovium, 1664.

Clock, L. "Formulier Ethlicken Christlichen Gebaethe" in Christliche Glaubens-Bekentnus, ed. Tieleman T. Sittert. Amsterdam: Johan Paskovium, 1664.

Line 128: Line 126:

Windhorst, Christer. "Das Gedächtnis des Leidens und Pflichtzeichen brüderlichen Liebe" in Umstrittenes Täufertum, 1525-1975, ed. Hans-Jürgen Goertz. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975.

Windhorst, Christer. "Das Gedächtnis des Leidens und Pflichtzeichen brüderlichen Liebe" in Umstrittenes Täufertum, 1525-1975, ed. Hans-Jürgen Goertz. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975.

−

−

{{GAMEO_footer|hp=Vol. 1, pp. 651-655, v. 5, pp. 170-172|date=1989|a1_last=Krahn|a1_first=Cornelius|a2_last=Rempel|a2_first=John D.}}

{{GAMEO_footer|hp=Vol. 1, pp. 651-655, v. 5, pp. 170-172|date=1989|a1_last=Krahn|a1_first=Cornelius|a2_last=Rempel|a2_first=John D.}}

GameoAdmin: CSV import - 20130816

2013-08-16T18:49:25Z

CSV import - 20130816
Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:08, 31 December 2018
Line 130:		Line 130:
	Windhorst, Christer. "Das Gedächtnis des Leidens und Pflichtzeichen brüderlichen Liebe" in <em>Umstrittenes Täufertum, 1525-1975</em>, ed. Hans-Jürgen Goertz. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975.		Windhorst, Christer. "Das Gedächtnis des Leidens und Pflichtzeichen brüderlichen Liebe" in <em>Umstrittenes Täufertum, 1525-1975</em>, ed. Hans-Jürgen Goertz. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975.
	{{GAMEO_footer\|hp=Vol. 1, pp. 651-655, v. 5, pp. 170-172\|date=1989\|a1_last=Krahn\|a1_first=Cornelius\|a2_last=Rempel\|a2_first=John D.}}		{{GAMEO_footer\|hp=Vol. 1, pp. 651-655, v. 5, pp. 170-172\|date=1989\|a1_last=Krahn\|a1_first=Cornelius\|a2_last=Rempel\|a2_first=John D.}}
		+	[[Category:Theology]]

@@ Line 112: / Line 112: @@
 Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. <em>Die Täufer.</em> Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.
-Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. <em class="gameo_bibliography">Mennonitisches Lexikon</em>, 4 vols. Frankfurt &amp; Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
+Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. ''Mennonitisches Lexikon'', 4 vols. Frankfurt &amp; Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
 Kaufman, Gordon F. <em>Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective.</em> New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

@@ Line 112: / Line 112: @@
 Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. <em>Die Täufer.</em> Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.
-Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. <em>Mennonitisches Lexikon</em>., 4 v. Frankfurt &amp; Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
+Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. <em class="gameo_bibliography">Mennonitisches Lexikon</em>, 4 vols. Frankfurt &amp; Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
 Kaufman, Gordon F. <em>Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective.</em> New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 __TOC__
 = 1955 Article =
-Communion (Lord's Supper, <em>Abendmahl, Nacht</em><em>mahl) </em>has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.
+Communion (Lord's Supper, <em>Abendmahl, Nachtmahl) </em>has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.
 During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This <em>is </em>my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This <em>signifies </em>my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 The <em>[[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Articles]] </em>speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" <em>(Mennonite Quarterly Review </em>19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.
-It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" <em>(Fundament, </em>1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, <em>Menno </em><em>Simons, </em>18-21, 139-142).
+It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" <em>(Fundament, </em>1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, <em>Menno Simons, </em>18-21, 139-142).
 Already in 1533 a booklet <em>Bekentenisse . . . </em>coming from the circle of Anabaptists in Holland, stated: "Two things are continually held before us in Christ, namely, that He is our Savior and example. We should remind ourselves in the Lord's Supper of what He has done for us and what we should do for Him. Thus we should contemplate these two things when we partake of the Lord's Supper, but not only reflect about them, but realize them with the highest expression of gratitude in our life" (v. d. Zijpp, <em>Geschiedenis . . . , </em>1952, 117). Similar concerns and beliefs were expressed by other writers of the Netherlands during the 16th century (see D. Philips in<em> Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica</em> X, 111-134). During the 17th century the beliefs of the Mennonites of the Netherlands were formulated in [[Confessions, Doctrinal|confessions of faith]] including the teaching about the Lord's Supper. Basically they remained the same throughout the centuries. The changes which took place pertained to the form and circumstances of observing the Lord's Supper.

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 The vessels—cup, pitcher, and plates or baskets in which wine and bread were served—were originally very plain. They became more ornamental during the "Golden Age" (17th century) in the Netherlands. The cup and pitcher were originally earthenware or pewter and later sometimes silver, the first silver cups having been used at [[Zwolle (Overijssel, Netherlands)|Zwolle]] in 1661. Etchings were common. This was also the case among the Mennonites in Prussia and [[Russia|Russia]]. Some of the vessels for communion services in Prussia and Russia (including cups from [[Chortitza Mennonite Settlement (Zaporizhia Oblast, Ukraine)|Chortitza]] dated 1842) were brought to [[North America|North America]].
-Originally not only elders ([[Bishop|bishops]]) performed the function of administering the Lord's Supper but also ministers, deacons, and possibly lay members. Gradually the practice developed that elders (bishops) only could be in charge of this function. In later centuries when in some countries and conferences the traditional function of an elder (bishop) was restricted to one congregation and his authority and function were reduced to that of a minister of one congregation, each local minister administered the Lord's Supper. This has been the case among the Mennonites of Holland for many generations and was the practice among most of the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]] and [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference]] congregations as well as other groups that have come from Europe to America during the 19th century. Among the groups of Swiss background such as the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonites (MC)]] and the [[Amish|Amish]], or the [[Old Colony Mennonites|Old Colony Mennonites]], where the bishop system was still the prevailing practice, only the bishop could be in charge of a communion service. The preachers and deacons assisted in the act. In Germany it was still the rule that only elders were in charge of the communion service.
+Originally not only elders ([[Bishop|bishops]]) performed the function of administering the Lord's Supper but also ministers, deacons, and possibly lay members. Gradually the practice developed that elders (bishops) only could be in charge of this function. In later centuries when in some countries and conferences the traditional function of an elder (bishop) was restricted to one congregation and his authority and function were reduced to that of a minister of one congregation, each local minister administered the Lord's Supper. This has been the case among the Mennonites of Holland for many generations and was the practice among most of the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]] and [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference]] congregations as well as other groups that have come from Europe to America during the 19th century. Among the groups of Swiss background such as the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonites (MC)]] and the [[Amish Mennonites|Amish]], or the [[Old Colony Mennonites|Old Colony Mennonites]], where the bishop system was still the prevailing practice, only the bishop could be in charge of a communion service. The preachers and deacons assisted in the act. In Germany it was still the rule that only elders were in charge of the communion service.
 Moral integrity, and unity and peace among the members were prerequisites for the observance of the Lord's Supper. For this reason it was always strongly emphasized that all differences and offenses should be removed between members before the Lord's Supper. This resulted in the practice among the Mennonites of [[Switzerland|Switzerland]], South [[Germany|Germany]], and Holland, of setting aside the Sunday before the observance of the Lord's Supper to cleanse the congregation as far as necessary and possible from all misunderstandings, and to clear all cases of necessary church discipline of individual members. If this was impossible some congregations would nor observe the Lord's Supper, or individuals not "at peace" with fellow men and God would stay away. In Holland this meeting was called <em>enigheid houden. </em>Mannhardt reports that the Danzig Mennonites up to the 19th century were invited by the <em>Ansager </em>or <em>[[Umbitter|Umbitter]] </em>(a sort of deacon) to come to the Lord's Supper and that the ministers inquired whether there was anything among the members of the congregation that needed to be cleared to have peace. In an Old Flemish congregation of the Netherlands in 1753 two brethren were asked to take off their [[Wigs|wigs]] for the communion service.
@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 Since the Mass was celebrated every Sunday it can be assumed and is easily understandable that the early Anabaptists observed the Lord's Supper quite frequently, possibly at every meeting. Gradually the frequency must have decreased to twice a year. At times in the past the Lord's Supper could not be observed because of lack of unity and peace. During the time of extreme liberalism in Holland some congregations temporarily discontinued this practice altogether. In the Netherlands most congregations observed it only once a year. In most of the congregations in other countries it was observed at least twice a year, in a few four times, and occasionally even ten times a year, rarely only once.
-As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- ''Cornelius Krahn''
+As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish Mennonites|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- ''Cornelius Krahn''
 = 1990 Article =
@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 The second stage in Mennonite eucharistic thought and practice begins with the transition to an established movement. The two most influential confessions of faith (Dordrecht in 1632 and the West Prussian [Flemish-[[Frisian Mennonites|Frisian]]-High German, later General Conference Mennonite] in 1660) perpetuate the plurality of Anabaptist eucharistic doctrines. The former articulates the memorial and covenant aspects (Loewen, <em>Confessions</em>, 67). The latter includes these but also teaches that Christ, "in his heavenly estate is the life-giving bread, food, and drink of our souls. In the keeping of this spiritual supper, Christ unites himself with all who truly believe" (Loewen, <em>Confessions</em>, 121/119). The [[Dordrecht Confession of Faith (Mennonite, 1632)|Dordrecht Confession]] articulated beliefs which were to be carried to the new world by Swiss Mennonites; the West Prussian confession articulated those which were carried by North German Mennonites to [[Russia|Russia]] and to North America. Both confessions included the ordinance of feetwashing.
-This second period of Mennonite history led to the codifying of practices concerning communion. [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]] and [[Gerrits van Emden, Jan (1561-1617)|J. Gerrits van Emden]] wrote meditations on and instructions for the observance of the Lord's Supper (<em>Vijf Stichtelijcke Predicatien</em>, 1650, 37ff). [[Clock, Leenaert (d. after 1638)|Leenaert Clock]] composed a prayer formulary in 1625 (<em>Formulier</em>, 60ff). Its three communion prayers were used by Mennonites throughout Europe and are still used by the [[Amish|Amish]] in the late 20th century.
+This second period of Mennonite history led to the codifying of practices concerning communion. [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]] and [[Gerrits van Emden, Jan (1561-1617)|J. Gerrits van Emden]] wrote meditations on and instructions for the observance of the Lord's Supper (<em>Vijf Stichtelijcke Predicatien</em>, 1650, 37ff). [[Clock, Leenaert (d. after 1638)|Leenaert Clock]] composed a prayer formulary in 1625 (<em>Formulier</em>, 60ff). Its three communion prayers were used by Mennonites throughout Europe and are still used by the [[Amish Mennonites|Amish]] in the late 20th century.
 By the 17th century it had become usual for Mennonites in northern Europe to celebrate communion twice a year while Mennonites in south [[Germany|Germany]] and Switzerland celebrated it once a year (Mast, <em>Letters</em>, 69). There is no extant rationale for the establishment of this practice. The following is an interpretive hypothesis: added to the undercurrent of fear of unworthy communion and obligatory confession beforehand, common through much of Christian history, was the Mennonite stipulation that believers had to be reconciled not only to God but to fellow Christians before they could commune. As communion for Anabaptists was a celebration of the church as the body of Christ, it could be observed only when the whole community was together and of one mind. As persecuted believers went into hiding and differing factions solidified, there could hardly be communion.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __FORCETOC__
 __TOC__
-<h3>1953 Article</h3> Communion (Lord's Supper, <em>Abendmahl, Nacht</em><em>mahl) </em>has always had only a symbolic meaning for the [[Anabaptism|Anabaptists]] and Mennonites and was observed as the ordinance of the Lord and not a sacrament which in itself conveys the grace of God to the participant. The early Christians probably observed the Lord's Supper at every meeting for worship in accordance with the Lord's ordinance given in Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25, etc. It was a memorial to the death of Christ and a means of the closest fellowship of the believers in Christ. In later centuries the sacrificial aspect surrounded by elaborate liturgical accompaniments was strongly emphasized so that the sacramental character predominated and the Lord's Supper became the "Sacrament," "Mass," or "Eucharist," as it is in the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]], the [[Eastern and Coptic Orthodox Churches|Greek Orthodox Church]], even the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, and some others. Bread and wine were believed to become actual flesh and blood of Christ (transubstantiation or consubstantiation) and partaking of them became a necessary means for securing forgiveness of sin.
+= 1955 Article =
 During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This <em>is </em>my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This <em>signifies </em>my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."
@@ Line 43: / Line 44: @@
 Since the Mass was celebrated every Sunday it can be assumed and is easily understandable that the early Anabaptists observed the Lord's Supper quite frequently, possibly at every meeting. Gradually the frequency must have decreased to twice a year. At times in the past the Lord's Supper could not be observed because of lack of unity and peace. During the time of extreme liberalism in Holland some congregations temporarily discontinued this practice altogether. In the Netherlands most congregations observed it only once a year. In most of the congregations in other countries it was observed at least twice a year, in a few four times, and occasionally even ten times a year, rarely only once.
-As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- Cornelius Krahn
+As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- ''Cornelius Krahn''
-<h3>1989 Article</h3>    [[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set'']]     The primal act of the Christian church is its gathering to eat bread and drink wine in memory of Jesus. This ritual meal originated among the Jewish people as a reenactment of their exodus from Egyptian bondage. The Christian breaking of bread recalls Jesus' meals with seekers and friends before and after his resurrection (Mark 2:18-22; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 24:13-35; John 21:9-14) and, supremely, that Passover supper at which the Messiah announced a new covenant to be inaugurated by his death (Mark 14:12-25). The early Christians believed that even after his ascension the repeating of the meal Jesus had instituted at his death was a "communion of the body and blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16), i.e., a participation in his person and life.
+= 1990 Article =
 It was not long before attempts were made to explain this mystery. Some (Irenaeus, fl. ca. 180-200; Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-86) emphasized the physical changing or conversion of the bread and wine as the means by which Christ is present; others (Clement of Alexandria, fl. ca. 200-215; Origen, ca. 185-254) concerned themselves more with the spiritual reality of this communion. At the time of the Protestant Reformation the former interpretation dominated in the western church. It was one of the central concerns of the Reformation to restore eucharistic practice and belief to their primitive simplicity. This involved a denial that priest and sacrament cause Christ to be present by the performance of the ritual whether or not there was a response of personal faith. All the reformers taught that nothing could or needed to be added sacramentally to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Many non-Lutheran reformers (Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican) put forth the claim that Christ could not be offered again because physically he was in heaven. Since the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, it was not to be celebrated at an [[Altar|altar]] but around a table.
@@ Line 75: / Line 80: @@
 The spiritual and theological work of the ecumenical movement has transcended 16th-century formulations as the unassailable norm for how both Protestants and Catholics understood the Bible. Mennonite, like other Protestant, understandings of the Lord's Supper came into being in the controversies of the Reformation. In the late 20th century, Mennonites stand on the threshold of a revolution sure to be as significant for how the church breaks bread as was that of the 16th century.
-In summary, the Mennonite interpretation of Christian belief concerning the Lord's Supper has the following traits: It is opposed to speculation about metaphysical changes in the elements, yet often rationalistic in its arguments against such speculations. It has a spiritualistic tendency which is manifest in its inability to make positive claims for the relationship in communion between bread and the presence of Christ. At the same time the traditional piety of participants in communion indicates belief in a mysterious reality beyond what Mennonite teaching can explain. The Mennonite interpretation of communion has emphasized the human more than the divine action of grace. This has sometimes been a way of countering claims for divine action which Mennonites deem to be unbiblical. More often it has issued from the conviction that ethical response is the most profound act of gratitude for grace. -- John D. Rempel
+In summary, the Mennonite interpretation of Christian belief concerning the Lord's Supper has the following traits: It is opposed to speculation about metaphysical changes in the elements, yet often rationalistic in its arguments against such speculations. It has a spiritualistic tendency which is manifest in its inability to make positive claims for the relationship in communion between bread and the presence of Christ. At the same time the traditional piety of participants in communion indicates belief in a mysterious reality beyond what Mennonite teaching can explain. The Mennonite interpretation of communion has emphasized the human more than the divine action of grace. This has sometimes been a way of countering claims for divine action which Mennonites deem to be unbiblical. More often it has issued from the conviction that ethical response is the most profound act of gratitude for grace. -- ''John D. Rempel''
 See also [[Christology|Christology]]; [[Communion Call|Communion Call]]; [[Worship, Public|Worship, Public]]

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel ]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, <em>Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, </em>330).
-The <em>[[Schleitheim Confession (Anabaptist, 1527)|Schleitheim Articles]] </em>speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" <em>(Mennonite Quarterly Review </em>19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.
+The <em>[[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Articles]] </em>speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" <em>(Mennonite Quarterly Review </em>19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.
 It was during the celebration of the Mass that the priest Menno Simons began to doubt the Catholic teaching regarding the Mass. These "whisperings of the devil" must have come to Menno via the Sacramentist movement. After a long struggle he realized that the spirit of God was leading him to the Bible as a source of information. He now believed that the "outward man" received in the Lord's Supper bread and wine, but that the "spiritual man received through the promises of Christ the invisible bread and drink" <em>(Fundament, </em>1539 H.i.i.j.2). Menno accused the Catholic Church of having made an idol of the Lord's Supper, which made Christ Himself superfluous. He emphasized strongly the symbolic character of the Lord's Supper which points to the one in whom all salvation is found—Christ. The Lord's Supper was a memorial of the death of Christ for men and a special occasion for self-examination (C. Krahn, <em>Menno </em><em>Simons, </em>18-21, 139-142).
@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 The three tendencies of Anabaptist belief about communion are the following: (a) The relationship between God and humanity is unmediated; grace cannot be caused by material means. It is the immediate work of the Spirit through the response of faith which unites us to Christ. Bread and wine remain outward signs of an inward relationship. (b) The person of Christ, more than the words of institution, is the source for understanding what happens in communion. The church is the extension of his incarnate life. This presence is renewed in the Lord's Supper. Since his ascension, the Lord's physical body is in heaven. Because he is fully human and fully divine, Christ can be present only in one place at a time in his humanity, but he is present everywhere in his divinity. (c) The Gospel of John is the preeminent source for Anabaptist eucharistic thought. From it comes the emphasis on Christ's ascension, the description of the Lord's Supper as a meal of love, and the inclusion of feetwashing as the enactment of that love.
-Certain of these characteristics and tendencies dominated each of the three regions in which Anabaptism originated. The most far-reaching reformation of the Lord's Supper took place among the Swiss Brethren. They placed their emphasis on the body of Christ as the church and on the memorial/thanksgiving character of communion ([[Schleitheim Confession (Anabaptist, 1527)|Schleitheim Confession]], articles 2, 3). [[Walpot, Peter (1521-1578)|Peter Walpot]] turned to rational arguments to prove the impossibility of the Catholic position and removed all mystery from communion (<em>TA Oberdtsch. II</em>, "Vom Abentmahl, 126-34, layoffs). [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], the most original and sophisticated representative of the Swiss Anabaptist view of communion, argued that the most profound sign function of the Lord's Supper was that it represented the church's pledge to give up its life just as Christ had done (Hubmaier, <em>Schriften</em>, 104, 317-18). Thus communion became primarily an ethical event; not so much a means of grace as a response to grace.
+Certain of these characteristics and tendencies dominated each of the three regions in which Anabaptism originated. The most far-reaching reformation of the Lord's Supper took place among the Swiss Brethren. They placed their emphasis on the body of Christ as the church and on the memorial/thanksgiving character of communion ([[Schleitheim Confession|Schleitheim Confession]], articles 2, 3). [[Walpot, Peter (1521-1578)|Peter Walpot]] turned to rational arguments to prove the impossibility of the Catholic position and removed all mystery from communion (<em>TA Oberdtsch. II</em>, "Vom Abentmahl, 126-34, layoffs). [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], the most original and sophisticated representative of the Swiss Anabaptist view of communion, argued that the most profound sign function of the Lord's Supper was that it represented the church's pledge to give up its life just as Christ had done (Hubmaier, <em>Schriften</em>, 104, 317-18). Thus communion became primarily an ethical event; not so much a means of grace as a response to grace.
 Among South German Anabaptists, [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]] taught a mystical union with Christ which was symbolized by bread and wine but came about in the individual's willingness to suffer with Christ. [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]] reacted against the emphasis on the exclusively human and inward reality of communion, insisted on divine initiative in the celebration, and emphasized the outward form of the celebration. For him the Lord's Supper was not a static object but a dynamic event. In it the Holy Spirit takes the gathering of those who come in faith and love to break bread and unites it with Christ. Christ's incarnation is the model of how God reveals himself. he comes to us in outward realities to lead us to inward ones (<em>CRR</em> 2:76, 85, 99). Thus, our faith and the bread we share are made by the Spirit into a participation in Christ (<em>CRR</em> 2:194ff.; Marpeck, <em>Verantwortung</em>, in <em>Marbeck-Schwenckfeld</em>, ed. Loserth [1929], 501-515).

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 During the Reformation this practice and concept were changed in the direction of the early Christian Church. The Anabaptists belonged to the wing which most radically broke with this tradition and restored the Biblical practice. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] insisted on a literal interpretation of the words of Christ, "This <em>is </em>my body," while [[Zwingli, Ulrich (1484-1531)|Zwingli]] interpreted it as meaning "This <em>signifies </em>my body." The early Anabaptists, who had originally closely associated with Zwingli, largely shared his views along these lines. Zwingli had adopted his interpretation which did away with the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper from the Dutch lawyer [[Hoen, Cornelius Hendrickz (d. 1523/24)|C. Hoen]], who had written on this subject in 1521. In the [[Netherlands|Netherlands]] those denying the sacramental character of the Lord's Supper became known as "[[Sacramentists|Sacramentists]]." It was this movement which influenced the early Dutch Anabaptists including such leaders as [[Menno Simons (1496-1561)|Menno Simons]]. [[Luther, Martin (1483-1546)|Luther]] and the Lutherans commonly called the Zwinglians "Sacramentarians."
-The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, <em>Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, </em>330).
+The first source of information regarding the attitude and beliefs of the early [[Swiss Brethren|Swiss Anabaptists]] is a letter which [[Grebel, Conrad (ca. 1498-1526)|Conrad Grebel ]]and some friends wrote to [[Müntzer, Thomas (1488/9-1525)|Thomas Müntzer]], dated 5 September 1524: "The Lord's Supper was ordained by the Lord as a means of fellowship. Nothing more nor less should be used than the words found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and 1 Corinthians 11. The minister of the congregation should read them from one of the Gospels or from Paul's letter. One should eat and drink in the spirit and in love. Even if it is only bread, if faith and brotherly love precede, it should be partaken of joyfully; and as often as it is practiced within the congregation it is to signify that we are truly one body and bread and are and wish to remain true brethren together" (Geiser, <em>Die Taufgesinnten-Gemeinden, </em>330).
 The <em>[[Schleitheim Confession (Anabaptist, 1527)|Schleitheim Articles]] </em>speak of the Lord's Supper as the breaking of "one bread in the remembrance of the broken body of Christ" and the drinking of the cup "as a remembrance of the shed blood of Christ" <em>(Mennonite Quarterly Review </em>19, 1945, 248). [[Denck, Hans (ca. 1500-1527)|Hans Denck]], [[Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?-1528)|Balthasar Hubmaier]], [[Marpeck, Pilgram (d. 1556)|Pilgram Marpeck]], and the other early leaders emphasized the fact that the Lord's Supper was ordained by Christ so that His disciples would commemorate His atoning death and have true fellowship in Him. The basic idea of the Catholic Church, the transubstantiation and the sacramental character, disappeared and the Biblical meaning of the Lord's Supper was restored.
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 During the early days of persecution, little attention could be paid to the outward form of the Lord's Supper. There was a very definite feeling and conviction that as much as possible of the outward form of the Catholic tradition should be done away with because of the idolatrous implications. Little attention was paid to uniformity of practice in the various parts of Europe where Anabaptists were located.
-Rembert <em>(Wiedertäufer, </em>510) reported regarding the communion services among the Anabaptists of the [[Lower Rhine (Germany)|Lower Rhine]]in the late 16th century: "When the Lord's Supper was distributed the minister took the bread and broke a piece of it for each, and as soon as it was given out and each had a piece in his hand, the minister also took a piece for himself, put it into his mouth and ate it; and immediately, seeing this, the congregation did the same. The minister, however, used no words, no ceremonies, and no blessing. As soon as the bread was eaten, the minister took a bottle of wine or a cup. drank, and gave each of the members of it. On this wise they observe the breaking of bread."
+Rembert <em>(Wiedertäufer, </em>510) reported regarding the communion services among the Anabaptists of the [[Lower Rhine (Germany)|Lower Rhine ]]in the late 16th century: "When the Lord's Supper was distributed the minister took the bread and broke a piece of it for each, and as soon as it was given out and each had a piece in his hand, the minister also took a piece for himself, put it into his mouth and ate it; and immediately, seeing this, the congregation did the same. The minister, however, used no words, no ceremonies, and no blessing. As soon as the bread was eaten, the minister took a bottle of wine or a cup. drank, and gave each of the members of it. On this wise they observe the breaking of bread."
 In the 16th century severe persecution made development along uniform lines difficult. One of the differences seems to have been whether the bread and wine were to be distributed by the officiating elder or minister while the members kept their seats, or whether the members were to come to the front of the meeting place to receive the bread and wine, seated around a table. Vos. [[Kühler, Wilhelmus Johannes (1874-1946)|Kühler]], [[Zijpp, Nanne van der (1900-1965)|van der Zijpp]], <em>et al., </em>are of the opinion that in the Netherlands it was the original practice to distribute the bread and wine to the participants in their seats, and that [[Ries, Hans de (1553–1638)|Hans de Ries]], an elder of the [[Waterlanders|Waterlanders]], introduced the practice of handing the bread and wine to the participants seated at table in groups around 1580. Thus it became the practice of the Waterlanders to observe the Lord's Supper seated around a table, while the [[Flemish Mennonites|Flemish]] received it from the elder in their seats. Later. when Flemish and Waterlander congregations united, a compromise was usually made. At one time of the year the Lord's Supper would he served around the table and at another time in the seat, This was the practice of the Amsterdam Mennonite Church to the 1950s.
-The widespread practice in certain groups of Mennonites in South and North [[Germany|Germany]] to have the members of the congregation come to the table in the front of the room to receive the bread has very likely no connection with this practice of the Waterlanders, but is due to Lutheran influences. The practice of putting the bread into a cloth or handkerchief until it is eaten in unison must be old, going back to the Catholic days when the actual presence of Christ in the bread and wine was a basic belief. According to Vos <em>(De avondmaalsbediening . . .) </em>this practice was observed among the early Dutch Mennonites but disappeared completely. Among some of the Mennonites of Prussian, Polish, and Russian background in America, it was still practiced in the 1950s ([[Beatrice (Nebraska, USA)|Beatrice]], [[Grace Hill Mennonite Church (Whitewater, Kansas, USA)|Gnadenberg]], Rosenort, and other congregations). When the cup is passed from member to member the one receiving it turns to his neighbor who has not yet been served, asking with a silent nod for permission to help himself, to which the neighbor responds with a nod. The origin and full meaning of this practice is not known to the writer. It may have been the intention by this practice to indicate brotherly love and recognition. The practice was still in use in [[Berlin (Germany)|Berlin]] as well as in [[Göttingen (Niedersachsen, Germany)|Göttingen]] in the 1950s, probably coming from [[West Prussia|West Prussia]].
+The widespread practice in certain groups of Mennonites in South and North [[Germany|Germany]] to have the members of the congregation come to the table in the front of the room to receive the bread has very likely no connection with this practice of the Waterlanders, but is due to Lutheran influences. The practice of putting the bread into a cloth or handkerchief until it is eaten in unison must be old, going back to the Catholic days when the actual presence of Christ in the bread and wine was a basic belief. According to Vos <em>(De avondmaalsbediening . . .) </em>this practice was observed among the early Dutch Mennonites but disappeared completely. Among some of the Mennonites of Prussian, Polish, and Russian background in America, it was still practiced in the 1950s ([[Beatrice (Nebraska, USA)|Beatrice]], [[Grace Hill Mennonite Church (Whitewater, Kansas, USA)|Gnadenberg]], Rosenort, and other congregations). When the cup is passed from member to member the one receiving it turns to his neighbor who has not yet been served, asking with a silent nod for permission to help himself, to which the neighbor responds with a nod. The origin and full meaning of this practice is not known to the writer. It may have been the intention by this practice to indicate brotherly love and recognition. The practice was still in use in [[Berlin (Germany)|Berlin]] as well as in [[Göttingen (Niedersachsen, Germany)|Göttingen]] in the 1950s, probably coming from [[West Prussia|West Prussia ]].
 The vessels—cup, pitcher, and plates or baskets in which wine and bread were served—were originally very plain. They became more ornamental during the "Golden Age" (17th century) in the Netherlands. The cup and pitcher were originally earthenware or pewter and later sometimes silver, the first silver cups having been used at [[Zwolle (Overijssel, Netherlands)|Zwolle]] in 1661. Etchings were common. This was also the case among the Mennonites in Prussia and [[Russia|Russia]]. Some of the vessels for communion services in Prussia and Russia (including cups from [[Chortitza Mennonite Settlement (Zaporizhia Oblast, Ukraine)|Chortitza]] dated 1842) were brought to [[North America|North America]].
@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 As stated earlier, throughout the 16th century and in most places down to the 19th century only members in good standing could participate in the Lord's Supper. This practice, called close communion, was also followed by other evangelical denominations and was in the mid-20th century still practiced by some large and small groups in America, e.g., the large Southern Baptist group. During the 17th and 18th centuries the Mennonites of Holland were divided on this question as to who should be admitted. The [[Zonists|Zonists]] and other conservatives favored the retention of close communion, while the [[Lamists|Lamists]] and others wanted to have not only all Mennonites of various groups admitted but also other professing Christians (v. d. Zijpp, 119, 244). Most of the European Mennonites practiced open communion by the 1950s, stating in their invitation something to the effect that all Christians were welcome to participate. In America this practice in the mid-20th century was followed by the [[General Conference Mennonite Church (GCM)|General Conference Mennonite Church]] and some others, while the [[Mennonite Church (MC)|Mennonite Church (MC)]], the [[Mennonite Brethren Church|Mennonite Brethren]], [[Krimmer Mennonite Brethren|Krimmer Mennonite Brethren]], the [[Amish|Amish]], and the [[Hutterian Brethren (Hutterische Brüder)|Hutterites]] generally observed close communion, i.e., only members of their own group in good standing were admitted. -- Cornelius Krahn
-<h3>1989 Article</h3>    [[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set
+<h3>1989 Article</h3>    [[File:Communion_Set.jpg|300px|thumb|right|''Communion set'']]     The primal act of the Christian church is its gathering to eat bread and drink wine in memory of Jesus. This ritual meal originated among the Jewish people as a reenactment of their exodus from Egyptian bondage. The Christian breaking of bread recalls Jesus' meals with seekers and friends before and after his resurrection (Mark 2:18-22; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 24:13-35; John 21:9-14) and, supremely, that Passover supper at which the Messiah announced a new covenant to be inaugurated by his death (Mark 14:12-25). The early Christians believed that even after his ascension the repeating of the meal Jesus had instituted at his death was a "communion of the body and blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16), i.e., a participation in his person and life.
 It was not long before attempts were made to explain this mystery. Some (Irenaeus, fl. ca. 180-200; Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-86) emphasized the physical changing or conversion of the bread and wine as the means by which Christ is present; others (Clement of Alexandria, fl. ca. 200-215; Origen, ca. 185-254) concerned themselves more with the spiritual reality of this communion. At the time of the Protestant Reformation the former interpretation dominated in the western church. It was one of the central concerns of the Reformation to restore eucharistic practice and belief to their primitive simplicity. This involved a denial that priest and sacrament cause Christ to be present by the performance of the ritual whether or not there was a response of personal faith. All the reformers taught that nothing could or needed to be added sacramentally to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Many non-Lutheran reformers (Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican) put forth the claim that Christ could not be offered again because physically he was in heaven. Since the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, it was not to be celebrated at an [[Altar|altar]] but around a table.
@@ Line 109: / Line 107: @@
 Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. <em>Die Täufer.</em> Munich: C. H. Beck, 1980.
-Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. <em>Mennonitisches Lexikon</em>., 4 v. Frankfurt &amp; Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe; Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
+Hege, Christian and Christian Neff. <em>Mennonitisches Lexikon</em>., 4 v. Frankfurt &amp; Weierhof: Hege; Karlsruhe: Schneider, 1913-1967: v. I, 6-10.
 Kaufman, Gordon F. <em>Systematic Theology: a Historicist Perspective.</em> New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968.

@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 See also [[Christology|Christology]]; [[Communion Call|Communion Call]]; [[Worship, Public|Worship, Public]]
 = Bibliography =
 Clock, L. "Formulier Ethlicken Christlichen Gebaethe" in <em>Christliche Glaubens-Bekentnus</em>, ed. Tieleman T. Sittert. Amsterdam: Johan Paskovium, 1664.
@@ Line 128: / Line 126: @@
 Windhorst, Christer. "Das  Gedächtnis des Leidens und Pflichtzeichen brüderlichen Liebe" in <em>Umstrittenes Täufertum, 1525-1975</em>, ed. Hans-Jürgen Goertz. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975.
 {{GAMEO_footer|hp=Vol. 1, pp. 651-655, v. 5, pp. 170-172|date=1989|a1_last=Krahn|a1_first=Cornelius|a2_last=Rempel|a2_first=John D.}}

Communion - Revision history

SamSteiner at 14:08, 31 December 2018

RichardThiessen: Text replace - "Mennonitisches Lexikon" to "''Mennonitisches Lexikon''"

RichardThiessen: Text replace - "" to ""

RichardThiessen: Text replace - "Mennonitisches Lexikon., 4 v." to "Mennonitisches Lexikon, 4 vols."

RichardThiessen at 06:02, 5 October 2013

RichardThiessen at 06:01, 5 October 2013

RichardThiessen: Replaced the internal link to the Schleitheim Confession to the article of the same.

GameoAdmin: CSV import - 20130823

GameoAdmin: CSV import - 20130820

GameoAdmin: CSV import - 20130816