# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2023_S241
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

One little word can fell him
Addendum to “Communion and Covid-19”

Ten reasons to question whether “online Communion” is “truly good, right and salutary”

O

n March 20, 2020, the CTCR unanimously
endorsed “Communion and Covid-19” (CC19),
an opinion on certain Holy Communion
practices during the coronavirus pandemic. The
opinion was drafted by the staff, in concurrence with
the chairman of the Commission, at the request of
the Synod president. While the opinion in its entirety
met with widespread expressions of gratitude and
agreement, some have also questioned it — particularly
its recommendation against online, streaming services
of Communion in which households consecrate with
the pastor and then commune together alone.1
An anonymous document has been circulated within
the Synod titled “Communion in Homes During Times
of Crisis: Scriptural and Confessional Principles” (CIH).2
It is evidently written and/or endorsed by pastors who
are now advocating and practicing online home Communion services in their congregations and who intend
to continue the practice. The authors offer it “in the spirit
of fraternal discussion and edification,” and in it they
“share some of the Scriptural and Confessional principles that guided our decision-making.”3
CIH offers three statements or assertions to support
the practice of online family Communion:
First, we believe that it is appropriate to celebrate the
Lord’s Supper, even while faithful participants may
be in different physical locations, because the gifts
offered in Christ’s body and blood are not based on
1
The CTCR first objected to a proposed practice in which congregations would hold online or streaming services wherein the words
of institution are spoken by the pastor in a video while individuals
in their homes receive bread and wine or grape juice from their own
tables (or altars). This CTCR position was consistent with a 2006
CTCR opinion on “DVD Communion” regarding a similar approach
using a recorded DVD rather than streaming or online videos (files.
lcms.org/wl/?id=7ZiqCqGn3FiMMtQcbrcFQuPjjfn9AoMQ). The central
objection raised in both CTCR opinions is that such practices would
inevitably result in “doubts or uncertainty about the Sacrament” since
they depart significantly from the pattern and practice of the New
Testament. The CTCR also stated that it could not endorse the practice
of having the pastor consecrate elements for elders to distribute.

At this time neither the authors of the document nor its place nor the
date of its publication are known.
2

3

CIH, 2.

ONE LITTLE WORD CAN FELL HIM

|

LSCE question # 312, 295.

ONE LITTLE WORD CAN FELL HIM

|

Second, we believe that it is appropriate for both
pastor and people to speak the Words of Institution
in the celebration of Communion because the words
and gifts of Christ are given to the whole Church.5
Third, we believe that the promise and certainty of
the Lord’s Supper is not found in the mere recitation of a certain set of words. Nor is it found in the
physical space in which a set of words is spoken. The
promise and certainty of the Lord’s Supper is found
in Christ and Christ’s Word alone.6
We appreciate the aforementioned purpose of
the document, to engage in “fraternal discussion and
edification.” In that same spirit, what follows are 10
reasons in support of the CTCR conclusion given in
CC19, that Lutheran churches should refrain from
online Communion services as described therein.

1. God’s Word alone gives us everything
we need for faith, life and salvation.

I

t should be cause for thanksgiving that
disagreement over this particular practice does
not preclude agreement in important truths. First,
both those who oppose and those who approve of the
practice believe, teach and confess that the Sacrament
of the Altar is the gift of Christ’s very body and blood,
“in and under the bread and wine, which we Christians
are commanded by Christ’s word to eat and drink” (LC
Fifth Part, §8, KW 467).7 Second, both parties fully hold
to the teaching that the forgiveness of sins is conveyed
to those who commune in faith, believing Christ’s words
that the Sacrament is “‘given for you’ and ‘shed for you
4

CIH, 2.

5

CIH, 3.

6

CIH, 5.

References to the Lutheran Confessions are from Robert Kolb and
Timothy Wenger, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000), with the
specific confession abbreviated, the section(s) indicated by § and the
page in the volume following the abbreviation KW.
7

THE LUTHERAN CHURCH—MISSOURI SYNOD

Jesus’ sake and God’s gracious variety of forms by which
it can be both heard and enacted — in baptismal washing, in the gathered meal of Christ’s body and blood, in
the declarations of grace and absolution, in the quiet
reminders given by members of the royal priesthood to
one another. Extravagant grace indeed!
Note also Luther’s reference in the foregoing quotation to the preaching of forgiveness as “the proper
function of the gospel.” Scripture’s Word spoken is the
foundation for every other means by which forgiveness is delivered to believers. The Word alone makes
the “signs” efficacious and salvific. And the practices
of Baptism, Communion, the power of the keys, and
the words of “mutual conversation and consolation” of
fellow believers with one another all have the common
foundation of the Gospel and with it, the central benefit
of the forgiveness of sins. For this reason, as highly as the
Lutheran church has valued these sacred acts, we have
also acknowledged that one who is unable to receive
them, but does not scorn them, does not forego the
precious gifts of forgiveness of sins, life and salvation.
Even Baptism, which Lutherans have always performed
in emergency circumstances, is not to be viewed legalistically as a requirement to be fulfilled to gain one’s
salvation.12 Similarly, we do not doubt the salvation of
our baptized infants and little children or prospective
members who are yet to be catechized, even though they
do not yet commune. Why? Because the Gospel Word,
which is the power of God for salvation (Rom. 1:16) and
gives us everything we need for faith, life and salvation,
has been heard and believed.
CIH does not deny the power of the Word at work
in the Lord’s Supper. Rather, it says “we believe that the
promise and certainty of the Lord’s Supper is not found
in the mere recitation of a certain set of words. Nor is
it found in the physical space in which a set of words is
spoken. The promise and certainty of the Lord’s Supper
is found in Christ and Christ’s Word alone.” For this we
give thanks. However, we do question some of the conclusions drawn from this valid assertion in CIH, as the
following will show.

12

our locations, but in wherever Christ has promised
to be present.4

for the forgiveness of sins’” (SC Sacrament of the Altar,
§5–6 and 9–10, KW 362–63). Third, and most importantly, both parties can join in the song and sentiment of
“A Mighty Fortress” with its triumphant cry that, in the
face of Satan and all his evil ways, “one little word can
fell him” (LSB 656:3).
We rejoice that all of us can agree that God’s Word
alone (Holy Scripture) gives us the wisdom to address
difficult and vexing theological problems, that God’s
Word alone (the Gospel) is the one thing needful
(Luke 10:42) and “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom. 1:16),8 and that God’s Word
alone (Jesus) is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (John
14:6). We praise God for this. For this very reason, we
endeavor here to “speak the truth in love” (eph. 4:15)
to and with brothers and sisters in Christ. This means
at times speaking forthrightly, but always in a spirit of
fraternal and collegial prayer, hope, and desire that God
would grant us a spirit of unity on this and all other
issues that threaten to divide us as a church body, and
thereby hinder our witness to Christ.
Underlying the teachings about the Lord’s Supper
noted in the first paragraph is the confessional insistence
on the trustworthiness and power of the Word of God.
In the Small Catechism the reality of the bodily presence
of Christ in the Sacrament’s elements is substantiated by
the written Word of God: “the holy evangelists, Matthew,
Mark, and Luke, and St. Paul write thus,” says Luther
before giving the Words of Institution. Then he adds that
the benefits of the Lord’s Supper are “the forgiveness of
sins, life, and salvation,” which he again buttresses with
the Word: “Eating and drinking certainly do not do it,
but rather the words that are recorded” (SC Sacrament
of the Altar, §4–8, KW 362–63). This is true also of
Baptism. There, too, the power lies not in the element,
but in the Word of God which is always trustworthy.
It, too, forgives and saves “as the words and promise of
God declare” (SC Sacrament of Holy Baptism, §5–6, KW
359). Water cannot do this, “but the Word of God, which
is with and alongside the water, and faith, which trusts
this Word of God in the water” can indeed do what it
promises (SC Sacrament of Holy Baptism, §9–10, KW
359). And, what is true of both Baptism and the Lord’s
Supper is also true of the Office of the Keys. Our Synod
catechism reminds us that Christ gives His church power
8
Scripture quotations are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English
Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing
ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission.
All rights reserved.

1

ONE LITTLE WORD CAN FELL HIM

T

If some want to justify their position by saying that
they want to commune themselves for the sake of
their own devotion, they cannot be taken seriously.
For if they seriously desire to commune, then they
do so with certainty and in the best way by using
the sacrament administered according to Christ’s
institution.15

he Sacrament of the Altar is not ours to do
with it as we please. It is the Lord’s Supper and He
is the true “officiant” since it is He who acts in the
Words of Institution — and who instructs us regarding
the proper use of His Supper.
Our Lord Our Lord Jesus Christ, on the night when
He was betrayed, took bread, and when He had given
thanks, He broke it and gave it to the disciples and
said: “Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for
you. This do in remembrance of Me.”
In the same way also He took the cup after supper,
and when He had given thanks, He gave it to them,
saying, “Drink of it, all of you; this cup is the new
testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the
forgiveness of sins. This do as often as you drink it, in
remembrance of Me.”13

In these words, He calls us (His disciples) to repeat
His holy meal (Do this) in His remembrance. He tells us
what to do (taking bread and the cup of wine), what we
are eating and drinking (His body and blood) and what
we receive with it (forgiveness). The synoptic Gospels
reinforce one another in these essential facts while St.
Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians corroborates them
in the earliest church, showing both how they may be
wrongly and rightly enacted.
Our confessions take care to show not merely that
Lutheran churches have a semblance of the sacraments,
but also the right use of them: “through God’s grace our
churches are now enlightened and supplied with the
pure Word and right use of the sacraments” (SA Preface
of Martin Luther §10, KW 299; emphasis added). This
was especially true regarding the Sacrament of the Altar.
Early in the Reformation a chief point of controversy
was the private Mass. In the Smalcald Articles Luther
calls it a human invention, an unnecessary thing that
can be omitted without sin or danger, something that
distracts from reception in a “better and more blessed
way ... according to Christ’s institution,” a practice that
has led to abuses, and a work by which individuals think
they are reconciled to God, acquire forgiveness and merit grace, thereby distracting from the Lamb of God who
alone takes away our sin.14
LSCE 28, 322.

14

See SA II, 2, §2–7, KW 302.

THE LUTHERAN CHURCH—MISSOURI SYNOD

3

None of the above material is focused on the efficacy
of the private Mass. “It is not a question of can one
communion alone; rather, it is a question of should
one commune alone.”16 Similarly, the CTCR’s primary
concern with online Communion is whether one can
do it with certainty — whether it is a right use (“truly
good, right and salutary”) of the Sacrament “according
to Christ’s institution.”
Concern over right use is clearly evident in the
Formula of Concord. CIH quotes from the Formula’s
Epitome (VII, §8 and 9) to emphasize the necessity
of the Words of Institution and that it is Christ’s own
words, not the minister’s recitation, that effect the
presence of Christ’s body and blood in the elements.17 It
states its agreement with the CTCR’s CC19 in this, but
then objects to the Commission’s concern over “where
these words must be spoken” as representing the CTCR’s
endorsement of an incantation: “We have difficulty understanding how an insistence that a certain set of words
be spoken by a certain person in a certain space can be
conceived of as anything other than the very definition
of an incantation.”18 We object to this claim on the basis
of the Formula of Concord itself. Lutherans have been
concerned precisely with such things as who speaks
the words of institution and the place of the speaking.
To say otherwise would be to suggest, for example,
that one could record the words of institution and play
them (say, on one’s cell phone) anywhere and anytime
at all and still be fully confident that the Sacrament is
being consecrated — after all, God’s Word is always and
everywhere powerful and efficacious! Such a view of
the power of God’s Word “wherever and however it is
15

SA II, 2, §8–9, KW 302. Emphasis added.

16
We are indebted to an unpublished paper written by Pr. Trevor Sutton (LCMS) for this quotation and the preceding line of thought. His
paper is “Making Sense of Online Communion: A Certain and Best
Celebration of the Lord’s Supper,” dated January 17, 2020, available
from the author.
17

CIH, 6.

18

CIH, 6–7.

ONE LITTLE WORD CAN FELL HIM

“to forgive the sins of repentant sinners” by showing that
very promise from the Word of God:
This is what St. John the Evangelist writes in chapter
twenty: The Lord Jesus breathed on His disciples and
said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone
his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them,
they are not forgiven.” (John 20:22–23)9
All of this, of course, is simply a reminder of the
Lutheran understanding of the Means of Grace, that is,
the means that God uses to bestow His gracious gift of
forgiveness and, with it, life and salvation. He does so by
His Word. The Word is the foundational Means of Grace:
“Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the
word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). The Spirit works through
the word of Christ to create faith. This truth is the
foundation of the Lutheran doctrine of justification and
our understanding of salvation. The Word does it all! We
confess with Luther:
Therefore everything in this Christian community is
so ordered that everyone may daily obtain full forgiveness of sins through the Word and signs appointed to comfort and encourage our consciences as long
as we live on earth.10
The Word here is the Gospel, the promise that Christ
Jesus is Lord, that we are justified by grace through faith
in Christ, that in Him all sin is atoned and forgiveness is
freely given. The Gospel empowers the “signs” — Baptism, the Supper and Absolution. All this is
because God is extravagantly rich in his grace: first,
through the spoken word, in which the forgiveness
of sins is preached to the whole world (which is the
proper function of the gospel); second, through
baptism; third, through the holy Sacrament of the
Altar; fourth, through the power of the keys and also
through the mutual conversation and consolation of
brothers and sisters. Matthew 18[:20]: “Where two or
three are gathered ...”11
Note first the reference to God’s “extravagantly rich”
grace. How grateful we are that the Gospel comes to us
by various means. We have its voice even in these perilous times of quarantine. Its extravagance applies both to
its full and total declaration that all sins are forgiven for
9
Luther’s Small Catechism (St. Louis: Concordia, 1986) as it appears in
Luther’s Small Catechism with Explanation (St. Louis: Concordia, 2017),
27, 314. Abbreviated as LSCE.
10

LC Creed, §54–55, KW 438.

11

SA III [4:], KW 319.

THE LUTHERAN CHURCH —MISSOURI SYNOD

Luther then meets the final objection to His view —
that the private Mass is a form of devotion:

2. It is the Lord’s Supper, not our
supper.

13

|

2

spoken” (CIH, 7), with specific reference to the words
of institution (CIH, 7), is detached from careful and
serious attention to the scriptural context of the Lord’s
institution of His Supper and its grounding in a specific identifiable and locatable set of actions that, as our
Lutheran Confessions teach, constitute “right use.” The
Epitome certainly addresses this, saying, “God has and
knows various ways to be present at a certain place” (FC
Ep VII, §14, KW 505, emphasis added), including a specific and unique way to be present in the body and blood
of Christ at specific places and times when the Supper
is used and practiced according to Christ’s institution.
These are matters of right use — the usus or actio that the
Formula of Concord Solid Declaration discusses:
In order to preserve this true Christian teaching on
the Holy Supper and to avoid and eliminate many
kinds of idolatrous abuses and perversions of this
testament, this useful rule and guide is taken from
the Words of Institution: nothing has the character
of a sacrament apart from the use [usus] instituted by
Christ or the divinely instituted action [actio]. (That
is, when Christ’s institution is not observed as he
established it, there is no sacrament.) This rule dare
not be rejected in any way, but it can and should be
followed and preserved in the church of God with
great benefit. The usus or actio (that is, the practice or
administration) does not refer primarily to faith or to
the oral partaking, but to the entire external, visible
administration of the Supper, as Christ established
the administration of the Supper: the consecration,
or Words of Institution, and the distribution and
reception or oral partaking of the consecrated bread
and wine, Christ’s body and blood. Apart from this
practice it is not to be regarded as a sacrament — for
example, when in the papistic Mass the bread is not
distributed but is made into a sacrifice, or enclosed
[in a tabernacle], or carried about in a procession, or
displayed for adoration.19
This is very much pertinent to this conversation
about online Communion. The “useful rule and guide”
offered here is that “when Christ’s institution is not
observed as he established it, there is no sacrament.” It
has to do with “the entire external, visible administration
of the Supper” and includes consecration, distribution
and reception according to Christ’s institution. CC19 is
concerned with the “external, visible administration of
the Supper” and nothing less.
19

|

241

FC SD VII, §85–87, KW 607–8.

THE LUTHERAN CHURCH —MISSOURI SYNOD

2023 Convention Workbook

4