# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_Mai 1856_S147
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Questions Concerning the Effect of the Holy Supper, etc. 147

...just as Adam, through his indwelling, propagated in us the corrupted nature, which is the mother of many abominations and injuries and has incurred both temporal and eternal punishments, so Christ, through his indwelling, propagates in us the restored nature, which is capable of many virtues and partakes of both temporal and eternal rewards. —

Question II.
Whether, besides the spiritual union, a certain sacramental
union between Christ and the communicants — both worthy
and unworthy — is to be posited.

This is denied, 1. because in this way the term "union" is evidently
misused. For that is called a sacramental union which
obtains between the earthly sign and the heavenly good, from which
certain manners of speech relating to the Sacrament are derived, taken
over from those used of the personal union. But now a new
sacramental union would be added, of which, however, Scripture knows
nothing, nor does it furnish any ground for it. It is true
that Paul, in 1 Cor. 10:16 and 17, mentions a twofold
union that takes place in the Sacrament: a. the sacramental union,
which relates to the earthly signs joined with the heavenly good;
b. the spiritual union, which relates to Christ's spiritual body and its members.
But just as hypocrites are not members of that spiritual body of Christ,
unless one speaks improperly, so one must not believe that a
union properly so called, one that is supposed to arise from the Supper,
pertains to them, or takes place between them and Christ — whether
it be called a sacramental union, or anything else. —

2. That sacramental union, according to its origin,
comes about only through the eating of the body and the drinking of the blood: but it is one thing
that the ungodly eat the body of Christ and drink the blood of Christ,
and another thing that they be spiritually united with Christ through
the working of the Sacrament. The former must be granted for the sake of the truly sacramen-
tal union, which takes place between the earthly sign
and the heavenly good and depends on the authority of the institutor, not
on the character of the fellow communicant. The latter, however, must be rejected,
because the character required of the fellow eater and drinker is
lacking, namely faith. Whoever, accordingly, does not have faith, is in
no way affected by the salutary effect of the Sacrament, the union with Christ;
and if one did not grant this, it would follow that a certain
salutary effect ex opere operato must be ascribed to the Supper apart from any good move-
ment on the part of the one partaking.

3. Also against this stands the comparison drawn with the baptism of
adults: for what spiritual effect does this have that would be common to
believers and hypocrites alike? None whatsoever — namely, that which