LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2026, Page 252

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

252

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

Proper Administration of the Lord’s Supper

The “word, institution, and ordination” of Christ creates the sacramental union
(FC SD VII 73–75).4 And His “Do this” means the validity of the Sacrament also
includes more than a mere recitation of Christ’s word over bread and wine. “This
embraces the entire action or administration in this Sacrament. In an assembly
of Christians bread and wine are taken, consecrated, distributed, received, eaten,
drunk, and the Lord’s death is shown forth at the same time. St. Paul also places
before our eyes this entire action of the breaking of bread or of distribution and
reception (1 Corinthians 10:16)” (FC SD VII 84). This is summarized in the ancient
rule that “nothing has the nature of a Sacrament apart from the use [usus] instituted by Christ or apart from the action [actio] divinely instituted” (FC SD VII 85).
“The use or action here does not mean chiefly faith. Nor does it mean the oral participation alone. It means the entire external, visible action of the Lord’s Supper
instituted by Christ: the consecration, or words of institution, the distribution and
reception, or oral partaking of the consecrated bread and wine, of Christ’s body
and blood” (FC SD VII 86).

That we seek to avoid ambiguity about the Sacrament, however, does not mean
that every specific thing described in the Last Supper or in Paul’s advice to Corinth
must be followed in some kind of rigid mimicry. When Jesus said, “Do this,” He
focused on eating the bread that He promises is His very body and drinking the
cup that He assures us is His very blood. Our Lord’s emphasis is not on such things
as the Passover setting or the physical action of breaking a loaf or other such matters. He tells us simply to eat and drink the bread and cup that are His body and
blood—and thereby assures us that our sins are forgiven.

Given the emphatic certainty of the Gospel in the words of Jesus when He
instituted His Holy Supper, we should be concerned if any church practice fails to
follow His institution or if it introduces doubt or uncertainty about the Supper. Instead, the church rightly seeks to follow our Lord’s own institution in Holy Communion. Just as our Lord took bread and wine, declaring it His body and blood and
promising that “in the Sacrament forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation are given
us through these words” (SC VI 6), so we also echo His very words over bread and
wine, distributing them in confident faith because He has declared that He wants
to distribute His very body and blood in this way.
The clear words of Christ answer essential questions: “For Christ gives this command at the table and at supper. There is certainly no doubt that He speaks of real,
natural bread and of natural wine. Also, He speaks of oral eating and drinking” (FC
SD VII 48). Everything important is there in the Words of Institution. Because they
are simple and clear and make unambiguous promises, our practice should avoid
anything that takes the plain, powerful words of Jesus and produces questions or
uncertainty, or leads to unhelpful, confusing, or illegitimate practices.

4

The Latin text reads, “verbo, institutioni atque ordinationi,” and the German, “Wort, Einsetzung und
Ordnung.” See Concordia Triglotta, 999.

9
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

10
Proper Administration of the Lord’s Supper
Luther and the Confessions, and of confessional Lutheran teachers who followed.
Throughout this history the term “fruit of the vine” has been understood as a technical term and not a general description. The LCMS and its theologians have with
great consistency affirmed that only bread and wine are to be used in the Lord’s

SUBSTITUTION OF GRAPE
JUICE FOR ORDINARY WINE

Supper. This position can be traced from C. F. W. Walther to Franz Pieper to the
faculties of our seminaries to the CTCR.7
In 1998, the Synod convention affirmed this understanding in Res. 3-16B, “To Affirm Use of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Altar.” In keeping with its title,

This is not the place to trace the history of how and why grape juice came to be

the resolution included reminders that the Scriptures are unanimous in stating

substituted for wine in the practice of Holy Communion. We should simply note
5

that our Lord used bread and a cup of wine in the Last Supper and that the same

that the practice came out of Methodist revivalism’s condemnation of all alcohol

were present in the Sacrament at Corinth. Pastors were urged to “remain faithful

use and was spurred by Thomas Welch’s (a Methodist minister) development of a

in their practice of Christ’s institution” so as “not to introduce an element of un-

way to prevent the fermentation of grape juice through pasteurization.6

certainty into the Sacrament.”8

Over time the substitution of grape juice for wine was adopted by many Protestant

As noted in 2023 Res. 5-15, the Synod again addressed this topic in 2001, in Res.

churches and even by some LCMS congregations. Within the LCMS, however, this

3-16, “To Encourage Use of Only Wine in Administration of the Lord’s Supper.”

practice has not involved a total substitution of grape juice for wine. In such cases

The convention then addressed congregations that were using grape juice: “That

wine is used by most members and grape juice is available for alcoholics and oth-

the congregations be encouraged to use only wine for the Sacrament.”9 Once

ers who avoid alcohol for medical reasons.

more, in 2023 Res. 5-15, the Synod again reaffirmed its 2001 Res. 3-16 stance, “To

Although some LCMS congregations may in some situations substitute grape juice

Encourage Use of Only Wine in Administration of Lord’s Supper.”10

for wine in the Lord’s Supper, the LCMS has taken a long-standing, consistent po-

We must add that this consistent position also indicates concern for the commu-

sition against the practice. For this reason, although 2023 Res. 5-15 asked the CTCR

nicant who for various reasons cannot tolerate alcohol. The discussions of both

to take up the three concerns we are addressing herein, the use of grape juice in

seminaries and the CTCR all note the availability of low or non-alcoholic wines

place of wine can be considered most briefly. The resolution itself reaffirms a 2001

that may be used without objection.

resolution that strongly encourages our congregations to use only wine and not
grape juice (see Appendix A for the full text of 2001 Res. 3-16).
The Synod’s position on this matter predates 2001 and is based firmly on Scripture.
It is also consistent with the traditions of the church before the Reformation, of

5

A relatively brief history of the temperance movement in the US is available on the National Institutes
of Health’s National Library of Medicine. See Paul Aaron and David Musto, “Temperance and Prohibition in America: A Historical Overview,” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216414/.

6

See Joe Iovino, “Methodist History: Communion and Welch’s Grape Juice,” United Methodist Church,
June 28, 2016, https://www.umc.org/en/content/communion-and-welchs-grape-juice#:~:text=To%20
combat%20the%20epidemic%20of,it%20is%20such%20common%20practice.

11

2026 Convention Workbook

12

7

See Walther’s Pastoral Theology (Concordia Publishing House, 2017), 199; Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics, vol. 3 (Concordia Publishing House, 1953), fns 94, 354; also “Opinion of the Department of
Systematic Theology,” Concordia Theological Quarterly 45, nos. 1–2 (1981): 77–80; “Is ‘Non-Alcoholic
Wine’ Really Wine?” Concordia Journal 17, no. 1 (1991): 4–6; Commission on Theology and Church
Relations, Theology and Practice of the Lord’s Supper (The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1983),
under 2. The Elements, b. The Wine, 16–17.

8

See The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 1998 Convention Proceedings.

9

See The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 2001 Convention Proceedings.

10

2023 Convention Proceedings, 157.