The sermon by Eric Bechler focuses on the Lord's Supper, particularly addressing two abuses: the denial of the cup to the people and the worship of the elements. Historically, the Catholic Church's practice of withholding the cup emerged from councils like Lamberth and Constance, based on the belief that Christ is wholly present in either element, thus making communion complete with just one. Reasons for this practice include avoiding the risk of spilling the consecrated wine, facilitating frequent communion, and hygiene concerns. Transubstantiation, the belief that consecrated bread and wine become Christ's body and blood, underpins these practices but is not supported by early church teachings. The sermon contrasts this with biblical examples where Jesus instructed his disciples to partake of both bread and wine. Additionally, the sermon criticizes the worship of the Eucharistic elements, arguing it constitutes idolatry, as Protestant beliefs reject the notion of transubstantiation. The sermon concludes by emphasizing the spiritual significance of the Lord's Supper and its intended observance according to Christ's instructions.

We continue today in our teaching of the Lord's Supper. Last week we focused, our focus was on how the Lord's Supper is to be administered, the consecration of the elements and their distribution. Today we will focus on a couple of abuses that have occurred. The denial of the cup and the worshiping of the elements themselves. The first point raised in our confession is the denial of the cup to the people.

Although there is some disagreement with the historical record of how far back this practice goes, the Catholic Church acknowledges that communion under both kinds was the prevailing usage in apostolic times. We also find that both Pope Leo from 440 to 461 AD and Pope Galatius from 492 to 496 AD emphatically condemned persons who abstained from the chalice. It is not until the 13th century that we begin to see a change. The Council of Lamberth directed that consecrated wine is to be received by the priest alone and non-consecrated wine is to be received by the faithful. And by 1416 at the Council of Constance, Communion under both kinds was abolished in the Catholic Church.

So why the change? What are the reasons that the Catholic Church offers for such a departure from Scripture? David Emory at the Coming Home Network answers the question for us, how come the cup is not offered to the congregation at Mass. The Catholic Church has always believed that the Eucharistic elements must consist of both bread and wine, but that Jesus Christ is equally present under each species. In other words, he is totally present in the form of bread and totally present in the form of wine.

So that if one partakes of one element without the other, his communion is complete because he has truly received Jesus Christ whole and entire. The Catholic Encyclopedia states the Catholic Church also takes the position that there is an absence of a divine precept imposing communion under both kinds, turning to John 6 verses 52, 54, and 58, and 1st Corinthians 11, 27, through 28 for their scriptural support. Furthermore, they believe that they have the discretionary power over everything connected with the sacraments that is not divinely determined. Thus their position is decided by a reference to the twofold purpose to be attained of safeguarding the reference due to this most august sacrament and a facilitating and encouraging its frequent and fervent reception. Nor can it be doubted that the modern Catholic discipline best secures these ends.

The danger of spilling the precious blood and of other forms of irreverence, the inconvenience and delay in administering the chalice to large numbers, the difficulty of reservation for communion outside of Mass, the not unreasonable objection on hygienic and other grounds, from promiscuous drinking from the same chalice, which of itself would be an act as a strong deterrent to frequent communion in the case of a great many otherwise well disposed people. These in similar weighty and just reasons against the practice of receiving both elements are more than sufficient to justify the church and forbidding it. These are the position of the Catholic Church that I just read. To better understand some of this, let's take a moment for some background. There is a position that the Catholic Church takes with respect to the elements of the Lord's Supper that impacts our discussion today and is a topic we'll speak more of in the coming weeks.

This is transubstantiation. What is it? Fundamentally, it is the belief that when the priest consecrates the elements, The substance of the bread changes to Christ's flesh, and the substance of the wine changes to Christ's blood. This is confusing since when you look at the bread and wine, they look like bread and wine. When you eat and drink them, they taste like bread and wine.

So how does this work? Philosophically there is a distinction made between the substance and something called accidents. The substance of something is what it actually is, its essence. The accidents of something are the external, perceivable qualities of that substance. Because accidents are not essential to a substance identity, they are the features that allow substances to undergo change without losing their identity.

For example, a tree can lose its leaves, change colors, or even be pruned, but it is still a tree. The question then becomes how do you explain the substance changing and the accidents remaining the same? Gentleman Dr. Dennis Beach makes a similar point. The doctrine of transubstantiation completely reverses the usual distinction between being and appearance.

Where the being is held to be unchanging and appearance is constantly changing. Transubstantiation maintains instead that that being or substance changes while the appearance remains unchanged. Such reversals in the order of things are affronts to reason and require much, not little, to affirm philosophically. Moreover, transubstantiation seems to go far beyond the simple distinction between appearance and reality. Unfortunately, I'm unable to explain to you all the details all of this.

I don't know a whole lot about philosophy and metaphysics. It is quite complicated and in the end they believe that after the consecration by the priest the substance of the bread and wine are changed to the body and blood of Christ, but the appearance, texture, smell, taste of bread and wine are maintained. They believe this is a point of faith. We don't see this position held by the apostolic or early church. We find that transubstantiation was discussed as early as the 11th century and officially defined by the Catholic Church in 1215 at the Fourth Lateran Council.

So how does this impact our discussion? A. Hodges offers some insight. After the establishment of the doctrine of transubstantiation, there arose the natural fear lest some of the august person of the Lord should be spoiled or lost from the crumbling of the bread or the spilling of the wine. Hence the bread is prepared in little wafers which cannot crumble, and the cup is denied to the laity and confined to only the priest.

To comfort the laity they teach that as the blood is in the flesh and as the soul is in the body and as the divinity is in the soul of Christ the whole person body blood soul and divinity of Christ is equally in every particle of the bread So that he who receives the bread receives all And this was stressed also in the Council of Trent. Our confession states that the denial of the cup to the people is contrary to the nature of this ordinance and to the institution of Christ. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper was instituted by Christ himself with his words and with his example. The Gospel of Matthew records Jesus's words in Matthew 26 verses 26 and 27 and as they were eating Jesus took bread blessed and broke it and gave it to the disciples and said, Take, eat, this is my body. Then he took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them saying, Drink from it, all of you.

Jesus tells his disciple to eat the bread. He tells the disciples to drink from the cup, all of you. Jesus' example for us is to eat the bread and drink the wine, all of you. We can turn to the Gospel of Mark in Mark 14 verses 22 through 23. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said, Take, eat.

This is my body. Then he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it. Jesus' disciples ate the bread he had given them. He gave the cup of wine to his disciples and they all drank from it. Again, Jesus' words and examples show us clearly how to observe the Lord's Supper.

Finally, we can turn to Paul in 1 Corinthians 11, verses 26 and 28, who clearly states that both elements are to be received, for as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till he comes. But a man must examine himself, and so in doing, he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup." There should be no confusion with this. Scripture is clear. We are to eat the bread and drink of the cup when we partake the Lord's Supper. To deviate this would be to violate the instructions and the examples that Christ himself gave to us.

The second point made by our confession is that worshiping the elements, the lifting them up or carrying them about for adoration, or reserving them for any pretended religious use are contrary to the nature of this ordinance and to the institution of Christ. Again, this comes also from the position taken by the Catholic Church with regards to transubstantiation. If the bread and wine are truly the body and blood of Christ, it would be appropriate to worship them. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, because Christ himself is present in the sacrament of the altar, he is to be honored with the worship of adoration. In the liturgy of the Mass, we express our faith in the real presence of Christ under the species of bread and wine, by among other ways, genuflecting or bowing deeply as a sign of adoration to the Lord.

The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers to the sacrament of the Eucharist the cult of adoration, not only during Mass but also outside of it, reserving the consecrated hosts with the utmost care, exposing them to the solemn veneration of the faithful and carrying them in procession. But we don't believe in transubstantiation. We don't believe that the substance of the bread and the wine changes to the actual body and blood of Christ when the elements are consecrated. So we would consider this idolatry, which is prohibited in the Ten Commandments. Richard read Exodus chapter 20 verse 4 and 5.

Dr. Sproul gives us some explanation here. For Christ to be present in his human nature, his body, in more than one place at the same time requires that some kind of communication of divine attributes takes place between God and the human Jesus. This was the chief objection that Calvin and the other reformers launched against both Luther and Rome because they saw in it a violation of the Council of Chalcedon which taught that Jesus Christ, the God-man, is acknowledged in two natures, unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, and inseparably, meaning the two natures of Christ are united without confusion and without mixture. For Jesus and his human nature, to which his body certainly belongs, to be present at more than one place at the same time would require the deification of his body, which the reformer saw as a thinly veiled, monophycite heresy, which held that the incarnation, the divine nature, and the human nature were combined in the Lord Jesus making a new third kind of nature.

John Calvin insisted on the true presence of Christ but he also insisted that the presence of Christ is through his divine nature, spiritual. His human nature is no longer present with us. It is in heaven at the right hand of God. We still are able to commune with the human nature of Christ by means of our communion with the divine nature, which does indeed remain united with or to the human nature, but that human nature remains located in heaven. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper is a gift to God's people.

It was given directly from Jesus Christ and is the sign of Christ's presence among his people and of their unity in him. When we receive it in faith, we derive benefit and nourishment from feeding on Jesus Christ spiritually. Let us not neglect in partaking the Lord's Supper each time we gather as the body of Christ. Let us not abuse or misuse what Christ has clearly instituted in His holy, infallible, and immutable Word. Amen.