The Lord's Supper is no less a divine institution and ordinance (institutio divina) than are Baptism, Matt. 28, 19, and the preaching of the Gospel, Mark 16, 15. 16. The Holy Supper, which our Lord instituted in the same night in which He was betrayed, was to continue in use till the end of time (Luke 22, 19:. "This do in remembrance of Me"; 1 Cor. 11, 25 : "This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me"). So the holy apostles and the primitive Christian Church understood the divine command, 1 Cor. 10, 16-22; 11, 17-34, and celebrated Holy Communion accordingly.
The divine institution of the Lord's Supper requires emphasis, since to-day certain enthusiasts (Quakers, the Salvation Army) reject the Holy Supper "as a mere ceremony not commanded by our Lord." In doing this, these enthusiasts are thoroughly consistent. Inconsistent enthusiasts (Calvinists) repudiate only the oral reception of the body and blood of Christ in Holy Communion (manducatio oral is) on the ground that "the flesh profiteth nothing'' (a misapplication of John 6, 63), while the Quakers reject the Sacrament altogether, on the ground that "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink" (a misapplication of Rom.14, 17) and that no man must judge the Christian "in meat or in drink" (a misapplication of Col. 2, 16).
According to Quakerian doctrine the true Lord's Supper is eaten and drunk in the heart (a misapplication of Rev. 3, 20). Quakerism teaches, moreover, that Christ celebrated the first Supper only for the benefit of His "weak disciples," so that this was meant for perpetuation as little as was "foot-washing," John 13, 5, or "the anointing of the sick with oil," Jas. 5, 14. 15, or "the abstaining from blood and from things strangled," Acts 15, 29. But the Quakers are not the only offenders in this respect.
Modern rationalistic theologians (B. Weiss, Juelicher, Spitta) have endeavored to disprove the divine institution of the Lord's Supper by arguments no more valid than are those which Quakerism employs ("Only Paul and Luke cite the words: 'This do in remembrance of Me,'" etc.). Cremer, on the contrary, rightly remarks that no fact in the New Testament is better attested than is the divine ordinance of the Holy Supper (RE^3, I, 33).
In contradistinction to Holy Baptism, which is the sacramentum initiationis, or the Sacrament by which faith is engendered, the Lord's Supper is the sacramentum confirmationis, that is, the Sacrament by which faith is strengthened. Gerhard: Per baptismum in foedus Dei recipimur; per usum sacrae coenae in eo conservamur. Per baptismum fides et reliqua Spiritus dona in nobis accendentur; per usum sacrae coenae augentur et confirmantur.
Baptism therefore rightly precedes Holy Communion. On Pentecost, St. Peter urged the penitent Jews to be baptized, but not to receive the Lord's Supper, Acts 2. This fact is of great practical importance; for persons who desire to receive Holy Communion should first be baptized before they are admitted to the Lord's Table. (Cp. Col. 2, 11. 12: Baptism in the New Testament has taken the place of Circumcision; and in the Old Testament only the circumcised were admitted to the Passover, Ex. 12, 48.)
The names which are applied to this Sacrament are either given in Scripture directly (the breaking of bread, κλάσις τοῦ ἄρτου, Acts 2, 42; the Lord's Supper, δεῖπνον κυριακόν, 1 Cor. 11, 20; the Lord's Table, τράπεζα κυρίου, 1 Cor. 10, 21), or suggested by Scripture (Eucharist, εὐχαριστήσας, Mark 14, 23; Communion, 1 Cor. 10, 16; Abendmahl or Nachtmahl~ 1 Cor. 11, 23). In the writings of the Church Fathers this Sacrament is also called "religious service" (σύναξις), "love-feast'' (ἀγάπη), "liturgy" (λειτουργία), "sacrifice" (ϑυσία), "offering" (προσφορά), "mystery" (μυστήριον), "thanksgiving" (εὐχαριστία, εὐλογία), etc., and in those of the Latin fathers "mass" (missa), coena Domini, sacramentum altaris, etc.
As long as the names of the Sacrament are not used to express unscriptural doctrine, no controversy ought to be waged about them (cp. Luther, St. L., XX, 174 ff.). Luther at times employed the name mass, though he expressly rejected the papistic doctrine of the Mass, and he defended this use against his fanatic opponent Carlstadt. Modern German theologians (Boltzmann, Noesgen, etc.) frequently employ the term Herrenmahl, which is the equivalent of our English expression "Lord's Supper."