Kepler - A Lutheran in Prague

When Newton said, "If we've seen further it's because we're standing on the shoulders of giants," he was talking above all about the Lutheran scientist Johannes Kepler.

Here's a little something on the Lutheran religious views of Kepler, and then something from an event celebrating Kepler in Prague several years ago. The great Lutheran and first astrophysicist, Johannes Kepler spend the first decade of the 17th century in Prague working for the Emperor Rudolf II. The photo below of the globe was taken today at the rather inauspicious Kepler Museum not far from The Charles Bridge.

Matt H.

From: Dan Graves, Scientists of Faith, Kregel Resources: Grand Rapids, MI (1996), pages 46-48:

The founder of modern astronomy... His real dream was to enter the ministry, but economic necessity forced him to pursue mathematics. He would later recognize God's leading in the academic route he followed... Harrassment over his religious beliefs compelled him to leave Gratz [Austria] in 1597. He spent some time in Prague, but community opposition to his Lutheranism eventually drove him from there as well. The persecution led him to his big break. Kepler began working with Tycho Brahe...

[page 48] All of Kepler's writings and letters displayed deep religious convictions. He held that Scripture used the common expressions of mankind when it spoke about mundane things as opposed to spiritual mattes. Hence, he perceived the Bible to be a spiritual and not a scientific guide. He held reason to be above authority in matters of natural philosophy, while authority (that is, church and Scripture) ruled in matters of religion. Beneath it all, he saw himself as a priset of nature whose discoveries glorified the name of God.

Firmly believing that God created the universe, Kepler sought to discover how it was set in motion. "I wanted to become a theologian," he wrote. "For a long time I was restless. Now, however, behold how through my effort God is being celebrated in astronomy."

As a Lutheran working in areas controlled by Catholics, he suffered pangs of conscience when forced to make compromises. When Mysterium cosmographicum was printed, Kepler's school requested he delte passages referring to Scripture. He did so, but in a short tract explained his view on the relationship of Scripture to science. Unfortunately, Galileo borrowed from it freely and without attribution so that it came to be reprinted as his own work.

For this and numerous other citations about Kepler and his Lutheran faith click here. Werner Elert also has a very nice section on Kepler's Lutheran orthodoxy in his Structure of Lutheranism. M.H.

Prague Technical Museum introduces "Johannes Kepler in Prague"

13-08-2003 | Dita Asiedu

• Send by email
• Print

Listen: RealAudio

The Technical Museum in Prague will be opening a new exhibition on Monday, looking at the life and works of famous German astronomer Johannes Kepler. The exhibition called "Kepler and Prague", is part of the international World View Network project and aims at informing the public about the ways in which famous astronomers have influenced our lives. More from the exhibition's curator Antonin Svejda:

"Our colleagues from Sweden's Landskrona, specifically the Tycho de Brahe Museum on the Island of Hven, decided to launch a project documenting the co-operation of various renowned astronomers. They chose to feature five great Modern Age scientists - Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, and Newton - and found five institutions that would be able to host exhibitions focusing on each one of these men. So, our museum was approached to introduce the significant years of Johannes Kepler in Prague. He actively worked in the Czech capital for twelve years, which were probably the most important and productive years in his life."

Johannes KeplerFrom 1600-1612, to be precise. Johannes Kepler is chiefly remembered for discovering the three laws of planetary motion that bear his name. But besides Kepler's work, visitors will also be able to see the various types of instruments used by astronomers at the time and how they worked.

"Some of the objects and publications at this exhibition are obviously borrowed from other museums. One such object is a beautiful sundial from the workshop of Erasmus Hebermel. It dates back to 1600 and was lent to us from Prague's Academy of Decorative Arts. We also have a piece that's called the Somnium, or the 'Dream', which is a publication on lunar astronomy. Kepler worked on it for dozens of years and most of it came to being while he was in Prague. It was so scientifically advanced that it wasn't until 1644 that it was published by Kepler's son Ludwig. It is a very interesting book that describes Kepler's journey to the moon. Written in Latin, he tells us what travellers would have to face on their trips to the moon - radiation, gravity - and the problems involved in the actual transfer. So, with this publication, Kepler was at least 350 years ahead of us, even though the first real trip to the moon was not until the second half of the twentieth century."

Bethlehem Chapel - Pulpit of Jan Huss

Here's a little something from www.prague.cz on Bethlehem Chapel, which we visited today. Couldn't get inside due to a wedding. MH

---

The Bethlehem Chapel in Prague Old Town is a place of great importance because of the reformer Jan Hus, who used to preach there in the 15 ^th century. It was a birthplace of reformative movement in the Czech Kingdom. Other reformers, such as Thomas Müntzer, used to preach there as well. The chapel was demolished in the 18 ^th century and there were only remains of the walls preserved, but it was built again according to the original plans in 1950s.

The origin of the name “Bethlehem Chapel”

The Bethlehem Chapel was built in 1391 by rich courtier Hanus of Mühlheim and tradesman Vaclav Kriz. They donated relics for the chapel – probably relics of one of the murdered Bethlehem babies. That´s also the origin of the chapel´s name.

The Bethlehem Chapel is very large, it has enough space for 3000 visitors, so it used to be called simply “Bethlehem”. It was also a burial place – several important personalities, such as Jakoubek of Stribro, are buried there.

Jan Hus in the Bethlehem Chapel

Bethlehem Chapel became very popular because of reformer Jan Hus (John Huss), who preached there from 1402 to 1413. Noblemen as well as poor people attended his preaching, even Queen Zofie did. The reformative movement grew here, and it escalated when Jan Hus was burnt as a heretic in 1415. The situation led to the Hussite wars.

The Bethlehem Chapel remained a centre of Protestant Church after the Hussite wars ended, but Catholicism finally won in the Czech Kingdom. The rebellion of Protestant nobles was defeated at the Battle of White Mountain in 1620. The Church of Rome confiscated the chapel then and Jesuit order bought it in 1661. They made it a Catholic church.

Demolition and rebuilding of the chapel

After the Jesuit order was suppressed in the 18 ^th century, Emperor Joseph II. had the Bethlehem Chapel desecrated and demolished in 1786. Only a sacristy remained there, with a room, where Jan Hus used to live.

The idea to rebuild the chapel was realized in 1950s. The original shape of the building was found out from old illustrations and it was projected by Jaroslav Fragner. The remains of the original Bethlehem Chapel were integrated to the new one. Its walls are decorated with paintings by art school students, inspired by biblical themes.

St. Vitus Cathedral Flying Buttresses et al

Took these in-auspicious shots today with my IPhone. MH

Just a few photos of St. Vitus taken today in Prague

Prague: The Lutheran Executions of 1621

Sitting up in Prague in the wee hours of the morning, wrestling with the time change. I pulled a couple of things off the web regarding the famous "Charles Bridge" which Kathy and walked today. It was there that the heads of 27 martyrs - many of them Lutheran - were impaled as a warning against insurrection against the Catholic authorities in 1621. The whole event was the tinder box which touched off the Thirty Years War. We are

here for a meeting of Confessional Lutherans in Central Europe. Kathy and I came a few days early for a couple of much needed vacation days. Saturday a friend will take us about 45 minutes south for a trek to the places and churches whence my Catholic Bohemian grandfather came. The Vondraks came to the U.S. in 1877, to Sioux City, Iowa. Was reading elsewhere that prior

to the events noted below, 90 percent of Bohemia was Lutheran.

Walked the Old Town Square today where the martyrs bled. Gives me courage to be Lutheran now, midst our light and momentary trials.

Matt H.

From Wikipedia:

The Charles Bridge is a famous historic bridge that crosses the Vltava river inPrague, Czech Republic. Its construction started in 1357 under the auspices of King Charles IV, and finished in the beginning of the 15th century. As the only means of crossing the river Vltava (Moldau) until 1841, the Charles Bridge was the most important connection between Prague Castle and the city's Old Town and adjacent areas. This "solid-land" connection made Prague important as a trade route between Eastern and Western Europe. The bridge was originally called the Stone Bridge (Kamenný most) or the Prague Bridge (Pražský most) but has been the "Charles Bridge" since 1870.

The bridge is 516 meters long and nearly 10 meters wide, resting on 16 arches shielded by ice guards. It is protected by three bridge towers, two of them on the Lesser Quarter side and the third one on the Old Town side. The Old Town bridge tower is often considered to be one of the most astonishing civil gothic-style buildings in the world. The bridge is decorated by a continuous alley of 30 statues and statuaries, most of them baroque-style, originally erected around 1700 but now all replaced by replicas.

At night Charles Bridge is a quiet place, but during the day it changes its face into a very busy venue with painters, owners of kiosks, and vendors alongside numerous tourists crossing the bridge.

Throughout its history, the Charles Bridge suffered several disasters and witnessed many historic events. A flood in 1432 damaged three pillars. In 1496 the third arch (counting from the Old Town side) broke down after one of the pillars lowered, being undermined by the water (repairs were finished in 1503). A year after the Battle of White Mountain, when the 27 leaders of the anti-Habsburg revolt were executed on 21 June 1621, the Old Town bridge tower served as a deterrent display of the severed heads of the victims to stop Czechs from further resistance. During the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648, the Swedes occupied the west bank of the Vltava, and as they tried to advance into the Old Town the heaviest fighting took place right on the bridge. During the fighting, they severely damaged one side of the Old Town bridge tower (the side facing the river) and the remnants of almost all gothic decorations had to be removed from it afterward. During the late 17th century and early 18th century the bridge gained its typical appearance when an alley of baroque statues was installed on the pillars. During a great flood in 1784, five pillars were severely damaged and although the arches did not break down, the traffic on the bridge had to be greatly restricted for some time.

Charles Bridge during 1872 flood

The original stairway to Kampa Island was replaced by a new one in 1844. The next year, another great flood threatened the bridge, but the bridge escaped major damage. In 1848, during the revolutionary days, the bridge escaped unharmed from the cannonade, but some of the statues were damaged. In 1866, pseudo-gothic gas (later changed to electric) lights were erected on the balustrade. In the 1870s, the first regular public-transport (omnibus) line went over the bridge (officially called "Charles Bridge" after 1870), later replaced by a horse tram. The bridge towers underwent a thorough reconstruction between 1874 and 1883.

On 2–5 September 1890, another disastrous flood struck Prague and severely damaged the Charles Bridge. Thousands of rafts, logs and other floating materials that escaped from places upstream gradually formed a huge barrier leaning against the bridge. Three arches were torn down from the great pressure and two pillars collapsed from being undermined by the water, while others were partly damaged. With the fifth pillar, two statues – St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Xavier, both by Ferdinand Brokoff – also fell into the river. The former statue was replaced by a statuary of Saints Cyril and Methodius by Karel Dvořák; the latter was replaced by a replica of the original. Repair works lasted for two years (the bridge was reopened on 19 November 1892) and cost 665,000 crowns.

Old Town Square Executions in 1621

PhDr. Vladimír SAKAŘ, CSc.

July 21 is the day to remember 27 executed representatives of the revolt of the Czech Estates, a revolt defeated in inauspicious battle upon White Mount, November 8, 1620. This defeat had meant the end of religious freedom in the Czech Crown Lands for more than two hundred years and was a prelude to a catastrophe, completed after a few decades of war by the Westphalian Peace in 1648, affirming the victory of the House of Hapsburg in Central Europe for a very long time. Czech Lands had become part of the Roman Catholic region, divided by the first "Iron Curtain" from Protestant Europe.

We can say without exaggeration that the representatives of the Czech Estates, executed on the Old Town Square June 21, 1621 [see the picture: The 27 Czech Protestant Intellectuals' Execution – 27 Representatives of the Czech Estates' Revolt (according to the historical engraving)], were the first victims of an ongoing violent "counter-reformation" and simultaneously the first victims of the constitutional changes prepared by winner from White Mount in the Czech Kingdom and Moravian Margravate.

The whole uprising of estates was triggered by attempts of recatholization, first visible during the reign of Mathias the Hapsburg (1611–1619), when the first direct sanctions against Protestant communities in certain dominions, belonging to the Crown or the Church, were enacted. When, in December 1617, the Evangelical church in Hroby was destroyed and a similar church in Broumov closed, the protestant community was greatly disturbed, also because of the summer election of Ferdinand of Styria, well known recatholizator who pushed back the Lutheran Church in Styria and Carinthia, which flourished during the reign of his father Karl, as a king in both mentioned lands.

We also have to realize that the Czech Estates were deeply anchored in the legal environment of religious tolerance and confessional freedom as it was present in land's laws from the second half of 15^th century (by Agreement from Kutná Hora in Bohemia and by Book of Tovačov in Moravia). These laws were affirmed and even expanded by Rudolph's Imperial Charter in 1609.

We can surely consider these facts as motives for the Evangelical Estates (as the Czech Estates, Protestant in confession, called themselves) to start their revolt by the Third Prague Defenestration, May 23, 1618. From this single act had emerged the great European conflict, transformed from the Czech War into the Thirty Years one.

It is clear that the whole action was ill prepared. The election of Calvinist Friedrich of Palatinate as the Czech King was not the most favorable, because it had cut the Czech Estates off from the support of the Saxon Elector, Lutheran John George. This decision was probably put through by future representatives of the Unity of Brethren [Unitas Fratrum], especially by Václav Budovec of Budov, sympathising more with Calvinists. There was yet another problem, lying in the internal relations between the new king Friedrich and the land's government of the Estates. This problem was exaserbated especially on Christmas 1619, when preacher Skultetus "cleared" (with king's permission) the St Vitus' Cathedral in Prague Castle, removing many artefacts [images; statuary] and even damaging its interior decoration. That upset almost all the Estate representatives, not only Lutherans, but members of the Unity as well, not mentioning many moderate Utraquists.

The next problem could be found in the relationship between cities (the Burgess Estate) and petty aristocracy on the one side and leaders of the revolution on the other. This was part of the negative heritage of the disensus between the higher Estates (wealthy and influential houses) in year 1547, when the Czech Estates tried to provide help for German (Imperial) Protestants, fighting in the Schmalkald War. That uprising was led by wealthy aristocracy but cities were the ones to bear the burden of Emperor's wrath when many aristocrats turned to be far more self interested than longing for religious tolerance.

The main fault of the revolting Estates lay however in their lack of self–sacrifice. Their armies, consisting of underpaid mercenaries, were poorly equipped, and the Estates had refused the suggestions from the leader of the Evangelical Estates in Austria, Ignatz Tschermembel, who said that the common people should be (in order to continue in the Hussite tradition) involved in the revolt by improvement of their social status.

It must be realized that despite all this flaws, the main significance of the revolt in 1618 was this (citation from work of Josef Pekař, Czech first–class historian, Roman Catholic in confession and faith):

"However different influences and motives were presented in Czech War and however weakly and unfortunately it was lead, the war itself is, and will be in its very core, the product of fear of moral violence, the act of defense against forcible counter-reformation incorporated in person of Ferdinand II the Hapsburg ruler. From this we must make the moral and cultural assessment of the battling sides. It was not the higher culture, who won at the White Mount. And however high have been towers of baroque churches and ornate fronts of palaces in catholised Prague, their victorious stance can not banish the memory of tears and blood, filling the raped land after the years of terror, caused by the victor" (Josef Pekař: Bílá Hora, její příčiny a následky).

The executions and the preceding trial, so much resembling trials and executions of the sinister communistic regime in 1950, were bloody presages of what was just to come.

The trial for the great number of people accused of "high treason" was conducted by a commission consisting of: cardinal František of Ditrichštejn, highest chancellor Zdeněk Vojtěch of Lobkovice, count Hohenzollern, prince Eggenberg, court counsellor Hegenmüler, deputy of imperial chancellor Ulm and counts Meggar and Trauttmansdorf. They had discussed the method of proceeding suggested by Vilém Slavata of Chlum and Košumberk a few days before the battle on the White Mount. Slavata wanted to seize belongings of anyone who had participated in the revolt in any manner and had committed offense against the crown. Similar were suggestions from Jaroslav Bořita of Martinice. He, just a few weeks before the execution, called for punishment of rebels and for elevation of the Roman Catholic faith, which (as he claimed) would not be possible if any pardon was granted the perpetrators (and this after intercession of children begging for dismissing of their accused fathers – see this picture of an historic engraving).

There were so many accused, that the commission feared that the executions would appear to intense a vengeance. For this reason, the rebels were divided into the three categories:

1. Lightest penalty – people (even Catholic) doing nothing, just accepting Friedrich of Palatinate as the Czech King – those were to be punished just by a fine.

2. Heavier penalty – people serving the revolt in any kind of service or bearing some sort of office – those were to be punished by degradation and confiscation of property.

3. Death penalty – for the leaders of the revolt.The commission wanted duke Maximilian of Bavaria, leader of the Catholic League, to be leader of the whole action and counts Hohenzollern and Hegenmüler were sent to discuss this matter with him in Munich. These both had also spoken with three most significant Czech Catholic emigrants in Passau – former highest burgrave Adam of Šternberk, Slavata and Martinic. After Maxmilian's refusal to play this "honourable" role (although he agreed in principal regarding the punishment for rebels as it was suggested by Czech Catholics), Prague's "commission for execution" was established, lead by Lichtenštejn.

After the examination of separate cases, the commission proposed in the first place verdicts for those who had fled, and condemned those, who were already dead. After a short session on April 2, 1621, the king's prosecutor took action and after three days there were verdicts placed on all the gallows in Prague. Sentences of those who had died rebelling were also posted in April. Those were Petr of Švamberk, Albrecht Jan Smiřický, general Linhart Colonna of Fels (killed in Austria in preceding year), Michal Slavata and Oldřich Kinský. Other sentences were passed in May (17^th – 25 sentences, 29^th – 20 sentences) and June (12^th – 6 sentences). So, altogether, 51 sentences were rendered by the commission.

The whole trial went off like a well prepared script, including calculated acts of mercy and deeds of "humanity." Cruel sentences were often lightened – quartering alive was, for example changed to quartering post mortem (as in the case of Doctor Jan Jesenius, a well-known physician). Verdicts suggested by the Prague commission were considered to be too cruel as a whole, and Vienna tried to lighten them, where it was possible.

The final balance looked like this:

Men condemned to dead and executed:

• From the Lordly Estate:
  • Václav Budovec of Budov (84 years old) – the leader of Czech anti-Hapsburg policy, was beheaded,
  • Jáchym Ondřej Šlik (52 years old) – was beheaded,
  • Kryštof Harant of Polžice and Bezdružice – was beheaded,
• From the Knightly Estate:
  • Václav Kaplíř of Sulevice (86 years old) – the oldest of all the convicts – was beheaded,
  • Prokop Dvořecký of Olbramovice – was beheaded,
  • Bedřich of Bílá and Řehlovice – was beheaded,
  • Jindřich Otta of Los (80 years old) – was beheaded,
  • Diviš Černín of Chudenice – who refused the spiritual help from the Jesuits, although was Roman Catholic himself – was beheaded,
  • Vilém Konecchlumský (70 years old) – was beheaded,
  • Bohuslav of Michalovice – was beheaded,
• From the Civic Estate:
  • Valentin Kochan of Prachová (60 years old) – M. A., the scribe of the New Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Tobiáš Štefek of Koloděje – the councillor of the Smaller Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Kryštof Kober - the councillor of the Smaller Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Jan Šultys of Feldsdorf – the Premier Mayor of Kutná Hora – was beheaded,
  • Maxmilián Hošťálek – the Premier Mayor of Žatec – was beheaded,
  • Dr Jan Jesenius (55 years old) – the rector of the Charles University in Prague – his tongue had been cut out, then he was beheaded,
  • Jan Hauenschild – Doctor of Laws – his right arm had been cut out, and then he was beheaded,
  • Jan Kutnauer of Sonnenštejn – M. A. – was hanged out of the window of the City Hall,
  • Leonard Rüppel – Doctor of Laws – his right arm was cut off, and then he was beheaded,
  • Simeon Sušický of Sonnenštejn – M. A., Kutnauer's stepfather – was hanged out of the window of the City Hall,
  • Natanael Vodňanský – the provost of the Old Town of Prague – was hanged in front of the City Hall,
  • Václav Maštěřovský of Jizbice – Prague burgess – was beheaded,
  • Jindřich Kozel of Peclínovec – the councillor of the New Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Ondřej Kocour of Votín – the councillor of the New Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Jiří Řečický – councillor of the New Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Michal Witmann – the councillor of the New Town of Prague – was beheaded,
  • Šimon Vokáč of Chýš – the burgess of Prague – was beheaded.

In addition:

• Mikuláš Diviš of Doubravín – the scribe – was nailed to the gallows by his tongue and left for two hours. Then he was imprisoned.
• Burgess' Václav Božecký, Josef Kubín and Václav Švehla were caned outside the city (see this historical engraving).
• The body of Doctor Jan Jesenius was quartered post mortem and its parts displayed on scaffold behind the city walls (historical engraving).

The macabre sight was to deter enemies of Hapsburgs and re-catholization, but the executed men were soon considered Protestant martyrs and their deaths became the subject of literary works. The preacher from the Smaller Town, Jan Rosacius Hořovský, who had accompanied many of those convicts to their deaths, wrote a report on the whole execution called Koruna neuvadlá mučedníků Božích českých (The Un-withered Crown of the Czechs: God's Martyrs), printed in exile. Similar testimony was made by Pavel Ješín of Bezdězí: Posmrtná paměť českým hrdnům (Posthumous Memory of the Czech Heroes) and, of course, Jan Amos Comenius in Historie o těžkých protivenstvích církve české (The History about Heavy Trials of the Czech Church).

The martyrs from the Old Town Square were revived also in folklore. This is stated, for example, in memoirs of Karolína Světlá:

"Our uncles from Český Brod were all Catholics only ion name and when they could get to Prague during the pilgrimage to Saint John, their first visit was to the Old Town Square, where they silently prayed, tears in their eyes, for the martyrs of the nation and faith. Then they traversed the bridge made of stone (the Charles' Bridge), where the heads of those martyrs were exposed, and then they visited the Bethlehem place, where the Bethlehem Chapel had once stood, honouring the memory of Huss."

One of the old Prague fables recalls the martyrs. It says that since 1631, when the heads of executed were secretly buried by exiles, at first in Týn and then in Salvator [churches], the heads come alive and every year on the day of execution on the Old Town Square, they visit the place of the scaffold and then go up to see the Horologe. Most of time,] the heads are satisfied with the functioning of the clock and go back to their graves. But if the clock is off, the heads are worried about the fate of Czech Lands and pray for peace and the nation. So it is clear that our remembering of these old events is not something new or artificial, but that the memory of 27 rebels has endured all these centuries.

It's no wonder. The execution itself was terrifying enough, but what's more, the heads of dead were hanged from the Bridge Tower's gallery for the next 10 years (see the historical engraving). A similar event happened in Žatec and Kutná Hora, where the heads of the executed Mayors were nailed to the city's gate.

Literature:
GINDELY, Antonín: Popravy v Praze po bitvě bělohorské a jejich následky. Časopis Národního muzea 1879.
KAVKA, František: Bílá Hora a české dějiny, Praha 1962.
PETRÁŇ, Josef: Staroměstská exekuce, Praha 1971 a 1992.
PEKAŘ, Josef: Bílá hora, její příčiny a následky. In Pekař, Josef: Postavy a problémy českých dějin (uspořádal František Kutnar), Praha 1990.

Sasse: Altar Fellowship is Church Fellowship

The Holy Scriptures simply teach that church fellowship is altar fellowship.[1] “The cup of blessing which we bless is the koinonia of the blood of Christ, the bread which we break is the koinonia of the body of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:16) The Apostle connects this participation in the body and blood of the Lord immediately with the assertion that, as the bread is one, so we who are many are one body, because we partake of one bread. (v. 17) The Corpus Christi sacramentale and the Corpus Christi spirituali sive mysticum [The sacramental body of Christ and the spiritual or mystical body of Christ] as our dogmaticians say, belong essentially together. Ecclesia, “church” in the strict sense of the New Testament is there where the people of God come together at one place and celebrate the Lord’s Supper. There the body of Christ in the double sense is reality, though it is of course not only there. From this view of the New Testament, that altar fellowship is church fellowship and church fellowship is altar fellowship, it follows that the boundaries of both coincide. Where does the boundary of altar fellowship in the New Testament lie? It is significant that all our documents concerning the oldest Christian Supper, insofar-as they bear a liturgical character, describe a boundary for altar fellowship. “The doors! The doors!” cries the deacon before the Creed yet today in the liturgy of Eastern Church. With this the liturgy of the “believers” begins, reminiscent of the first Sunday of the church, when the Lord came to His own behind closed doors (John 20:19). “No catechumen, no hearer, no unbeliever, no heterodox” shall be present at the Supper according to the liturgical cry of the Antiochene liturgy in the eighth book of The Apostolic Constitutions (ch. 12), and among the believers no one should have anything against another, nor should a hypocrite approach (Compare the text of Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, I, p. 13). “Santa sanctis,” “Holy things for holy ones” sounded the warning call before the communion. And so that no one thereby understood that the church was a union of pharisees, the response of the holy people of God sounded: “One is holy, One is the Lord, Jesus Christ, to the honor of God the Father.” (Compare Brightman p. 24 et passim.) The fact that all liturgies of the old Greek Church contain such a cry by which a fence was placed around the Supper points to the fact that this is a very ancient practice. The way in which Justin [ca. 100-ca. 165] (Apology. I, 66) in his account concerning the origin of the Supper emphasizes that Jesus at the institution of the Supper gave bread and wine to the disciples only—who else could he have given it to?—shows that the “to them alone” is essential to his understanding of the Supper. The admonitions and warnings of the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles [Didache] corresponds to this. “No one is to eat or drink from your eucharist unless they are baptized in the name of the Lord. For concerning this the Lord has said: Do no give that which is holy to dogs.” (Didache 9.5) Thus follows the “rubric” in the liturgy, “He who is holy, come; he who is not, repent” (10.6). This same writing prescribes confession and absolution before the Sunday celebration of the Supper in the same way the later liturgies and church orders do:

But every Lord’s day do gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord.[2]

Here follows the citation from Malachi 1:11 and 14, which in this passage for the first time is applied to the Supper, though not yet in the sense of the later theory of the sacrifice of the mass. For the “sacrifice” is here still the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving in the Biblical sense, applied to the “Eucharistia” (Didache 14). When we look at the New Testament in this light then we see immediately several passages containing the early Christian concept of the “closed Supper,” namely that the Lord’s Supper is celebrated behind closed doors, to the exclusion of those who do not belong at it.

First, it is certain that wherever in the New Testament there is the demand for the holy kiss (Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 1 Peter 5:14), the “kiss of peace,” the later “Pax” which preceded the communion, is in view. The demands for this kiss occur as they do at the conclusion of these letters of Paul because they were read before the gathered ecclesia which then proceeded to celebrate the Supper. Thus the letters conclude with the “Apostolic Blessing” in its simple form, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you,” or in the developed Trinitarian form such as we find in 2 Corinthians 13:13. Is it mere coincidence that in the Greek (the liturgy of Chrysostom) and in the Syrian (e.g. in the liturgy of Theodor of Mopsuestia) Churches they do not begin the preface with “The Lord be with you” but with the formula of greeting from 2 Corinthians 13:13? The conclusion of the book of Revelation should also be compared with the Pauline letters. Is it merely coincidental that the “Maranatha! The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you!” of 1 Corinthians 16:23 is repeated in Revelation. 22:20 with the words: “Come Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you all”? Was not Revelation written to be read in the liturgy (1:11; 22:18) as much as the letters of Paul? Even if it is not possible for us to know all the details of the liturgy of the first century (Pliny gives us the responsories for the time immediately before the turn of the century; the Sanctus is verified for the first century through Clement of Rome [Bishop of Rome 92-101]) the letters of Paul certainly show us this much: besides the words of institution, which belong to the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, there is the demand for the kiss of peace; and then follows immediately the warning against schismatics and heretics, the anathema (Romans 16:16f.; 1 Corinthians 16:20, 22); then the ancient petition of the congregation for the coming of the Lord (still spoken in Aramaic in the Pauline congregations); and finally the benediction. The similarity of the letters of Paul with Revelation and the Didache show that these were fixed liturgical usages.

What interests us here is the close connection between the “Pax” and the “Anathema”; the kiss of love and peace, which expressed the unity and fellowship of the church, and the inflexible exclusion of schismatics and heretics from the Supper and thereby the church. At the conclusion of First Corinthians, which is directed against the divisions in the church of Corinth, it is the stubborn schismatics to whom the Anathema is directed: “If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be Anathema” (16:22). For the one who arrogantly splits the congregation, which is the body of the Lord, cannot love the Lord. In the Letter to the Romans the admonition to greet one another in peace with the kiss of love, and the assurance that the church of Rome is in this kiss bound together with all churches of Christ, is followed by the express warning over against heretics:

Now I urge you brethren, note those who caused divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple [16:17f.; compare 1 Corinthians 16:20].

The fellowship of the church, the deepest and most intimate fellowship which there is, presupposes an inflexible separation from heresy (1 John 4:1–7; 2 John 9ff.; 2 Corinthians 6:14) because it is at the same time both fellowship between believers and fellowship with the Triune God (1 John 1:3). And this separation finds its essential expression in who does and who does not receive the Supper (Abendmahlszucht). The fundamental axiom of canon law that there can be no communicatio in sacris cum haereticis [lit: no fellowship in holy things with heretics] comes directly from the early church and has its dogmatic basis in the New Testament.

Hermann Sasse, Letters to Lutheran Pastors 28, translated by M.C. Harrison - Soon to appear in The Lonely Way volume III.

---

[1] So also CFW Walther and the LCMS. “Members of heterodox fellowships are not excommunicated by their nonadmission to the celebration of Holy Communion in fellowship with the Lutheran church, muchless are they (declared to be heretics) and condemned, but only suspended until they have reconciled with the orthodox church by leaving the false fellowship in which they stand.” Theses on Communion Fellowship (1870) in C.F.W. Walther, Essays for the Church, St. Louis: CPH, p. 225. MH

[2] English text cited from “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles” in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Reprinted by Eerdmans, 1979), Vol VII, p. 381 MH