The Eucharistic Prayer is controversial among Lutherans. The suspicion goes back Luther and his liturgical reforms. Whether Luther was right or wrong I cannot say. But there are some things I can assert on the basis of 2,000 years of liturgical history and practice.

First that the Eucharistic Prayer has been in use from the beginning. The four gospels give only the simplest sketch of what the Lord said and did at the institution of the Sacrament. We know that he “blessed,” the bread and “gave thanks,” (eucharistia) likewise the cup.  But what did that blessing and eucharistia consist of? What was the content? No one can say for certain, but it consisted of something more than the description recorded in Holy Writ.[1]

We know this because the very earliest liturgical sources outside Scripture all include Eucharistic Prayer, a practice that must have been learned from the apostles, who learned it from the Lord himself. Not only this, but to the best of my knowledge there is not, nor has there ever been, a catholic liturgy without it. Indeed, the Eucharistic Prayer (aka: canon or anaphora) has enjoyed uninterrupted usage in both east and west from the beginning till now; and the only Eucharistic liturgy lacking it (to the best of my knowledge) is Lutheran Liturgy.

The Function of the Eucharistic Prayer

Why restore the Eucharistic Prayer to Lutheran Liturgy? Is it pro forma, or a quest for repristination? Those would hardly be reasons. But there is one very good reason, viz., that the Eucharistic Prayer encapsulates the kerygma (message) that accompanies the Eucharistic actions, the taking, breaking, blessing and eating. It is, and consists of, the church’s confession of faith spoken aloud, enunciating before God, before the Faithful, and in the face of the principalities and powers (Eph. 6:12) what the church is doing in her Eucharistic feast.

As the Eucharistic words without the accompanying action mean nothing, even so the actions minus the kerygma explicitly spoken are incomplete at best. But not only does the Eucharistic Prayer confess with the mouth, the Lord Jesus Christ come in the flesh, and fed to us in the bread and cup. But it indicates intentionality each time the church marks the Feast[2][3].  Many Protestant churches celebrate the Eucharist. But Lutherans hold that their celebration is a faux communion because neither the true confession of faith is present, nor is the intention of said gathering to celebrate the Sacrament that Jesus instituted, but only an imitation of it.

What is missing? Several things. Most importantly faith in the Lord’s words that “is” means “is.” (This “is” my body.)  And consequently the praying of a Eucharistic liturgy that explicitly affirms the catholic faith on this matter. This latter point injects an element of doubt into Lutheran Eucharistia as well.

Undoubtedly our written confession of faith regarding the Supper is true. “It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ …” But minus the Eucharistic Prayer how is this explicitly confessed before God? Before his people each Sunday as they gather to liturgize the Father in Spirit and Truth? And before every sentient being in heaven, and on earth, and below the earth who, in the church’s Eucharist, (willingly or unwillingly) confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father? (Phil. 2:5ff)

Such a practice is without precedent! and might fairly be termed sectarian, a charge that would pain any faithful Lutheran.

The case is not unsimilar to baptism. The church has never baptized without the employment of a full baptismal rite. Though I have no statistics, there may well be as many baptismal rites in Christian history, as there are anaphoras (Eucharistic Prayer). Some true, some weak, and some blatantly false. But a baptism never occurred without its attendant liturgy.

As it would be quite questionable practice to baptize without the church’s entire rite; even so one should never mark the feast of victory for our God without the accompanying rites, rituals and prayers that majestically proclaim in word, what is done in deed.

Said another way: as we cannot have God without Christ, we cannot have Christ without Sacraments, and we cannot have Sacraments without adequate and pure liturgy. To this end I recommend that the Lutheran church restore the Eucharistic Prayer to liturgy. It’s the right thing to do.

How Can This Be Done?

Liturgical change should never be done unilaterally because liturgy belongs the church. I am not speaking of local customs which may vary, but of the substance of the church’s Eucharist.

None-the-less because there is all but complete ignorance of the Eucharistic Prayer, as well as regrettable reactionary objections to it, change needs to begin somewhere. I am considering, for example, instructing my parish in the Eucharistic Prayer and then instituting it on Christmas, Easter and Pentecost for openers. This is still in the thinking stages, so please don’t hold me to it. But to wait for consensus from fellow pastors, much less the larger church (when the Eucharist is not even celebrated weekly), is to wait forever.

Which Eucharistic Prayer?

Here is a more difficult question. The Eucharistic Prayers found in LW, LSB and the old SBH are okay; but they are little more than meager remnants of the great anaphoras of the church; and there are great ones. Breathtaking ones!

It’s possible that the RC canon, cleansed of its false teaching, could be used. Equally acceptable in my mind, though much lengthier, would be the anaphora the St. John Chrysostom liturgy which, after the Roman Mass, is the most commonly celebrated liturgy in Christendom. I don’t know if this can be done. But I think we have to try. At this late stage, and with such a treasury of Eucharistic Prayer as is possessed by Christ’s church, I can think of no reason to re-invent the wheel.

But to do this we might well need to re-examine our theology of consecration. There is a clear divide between east and west on this matter and it all is made explicit in the Eucharistic Prayer: so it is important.

For the west, which in this case includes Rome and Wittenberg it is the Verba that consecrate, and with good reason. As our Lord was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Angelic Annunciation; even so our Lord continually enters his Virgin Church at the Eucharistic Annunciation.

For the east, citing the same reasons as above, but focusing on the Holy Spirit rather than the Angel’s announcement, the Epiclesis an essential element of consecration. That prayer in which the church implores the Holy Spirit to descend upon the gifts, and to change the bread and wine into the very Body and Blood of Christ. There is much to be said for both, because Scripture alone does not say how consecration occurs, and because for two millennia both theologies have been in practice like two ships passing in the night.

I think we would also do well to once again think about what Rome clumsily calls transubstantiation. As with the Eucharistic Prayer I think the Lutheran reformers had a knee-jerk reaction to it. It was no doubt a well founded reaction at the time, when one considers the depth of Rome’s power and the breadth of its abuses! But things are different now, Rome can no longer harm us.

Lastly, the Eucharistic Prayer is not simply a theological nicety, but has been the church’s most important prayer, clearest voice of worship, sacred confession of faith, and manner of eucharistizing the Gifts from the beginning. As St. Paul writes they are, “ … made holy by the word of God and prayer.” Or to quote David Scaer, “There is no distinction between prayer and proclamation.” That is as profound as it is liberating! It obliterates the false dilemma that Luther constructed which called the Canon “the words of man.” The canon / anaphora / Eucharistic Prayer is not the words of men, but the word of God.

To study the great anaphoras (many of which are currently in use in various Eastern churches, and in Rome); to drink in the height of their theology, and the depth of their grandeur, the perfection of their praise … is to be convinced not only of their desirability, but of their necessity.

Below is a modest, but fair example of Eucharistic prayer and procedure as it has always been done in the church catholic both East and West. The example is from A Manuel On Worship (rev. ed.) by Lutheran pastor Paul Zeller Strodach (1876 – 1947).

Following the Prayers of the Church

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the Communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

R: And with your spirit.

Lift up your hearts.

R: We lift them up unto the Lord.

Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.

R: It is meet and right so to do.

It is truly meet, right and salutary … (proper preface here)

(Sanctus & Benedictus)

It is fitting and due to praise You, to hymn You, to bless You, to worship You, to give thanks to You, Therefore we also, with this Blessed Host, cry aloud and say: Holy are You, O God, You and Your Only Begotten Son and Your Holy Spirit. Holy are You, and great is the Majesty of Your Glory, O Father and lover of men, Who did love the world in this manner: by giving Your Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life; Who having come into the world, and having fulfilled for us Your Holy Will, and being obedient unto the end,

(The Institution)

In the night …

(The Anamnesis)

Therefore remembering His salutary precept, and all that He endured for us: His Passion and Death, His Resurrection and Ascension, His Session on the Right Hand, and his Glorious Coming Again, we give thanks to You, O Lord God Almighty, not as we ought, but as we are able; and we offer to You, according to His Institution, these Your Gifts of Bread and Wine, giving thanks to You through Him, that You have deemed us worthy to stand before You, celebrating and making the Memorial which Your Son has willed us to make.

(The Epiclesis)

And we implore You: Send down Your Holy Spirit upon us and upon these Gifts here before You, that according to the Word of Your dear Son they may be sanctified and blessed, and so used by us that this Bread may be the Body of Christ and this Wine His precious Blood, that all who eat and drink thereof in true faith and with contrite hearts may be sanctified in soul and body, that we may be one body and one spirit, and may have our portion with all Your Saints who have been well-pleasing to You; through the same, Christ our Lord;

(The Lord’s Prayer – Prayer Of Humble Access)

Who has taught us to pray and through Whom we make bold to say:

Our Father …

(The Embolism)

Deliver us, O Lord, from all evil, the past, the present and that which may come; grant us gracious peace in our days: that in all things Your Holy Name may be hallowed, praised, and blessed, for to You is due all glory, worship, adoration, O Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, One God, now and evermore.

R: Amen.

(The Pax)

The Peace of the Lord + be with you always.

R: Amen.

(The Agnus Dei)

[1] Be it truth or myth the Ethiopian church, for example, believes that “The Anaphora of our Lord” was given to the disciples by our Lord himself when he, “He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.” (Acts 1:3). The same church holds that “The Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles” and “The Anaphora of St. John the Son of Thunder” come from the Lord’s disciples.

[2] I think there is a strong case to be made that John chapter 17 is a portion of the Lord’s own Eucharistic Prayer, or post communion prayer, establishing the practice. Also, Dr. Arthur Just of our Fort Wayne Seminary thinks that Hebrews 11 may be a Eucharistic Prayer.

[3]Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.