Covenant signs are tangible reminders by
which God not only confirms the covenant he made with his people, but also
assures them of the certainty of the fulfilment of his promises in the covenant.
In Genesis 16, Abraham shows some sign of spiritual decline as evident from the
fact that he complies with Sara’s request that he bear a child through Hagar instead
of trusting in God’s promise of a son through Sara. It is in this context that
God reveals himself again to Abraham to give him another sign to revive his
faith.[1] The situation is similar
to that in Genesis 15 where Abraham is thinking of the possibility of the
execution of plan B where Eliezer of Damascus would be his heir. In response,
God shows Abraham the stars in the sky to assure him that the promises, especially
the promise of a seed are still valid. In Genesis 17 God gives a more permanent
sign of his covenant faithfulness by commanding Abraham to circumcise himself
and all the males in his household.
The Passover is another sign of the Abrahamic
covenant to remind Israel of his commitment to their forefathers. Indeed, the
Exodus happens because God remembers his covenant promises to the patriarch
(Exodus 2:24) to bring his descendants into Canaan and possess it by redeeming
them from slavery in Egypt. The gracious purpose of the first Passover is that
God intends it as “a pledge to strengthen their terrified minds.”[2] The first Passover and its
successive annual celebration that involves the sacrifice of the paschal lamb also
points to the bigger picture of God’s plan to redeem his people from the
slavery of sin through Jesus Christ.[3] In the New Testament, the
Passover ordinance continues to be in effect except instead of remembering and
celebrating God’s deliverance from Egypt, his people remember and celebrate their
salvation through the atoning sacrifice of Christ on the cross in the new
covenant in the administration of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. The
Westminster Larger Catechism (WLC) Question 162 defines sacrament as[4]
… a holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church, to signify, seal, and exhibit unto those that are within the covenant of grace, the benefits of his mediation; to strengthen and increase their faith and all other graces; to oblige them to obedience; to testify and cherish their love and communion with one another, and to distinguish them from those that are without.
Just
as covenant signs in the Old Testament serve as means of grace in which God
condescends to his people to bestow his blessings of assurance of the
fulfilment of his promise in order to sustain their faith especially in the
midst of affliction and crisis like what Israel and Abraham went through, so do
the signs of the covenant in the New Testament.
This paper explores the pastoral implications
of the Lord’s Supper being a means of grace in the lives of God’s people. What graces and how they are bestowed as a result of partaking by faith in the
event will be covered first. I will then show some examples based on the
practices and the accounts of Evangelical Presbyterians in the 17th
and 18th century. After evaluating them, as a conclusion, I will
propose what believers today can learn and implement from the materials discussed
in this paper.
The WLC Question 168 defines the Lord’s
Supper as
…a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is showed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace, have their union and communion with him confirmed; testify and renew their thankfulness and engagement unto God, and their mutual love and fellowship with each other, as members of the same mystical body.
According to MacLeod, when we partake the
Lord’s Supper, we commemorate, profess, proclaim, give thanks to and feed from
Christ, commune with him and the Church. Feeding from Christ means that as we
partake in the elements of the bread and the wine, we receive him and all his
benefits for our spiritual nourishment and growth in grace.[5] What do these benefits
consist of? MacLeod lists four: assurance of God’s love, peace of conscience,
impartation of joy and increase of grace.[6] The last may be redundant
because the first three are a subset of the last. But MacLeod elaborates that
by the increase of grace, he means that by presenting the fundamental Christian
fact namely the atoning death of Christ displayed visibly, God quickens faith,
hope and love into greater vividness in order to their more active exercise in
our lives.[7]
Calvin introduces the concept of
sacramental union, the mechanism or the mode by which the graces are bestowed
during the Communion.[8] Sacramental union is the
union between the sign and the reality represented by the sign during which
there are simultaneous divine and human activities.[9] When believers partake in
the sign, God brings to pass the truth that the sign represents to bestow
graces upon them. Although the sign and the reality behind it are inseparable
in that they are intimately connected together, they are still distinct.
Sacrament then, is the instrument of gracious divine actions made efficacious
by the sovereign operation of the Holy Spirit who not only brings the intended
blessings, but also prepares believers to receive them by faith.
In the Lord’s Supper, the fountain of the
blessings contained in the occasion is the gift of the whole Christ in his
humanity and divinity.[10] Calvin insists that the
body of Christ remains in heaven, but during the Communion the Holy Spirit
descends and raises believers up spiritually there to feed on his body
represented by the elements. The bread and the wine do not change substance,
yet nevertheless there is a real spiritual presence of Christ in the ritual of
partaking in the elements. In this process, “our souls are nourished by the
substance of the body of Christ.”
Christ, then, is absent from us in respect of his body, but dwelling in us by his Spirit. He raises us to heaven to himself, transfusing into us the vivifying vigor of his flesh just as the rays of the sun invigorates us by his vital warmth. No extent of space interferes with the boundless energy of the Spirit which transfuses life into us from the flesh of Christ. It is not necessary that he should descend from heaven in order to assist us since he can assist us by the grace of his Spirit as if he stretched out his hand from heaven. By the virtue of his Spirit and his own divine essence, he unites us with himself in one body so that that flesh, although it remains in heaven, is our food. Christ, though absent in the body, is nevertheless not only present with us by divine energy which is everywhere diffused, but also makes his flesh give life to us. He infuses life from the substance of his flesh and blood into our souls so that no distance of place can impede the union of head and members.[11]
Calvin makes it clear that there is no
mingling of substance: Christ’s and ours. There is no transfusion of substance
from his flesh to ours so that there is a mixture between his flesh and ours.
What is then being bestowed or transfused to believers when they feed
spiritually on the whole Christ? What does Calvin mean by “the vivifying vigor
of his (Christ’s) flesh”? Although when Jesus speaks of eating his flesh and drinking
his blood in John 6, he doesn’t specifically refer to the Lord Supper, this
expression contains a communion language. In John 6:32-33, 35, 48-58, Jesus
compares himself with the manna that God fed his people with in the wilderness
(Exodus 16:31, Numbers 11:7-9). He then makes the claim that he is the bread of
life, the fountain of life itself (verse 51), and “whoever feeds on my flesh
and drink my blood has eternal life, abides in me and I in him” (verses 54,
56).
Here is where Calvin’s analogy between
feeding on the whole Christ in his humanity and divinity and the transfusion of
the rays of the sun that invigorates us by its vital warmth is useful. When we
experience the warmth of the sun, there is no mingling between the substance of
the sun and ours. When we partake the bread and the wine, they can’t be the
actual body and blood of Christ or else as they enter our bodies, there will
inevitably be a comingling between his flesh and ours, yet God bestows his
graces in the process, graces derived from the whole Christ. Just as the manna
given in the wilderness is the nourishment necessary to sustain God’s people in
their pilgrimage, so when we feed spiritually on the flesh and blood of Christ
we receive the necessary graces derived from his whole being to sustain us in
our Christian walk. Calvin lists “righteousness, forgiveness, sanctification,”
as some of the blessings believers receive, although as we will see later,
there are more. Our continual dependence on Christ to support us every step of the
way for the sustenance of our spiritual life is an evidence that we are his,
hence Christ’s remark that those who feed on him abide in him and he in them
and thus have eternal life.[12]
Having discussed Calvin’s view, we
recognize that there remains a significant element of mystery in the Lord’s
Supper and in sacraments in general. As one tries to dig deeper to understand
the process of sacramental union more, he or she should not assume that a
comprehensive logical system of argument is attainable and does well to heed
Calvin’s warning, “He who doesn’t feel that in these few words (i.e., his
attempt to expound on the Lord’s Supper) are many miracles is more than
stupid.”[13]
In contrast to Calvin’s view of believers
receiving divine graces during the Lord’s Supper, the Roman Catholic view puts
a strong emphasis in adoration and thanksgiving. Its doctrine of Transubstantiation
is derived from the Aristotelian philosophy that makes a distinction between
substance and accident. The outward appearance, the accident, of the elements
may look like bread and wine, but after the priest pronounces the word of
institution and consecrate them, the substance of the elements changes into the
actual body and blood of Christ.[14] Unlike Calvin who
maintains a distinction between the sign and the reality behind it, in Transubstantiation,
both are indistinguishable from each other.
There are at least three problems with
Transubstantiation.[15] The kind of
transformation that Transubstantiation advocates is unintelligible to the first
century Jewish audience, especially in light of the liturgical context of the
Passover. The Passover liturgy includes the words “This is the bread of
affliction which our ancestors ate when they came from the land of Egypt” which
certainly doesn’t imply that the Passover bread that the Jews eat every year
turns into the same bread that their ancestors ate thousands of years ago. The
proponents of Transubstantiation applies what Mathison calls “arbitrary literalism”[16] by insisting that Jesus’
word of institution be interpreted literally while the grammar actually doesn’t
demand it. They refuse to acknowledge that just as Jesus uses metaphorical
language,[17]
it is possible to apply metaphorical interpretation to the word of institution
of the Lord’s Supper as well.
Transubstantiation implies ubiquity of the
body of Christ contrary to the testimony of Scripture. In Matthew 28:6, the
angel would not have told the woman, “He is not here” if the resurrected Christ
has a ubiquitous body. The Gospels contain accounts of Christ being tired and
hungry (Mark 4:27, Matthew 4:2) and Hebrews 2:14 speaks of Christ sharing in
our humanity. If Christ has a ubiquitous body, then it is not the human body
everyone has, but a super-human body and that is hardly sharing in our
humanity.
The
most serious problem with Transubstantiation is it perverts the purpose of the
Lord’s Supper. It turns the means of grace into an offering and dangerous
idolatry. Instead of God condescending to bless us, Transubstantiation is
integral to the message of the Mass, the Roman Catholic’s version of the Lord’s
Supper that it is “the same sacrifice that Christ offered on the cross, only
bloodless. It is a propitiatory sacrifice offered for the living and the dead.”[18] Mathison clarifies that
the Mass is not a repetition of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. It is the
same one except it is bloodless. The problem is bloodless propitiatory
sacrifice in light of Scripture is an oxymoron. If Christ’s sacrifice is
propitiatory, then it must be bloody (Hebrews 9:22, Leviticus 17:11). If it is
bloodless, then it is not propitiatory. If Christ’s sacrifice was completed at
one point in time, why is it necessary to offer the same sacrifice today, over
2000 years after the event? The underlying presupposition of the Mass appears
to be the denial of the perfection and efficacy of the cross, something that
the book of Hebrews vehemently insists (Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 26, 10:10).
Finally, since the sign and the reality are no longer distinct in
Transubstantiation, Rome teaches the worship of the elements. Mathison points
out a tension that Roman Catholic has to resolve in this case. What are the
elements? If they are the actual body and blood of Christ, then they are not
sacraments. If they were mere signs, i.e., sacraments, then the worship of them
is idolatry, a direct violation of the second commandment.
The opposite extreme of the Roman Catholic
view is the Symbolic Memorialism or “Zwinglianism” which is the dominant
position of most evangelical churches today.[19] The Zwinglian believes
that the elements are purely symbolic. There is no presence of Christ involved
in the Communion. The purpose of the Communion is to express our faith and
confirm it and other Christian graces. The act of eating and drinking is
equivalent to the act of believing in Christ. If in the Roman Catholic view,
the sign and the reality are identical, in the Zwinglian view, the two are
divorced. There is merely a subjective mental recollection of the events
associated with the elements by the believers without any reality presented
along with them.
However, as we look at passages such as
John 6, when Jesus speaks of partaking in his body and blood as discussed above,
it refers to communion with him. In 1 Corinthians 10:16 when Paul speaks of
participation in the blood and body of Christ, he uses the word, κοινωνία,
which can be translated as sharing, fellowship or communion with Christ as
believers celebrate the Lord’s Supper. Mathison notes that “when there is
communion, there is presence,” so Scripture rejects the Zwinglian idea of the
absence of Christ and communion with him in the Lord’s Supper.
The main problem of Zwinglianism is the
same as that of the Roman Catholic view I described above, namely it
misunderstands the purpose of the sacraments. If the Roman Catholic believes
that we offer to God the sacrifice of Christ during the Lord’s Supper, the
Zwinglian believes that we offer to God our faith. It is also a confirmation
from our side that we are indeed believers in Christ. The misunderstanding
about who does the offering is unfortunate. By believing that it is we who
offer God something, we deprive ourselves of the blessings God intends to bestow
through our participation at his Table. I can’t think of any right-minded
Christians who would refuse God’s invitation to an intimate communion with his
Son and in the process they would receive his blessings too. But for those who
reject Calvin’s view, this is precisely what they are doing. The Zwinglian and
the Roman Catholic turn the Lord Supper into an act of human work instead of a
gracious act of God where we are the recipients of his blessings.
To have a better idea on the benefits that
believers receive by partaking in the Lord’s Supper as a result of communion
with him that Calvin speaks of, Eric Schmidt provides useful accounts of the
experiences of 17th and 18th century Scottish Evangelical
Presbyterians not only during the Communion itself but also during the preparation
that leads to it.[20] In this period, the Communion
was held only a few times a year. There were a number of ways ministers guarded
the solemnity of the celebration particularly by ensuring that only worthy
believers partake in the communion. First, they examined communicant candidates
by asking relevant questions such as whether or not they had experienced the
work of grace in their lives, whether or not they lived a godly life and if
they understood the doctrine of faith and the meaning of the sacrament. Second,
they preached several sermons even during the preparation week. For example, on
Saturday, sermon on the dying love of Christ was preached with further
elaboration on who was invited to the feast and who was not.[21] The list was extensive
but there was also a gracious reminder that despite all these sins that one may
struggle with, “all penitent souls, all who were ready to part with their sins
and turn their back on the devil, all thirsty panting souls and all poor cloudy
believers” were invited.[22] Third, ministers
distributed tokens to worthy communicants on the same Saturday to be turned in
to the elders the next day during the Communion. On Communion Sunday, ministers
fenced the table “with awful solemnity” debarring all the unqualified. The Ten
Commandments were reviewed again with the same exhaustive list of those who
fall under the category of the unworthy, while true penitents were invited to
come and partake at the Lord’s Table.
For communicants or as Schmidt puts it,
“the saints,” the preparation week began with the preparation Sabbath, namely
the Sunday before the Communion Sunday where ministers expounded on the Lord’s
Supper, its powers for the worthy and its danger for the unworthy in the
morning and afternoon. Wednesday was the day of “public fast and humiliation”
where the saints listened to the exposition of the Ten Commandments to
facilitate self-examination, confession and repentance. The fast, lasted for 24
hours from sunset on Tuesday to sunset on Wednesday without refreshment. It was
a symbol of inward repentance and humiliation, an expression of “a deep sense
of guilt the saints had for sin, for all that disordered their lives and
estranged them from their neighbors and God, for their thanklessness and
disobedience, a plain acknowledgement of our unworthiness of the least mercy.” They
were to abstain from “worldly labor, discourses and thoughts” as well as “all
bodily delights," in order to “discipline the body, placing it more and
more in subjection to the soul.” The focus of this public fast was
Christ-centered,[23]
The chastened body was an emblem of the humbled heart. A body that hungered and thirsted suggested a soul that was hungering, thirsting, panting, fainting, almost dying to meet with Christ in the Lord’s Supper. Empty stomachs symbolized empty souls longing to be filled with the bread of life and the cup of salvation.
It is easy to misunderstand the purpose of
the fast, but the saints were reminded that the fast was not an efficacious act
that merits God’s grace. The fast was supposed to be a voluntary act of
self-humbling before God out of reverence and holy affection to the Lord. Along
with confessions of sins, the saints were brought to weeping and mourning for
sin because of which Christ had to suffer and die. The saints also attended
public singing of Psalms on the same Wednesday and Saturday and the “public
reading of the sacrament.”[24]
In addition to public preparations described
above, the saints prepared for the Communion privately through the following
activities.[25]
First, self-examination consists of “careful reflection and painful
self-awareness through introspection and retrospection.” The questions they
asked themselves were similar to those asked by the ministers.[26] Second, personal
covenanting is a personal resolution upon realization of one’s unworthiness to
be in the Lord’s presence at the Communion, to renounce sin, accept Christ,
dedicate the entire being: head, tongue, eyes, ears, hands and feet to God.
These expressions were usually put in written form[27]
…on bended knees in a posture of reverence and humility, the saints took up their pens in the sight of God and bound themselves (and often their families as well) to the Lord. These documents help assure the saints of their worthiness and help them give focus on the difficult and sometimes nebulous task of self-examination.
Included
in this personal covenanting was a moment of profession of faith for the first
time, especially for the youths as they embraced Christ according to the Gospel
and resolved to live in obedience to God. Regardless of whether one did it for
the first time or for the renewal of his or her commitment to the Lord,
personal covenanting is “a monument that attested to the solemn transaction
that had passed between God and the pilgrim soul, a transaction sealed in the
Lord’s Supper.”
Third, the saints offered “secret
prayers,” that Schmidt describes as “incessant day-in and day-out activity with
lengthy vigils often lasting all night… long fervent prayers uttered in
humility before God.” This was the moment where the saints often poured out
their hearts to God in an extended devotion at an isolated place where the
dominant themes were “confessions of unworthiness and fervent entreaties for
blessings during sacrament.” Fourth, as the saints retired from the world, they
focused on spiritual objects. In particular, they meditated on the sufferings
of Christ, the nature of sin and atonement and labored to marvel at the sights
that accomplished their redemption. Fifth, devotional reading from Scripture
was used to aid the meditation, most importantly the passages about the
sufferings of Christ. Other readings such as manuals about the nature of the
Lord’s Supper, its symbols and actions, the qualification for partaking in
them, the dangers of approaching the Table unworthily and the preparation
duties were often incorporated as well to supplement the meditation.
On Communion Sunday, the saints
surrendered the token they received on the previous day to the assisting elders
to indicate their qualification. They participated in prayer, Psalm singing and
listened to sermon and the Word of Institution in 1 Corinthians 11 and its
exposition before partaking in the elements. The Monday after the Communion
Sunday was usually an occasion of joyful thanksgiving capping the transition
from weeping and mourning for sin that caused the sufferings and death of
Christ to joyful praise for his love and redemptive work.
The rigorous preparations of these 17th-18th
century Christians may seem excessive today, but they are not something we can
completely dismiss. In partaking in the Lord’s Supper we come into God’s
presence in a special way. God is gracious to condescend not only to meet us,
but also to bless us. The tabernacle in the Old Testament symbolizes not only
God’s presence among his people, but also his solidarity with them. To use
Poythress’ words, [28]
(God) is majestic and beautiful. But He would not simply remain in heaven and let Israel go its way. He would come right down among them. They were living in tents. He too would be in a tent, side by side with their own tents.
Therefore, the tabernacle teaches us the
gracious character of God, his accessibility by dwelling among his people and
allowing them to draw near to him. On the other hand, it also teaches us that
he is holy and inaccessible as we look at the strict requirements where only
the high-priest is allowed to enter the Holy of Holies (Hebrews 9:6-7,
Leviticus 16:2-34). The penalty for violations of his tabernacle rules is
death. This reality teaches Israel that they ought to approach God with holy
reverence. Likewise, we ought to keep this attitude in mind when partaking in
the Lord’s Supper. We rejoice in his goodness inviting us to his Table in order
to bestow abundant blessings for the nourishment of our souls that we may be
strengthened and encouraged in our walk with him. Yet proper heart conditions
are in order as we consider the solemnity of the occasion, the fact that we
come in the presence of a holy God just like Israel did when they approached
the tabernacle.
Are the preparations done by ministers and
the saints that we just reviewed above biblically warranted? While ministers
must indeed warn their congregation of the danger of partaking in the Lord’s
Supper unworthily as 1 Corinthians 11:28-30 suggests, I can’t find any biblical
support where they need to personally examine individuals. Paul says, “Let a
person examine himself,” so the examination should be done by individual
Christians. However, public exposition of the Decalogue, preaching and fasting
may be appropriate to facilitate the self-examination process. Likewise, the
five devotional exercises are helpful to prepare one’s heart that he or she may
partake worthily.
What are the effects of partaking in the
Lord’s Supper in the lives of the 17th and 18th century
Evangelical Presbyterians that includes the rigorous preparation which is
integral to the Communion itself? Schmidt indicates that the preparation itself
is often the means God uses to bring the benefits, the blessings associated
with the sacrament. These blessings are not merely the graces that MacLeod
lists above: assurance of God’s love,[29] peace of conscience,[30] impartation of joy,[31] renewed repentance,[32] resolution and strength
to live a holy life[33] but also benefits to the
community. There are internal and external elements in the blessings to the
community. The internal one consists of the strengthening of the bonds among
Christians in the congregation that includes reconciliation of enemies. In
fact, harmony with neighbors was an essential qualification for Communion.[34] When Paul rebukes the
Corinthians in l Corinthians 11:17-22, he criticizes the division in the church
that has to do with social barrier between the rich and the poor.[35] Proper Lord’s Supper
celebration is supposed result in reducing instead of increasing barriers
between the sexes, races and people of different economic standing. [36] The same spiritual
benefits - communion with Christ at his table were available to all believers
of all walks of life regardless of sex, race and social status, “All were
Christ’s guests equally at his table.” The external element of the blessing to
the community is displayed in the giving of alms to the poor. Schmidt observes
that “communion seasons were also high days of charity and mutuality, periods
of particular care and concern for the poor of the parish.”[37]
The experiences of personal blessings
among these Christians often involved dramatic manifestations such as lapsing
into trances, fainting or falling down as if dead, dreaming and seeing visions.[38] Schmidt remarks that
during these festal events, “laypeople often had very direct and overwhelming
encounters with the divine.” However, ministers often hesitated to discuss or
include them in their journal for fear of being charged of enthusiasm and
disorder and in order to affirm the rational and scriptural soundness of
evangelical spirituality. It may be encouraging to witness what appears to be
the power of God at work bestowing graces during the Lord’s Supper and the
rituals surrounding it through these extreme bodily and emotional expressions
of joy and repentance. On the other hand, they may intimidate other believers
that do not have the same experience, yet are genuinely and positively affected
by their participation at the table. Furthermore, how can we be sure whether
such expressions are genuine? Another problem is that the imagery often
conjured up especially by female believers is that of marriage with Christ
which is misleading doctrinally. Scripture depicts marriage relationship
between Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:22-32), not between Christ and
individual believers. Male believers may not be comfortable relating to the testimonies
of female Christians when they see themselves as the bride(s) of Christ
experiencing his love through the use of the imagery in Song of Solomon. This
marriage imagery may also easily lead to a blasphemous conclusion that Christ
has many brides.
As
we look at the various views on the Lord’s Supper, although not without some remaining mystery, Calvin’s
view is the most compelling not only scripturally but also when we consider the
implications of this view in the Christian life. Compared to the Roman
Catholic, Lutheran and Zwinglian views, Calvin’s view is the only one that
explicitly recognizes the Lord’s Supper as the means of communication of God’s
grace to us in continuity with the purpose of the Old Testament signs of the
covenant, as opposed to the means by which we offer God something; whether it
be the bloodless sacrifice of Christ or our faith. As we acknowledge God’s
purpose to bless his people by nourishing their souls as they partake in the
elements in communion with him, he enables us by virtue of sacramental union to
experience the sweetness and assurance of his love, to grow in obedience and
usefulness for the church and the community around us: to be faithful witnesses
of him who has redeemed and claimed us to be his own. The lessons learned from
the examples of the gracious effects of partaking in the Communion from the 17th
and 18th century Christians seem to validate Calvin’s view. They encourage
us to be more serious in our preparation not only in order to render the Lord
the reverence, holy fear and appreciation due to him as we approach his Table
which is for our benefits too, but also as an expression of our longing for him
to pour out his blessings in a greater way to sustain us in our pilgrimage in
this world and bring glory to him by the testimonies of his goodness in our
lives.
Bibliography
1.
John
Calvin, The Gospel According to St. John
1-10 (Grand Rapids: Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1974).
2.
John
Calvin, The Gospel According to St. John
12-20 (Grand Rapids: Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1974).
3.
Matthew
Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible
(Grand Rapids: Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1984).
4.
Leigh
E. Schmidt, Holy Fairs: Scotland and the
making of American Revivalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989).
5.
Vern S.
Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian
and Reformed, 1991).
6.
Louis
Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996).
7.
Ronald
S. Wallace, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Word
and Sacrament (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 1997).
8.
Keith
A. Mathison, Given for You: Reclaiming
Calvin’s Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 2002).
9.
The Confession of
Faith and Catechisms of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (Willow Grove:
Orthodox Presbyterian Church, 2005).
10.
Donald
MacLeod, “The Lord’s Supper as a Means of Grace”, Banner of Truth Magazine 64 (1969): 16-22.
11.
Donald
MacLeod, “Qualification for Communion,” Banner
of Truth Magazine 65 (1969): 14-20.
12.
Mercy
Amba Oduyoye, “The Eucharist as Witness,” International
Review of Mission 72:286 (1983): 222-228.
13.
Antti
Raunio, “Faith and Christian Living in Luther’s Confession Concerning Christ’s
Supper (1528),” Lutherjahrbuch 76
(2009): 19-56.
[1] Calvin seems to allude to this in
his remark on Genesis 17:11, “For the signs which God has appointed to assist
our infirmity, should be accommodated to the measure of our capacity, or they
would be unprofitable,” in John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (Grand Rapids:
Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1974).
[2] The Passover is “a solemn symbol of their redemption, whereby the people professed their
obligation to God their deliverer, and in a manner devoted themselves to His
dominion. In effect then, the celebration of the Passover taught the Israelites
that it was not lawful for them to have regard to any other God besides their
Redeemer; and also that it was just and right for them to consecrate themselves
to His service, since He had restored them from death to life; and thus, as in
a glass or picture, He represented to
their eyes His grace; and desired that they should on every succeeding year
recognize what they had formerly experienced, lest it should ever depart from
their memory. He awakened the minds of
the faithful to the hope of this salvation, by the interposition of a sign;
whilst He instituted a perpetual memorial of His grace, that the Passover might
every year renew the recollection of
their deliverance. For the first Passover was celebrated in the very
presence of the thing itself, to be a
pledge to strengthen their terrified minds; but the annual repetition was a
sacrifice of thanksgiving, whereby their posterity might be reminded that they
were God’s rightful and peculiar dependents (clientes),” John Calvin on Exodus
12:1-2 in Harmony of the Law, vol.I
(Grand Rapids: Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1974).
[3] The Westminster Confession of
Faith (WCF) VII.5 states that the Old Testament covenants are administered by
such things as “…the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to
the people of the Jews, all
foresignifying Christ to come” This view aligns well with Calvin’s on
Exodus 12:1-2 “Yet both the original institution and the perpetual law had a
higher reference; for God did not once redeem His ancient people, that they
might remain safely and quietly in the land, but He wished to bring them onward even to the inheritance of eternal life,
wherefore the Passover was no less than
Circumcision a sign of spiritual grace; and so it has an analogy and resemblance to the Holy Supper, because it both
contained the same promises, which Christ now seals to us in that, and also
taught that God could only be propitiated towards His people by the expiation
of blood. In sum, it was the sign of
the future redemption as well as of that which was past. For this reason
Paul writes, that “Christ our Passover is slain,” (1 Corinthians 5:7) which
would be unsuitable, if the ancients had only been reminded in it of their
temporal benefit.” John Calvin, Harmony
of the Law, Vol.I (Grand Rapids: Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1974).
[4] Similar to Berkhof’s definition:
“a sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ, in which by sensible
signs the grace of God in Christ, and the benefits of the covenant of grace,
are represented, sealed and applied
to believers, and these, in turn, give expression to their faith and allegiance
to God,” Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 617.
[6] Donald MacLeod, “The Lord’s Supper
as a Means of Grace,” Banner of Truth Magazine, 64 (1969): 21-22.
[7] WCF XXIX.1 highlights the
commemoration part of the Lord’s Supper being “the perpetual remembrance of the
sacrifice of himself in his death,” and its benefits being our spiritual
nourishment and growth in him that enable a greater faithfulness and obedience,
as well as “a bond and pledge” of our communion with him, and with each other
as members of his Church.
[8] Throughout this paper, I use the
term Communion and the Lord’s Supper interchangeably.
[9] Ronald S. Wallace, Calvin’s
Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 1997), 159-174.
[10] Wallace, Calvin’s Doctrine of the
Word and Sacrament, 201, “The substance of Christ’s flesh and blood is our
spiritual life that is communicated to us under the symbols of bread and wine.
Since the gift in the sacrament is the whole Christ, there is given along with
him those benefits that he has won for his people through his death and
resurrection.”
[11] Wallace, Calvin’s Doctrine of the
Word and Sacrament, 206-207.
[12] Henry holds a similar view, “So
that the flesh and blood of the Son of
man denote the Redeemer incarnate and dying; Christ and him crucified, and the redemption wrought out by him, with all
the precious benefits of redemption: pardon of sin, acceptance with God, the
adoption of sons, access to the throne of grace, the promises of the covenant,
and eternal life; these are called the flesh and blood of Christ, 1.
Because they are purchased by his flesh and blood, by the breaking of his body,
and shedding of his blood. Well may the purchased privileges be denominated
from the price that was paid for them, for it puts a value upon them; write
upon them pretium sanguinis—the price of blood. 2. Because they are meat and drink to our souls. Flesh with the blood was
prohibited (Gen. 9:4), but the privileges
of the gospel are as flesh and blood to us, prepared for the nourishment of our
souls. He had before compared himself to bread, which is necessary food;
here to flesh, which is delicious. It is a feast of fat things, Isa. 25:6. The
soul is satisfied with Christ as with marrow and fatness, Ps. 63:5. It is meat
indeed, and drink indeed; truly so, that is spiritually; so Dr. Whitby; as
Christ is called the true vine; or truly meat, in opposition to the shows and
shadows with which the world shams off those that feed upon it. In Christ and his gospel there is real
supply, solid satisfaction; that is meat indeed, and drink indeed, which
satiates and replenishes,” Matthew Henry on John 6, in Commentary on the
Whole Bible (Grand Rapids: Christian Classic Ethereal Library, 1984).
[13] Wallace, Calvin’s Doctrine of the
Word and Sacrament, 207.
[14] Keith A. Mathison, Given for You:
Reclaiming Calvin’s Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian
and Reformed, 2002), 240, “Christ is whole and entire under the form of bread
and under any part of that form; likewise the whole Christ is present under the
form of wine and under all its parts.”
[15] My criticism of
Transubstantiation, mostly taken from Mathison, also applies to the Lutheran
doctrine of Consubstantiation that teaches that the substance of the bread and
wine as well as the substance of the body and the blood of Christ are present
together in the elements. The body and the blood of Christ are said to be in
and under the bread and wine (Mathison, Given for You, 256). Like the Roman
Catholic’s view, the Lutheran’s view is also guilty of arbitrary literalism.
However, the Lutheran view rejects the doctrine of the sacrifice of the Mass
and the idea of worshipping the consecrated elements (Mathison, Given for You,
257). It is also important to note that the Lutheran view acknowledges the
Lord’s Supper as a means of grace, see for example, Antti Raunio, “Faith and
Christian Living in Luther’s Confession Concerning Christ’s Supper (1528),” Lutherjahrbuch
76 (2009): 26, “… his (Luther’s) purpose is to give an argument for the belief
that Christ is present in the elements of the Lord’s Supper and delivers his
merit there to the believers.”
[16] Mathison, Given for You, 243.
[17] For example, when Jesus says, “I
am the door” (John 10:7, 9), he doesn’t mean that he is a door literally.
[18] Mathison, Given for You, 249-250.
[20] Leigh E. Schmidt, Holy Fairs:
Scotland and the making of American Revivalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989).
[21] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 109, 111.
Examples of those who are debarred from partaking include “atheists, deniers of
the Trinity, enemies of Christ, witches, charmers, warlocks, all who were in
compact with the devil, ignorant persons who know no God, worshippers of
images, cursers, swearers, tearers of God’s name, all Sabbath breakers, those
disobedient to natural parents or civil parents, sinners of the flesh: unclean
persons, effeminate, incestuous, persons guilty of bestiality, self-pollution,
sodomy, gluttons, drunkards, promiscuous dancers, thieves, robbers, oppressors,
cheaters, liars, backbiters, slanderers, covetous persons that cannot be
content with their own state and condition.”
[22] The WLC Question 172 offers some
further guidelines:
Q.172.
May one who doubts of his being in Christ, or of his due preparation come to
the Lord’s Supper?
One
who doubts of his being in Christ, or of his due preparation to the sacrament
of the Lord’s Supper may have true
interest in Christ, though he be not yet assured thereof, and in God’s
account has it, if he be dully affected
with the apprehension of the want of it and unfeignedly desires to be found in Christ, and to depart from iniquity: in which case (because promises are made and
this sacrament is appointed for the relief even of weak and doubting
Christians) he is to bewail his unbelief
and labor to have his doubts resolved;
and so doing, he may and ought to come to
the Lord’s Supper that he may be further strengthened.
[23] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 78.
[24] I take “public reading of the
sacrament” to mean the reading of passages related to the Lord’s Supper such as
those in the Gospel (Matthew 26:1-29, Mark 14:1-25, Luke 22:1-23) and 1
Corinthians 11:17-34.
[25] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 135. The
preparatory activities that Schmidt lists are similar to the WLC Q.171, How are
they that receive the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper to prepare themselves
before the come unto it? They that receive the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper
are, before they come, to prepare themselves thereunto,
- by examining themselves: of their
being in Christ, of their sins and wants, of the truth and measure of their
knowledge, faith, repentance, (of their) love to God and the brethren, (of
their) charity to all men, forgiving
those that have done them wrong, of their desires after Christ, and of their
new obedience,
- and by renewing the exercise of
these graces,
- by serious meditation and fervent
prayer.
[26] Schmidt, Holy
Fairs, 135. Self-examination questions, perhaps taken from the manual distributed
by the ministers include what evidences did they have of saving grace? Did they
long for greater conformity to God’s commands? Did they war against lust and
backslidings? Did their minds turn regularly to spiritual and heavenly things
and away from earthly and sensual ones? Did they express love and affection to
their neighbors? Did they have solid doctrinal knowledge, particularly in
regard to the Lord’s Supper so that in communing they would show forth Christ’s
death?
[27] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 136. The main
theme of personal covenanting are repentance, faith, love, redemption,
surrender and service.
[28] Vern S. Poythress, The Shadow of
Christ in the Law of Moses (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1991),
11-12.
[29] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 120, “I
cannot express the joy with which I was filled in time the Tables were serving,
and I could not endure to look down to earth, but looked up, mostly to heaven
and thought, I heard Christ speaking to me from thence and saying, ‘Arise my
love, my fair one and come away, and saw him, as it were reaching down his hand
and drawing me up to himself, and at the same time, I felt my heart powerfully drawn to him with the cords of love.”
[30] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 119-120,
“Dedicated the week to extensive prayer, devotion and fasting, meditated on the
sufferings of Christ and gained an ever
greater sense of her own sin…On Saturday before the sacrament: ‘I slept
none that night, but went out to the fields for secret prayer.' The morning
after her vigil, she wept much during the sermon preceding the Lord’s Supper
and at the table she felt much of a
hungering and thirsting after Christ’… On Sabbath morning, the sight of the
communion table filed her heart with
sadness at the thought of Christ’s sufferings and with joy at the thought of her near approach to him in this
sacrament. When she sat down at the table and the elements were about to be
distributed, she burst out into a flood of tears of gratitude and penitence.
When she received the cup of the Redeemer’s blood, she believed Christ spoke to
her saying, ‘My blood is sufficient to wash away all thy sins.’ She was filled with peace at the knowledge of
Christ’s forgiveness and went from the table convinced of her salvation.
[31] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 137, “Enjoying sweet communion and fellowship with
God and had a sweet time as ever I
had in my life and thought I could not have a sweeter time in this world. I
continued in that frame all the next day and was much refreshed and delighted with what I heard and found in sermons
and at the Lord’s Table.”
[32] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 138, “I went
out to the fields by myself for prayer and there falling down, while I was
earnestly pleading that the Lord might
give me a clearer sight and more affecting sense of the evil of my sins as dishonoring
to him, and as the procuring cause of Christ’s sufferings that ever I had
yet got. The Lord was pleased accordingly to give me the desire of my heart in
that matter, and more than I asked or could think of. For I then got a most humbling sight and sense of the
exceeding sinfulness and hatefulness of sin and I was made to see my sins
especially my unbelief as the nails and spear that pierced his hands, feet and
side and was made spiritually and in the most evident manner by faith to
look as it were through his pierced side into his heart and see it filled with
love to me and his love engaging him to undergo all these his bitter sufferings
for me.”
[33] Schmidt reports the account of a
soldier who “received faith and went on to seal his salvation at the Lord’s
table making on this occasion a personal
covenant to lead a godly life. He reported no dramatic experience at the
communion, only a solemn and self-made
vow to resist all filthiness and pollution of the flesh. In the sacrament
he had found moral strength and had been
guarded against unbelief. After several years of indifference and
immorality, he finally hardened his
resolve to resist sin and to lead a godly life,” Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 129.
[34] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 99, “No one
participating was to harbor malice and envy in their hearts against their
brethren. Those who did not put aside their unchristian quarrels and seek peace
and friendship with all were debarred from the Lord’s table.”
[35] Matthew Henry on 1 Corinthians
11:17-22, Commentary on the Whole Bible.
[36] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 105.
[37] Oduyoye acknowledges the positive
impacts of the blessings that believers receive during the Communion that are
to be extended to their community, “When we break the bread and drink the wine,
we proclaim the Lord’s death till he comes. That proclamation ought to strengthen us to do the Lord’s work
till he comes to bring the fullness of the kingdom of God. It should motivate us to plan and execute
actions that will constitute Good News to the poor, bring liberty to the
captives, freedom to the oppressed, recovery of sight to the blind, and usher
in the joyful presence of the Lord… Experiencing the self-giving love of
Christ in the Eucharist, we are
strengthened to go and do likewise,” Mercy Amba Oduyoye, “The Eucharist as
Witness,” International Review of Mission 72:286 (1983): 226.
[38] Schmidt, Holy Fairs, 146-148.
Schmidt records a number of reports documenting extraordinary experiences that
some had associated with their partaking in the Communion. They include someone
falling into a trance and saw Jesus in a vision showing his wounds to assure
him that his suffering satisfies divine justice. Afterwards this person was
“filled with great joy and comfort and thankfulness to God, assured of pardon
and salvation” (p.146). Other reported similar experiences of seeing Jesus in
his bloody suffering on the cross (p.148).
No comments:
Post a Comment