# The Reformed View of the Lord's Supper



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

In the past year through many internet articles I have come to accept the Reformed view of the Lord's Supper which is Christ Spiritual Presence in the Bread and the Wine. I have also come to accept that the elements of the Lord's Supper must be bread and wine and I have also come to a weekly partaking of the Covenant meal.

Tonight since I was home sick my wife and I was listening to the "Wild Boar Podcast" by Pastor McMahon on the Lord's Supper and enjoyed them very much.

My question is, Does anybody know of a modern complete book on the Reformed view of the Lord's Supper that includes more details on the spiritual presence along with the bread and wine elements and a weekly partaking? A book that gives a complete Reformed view on the Lord's Supper in total detail?

Any thoughts?

Michael


----------



## RamistThomist (May 27, 2007)

Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine on the Lord's Supper.

Caveat emptor: Some have accused Mathison of being soft on paedocommunion, but to his credit he doesn't affirm it. He is just saying we need to given cogent responses to the most recent challenges, and to take the challenges seriously. That, contra some, is not an endorsement of paedocommunion.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

Thanks,

Just wondering.. What view does he hold on wine use? and frequency of the Supper?




Draught Horse said:


> Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine on the Lord's Supper.
> 
> Caveat emptor: Some have accused Mathison of being soft on paedocommunion, but to his credit he doesn't affirm it. He is just saying we need to given cogent responses to the most recent challenges, and to take the challenges seriously. That, contra some, is not an endorsement of paedocommunion.


----------



## RamistThomist (May 27, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Thanks,
> 
> Just wondering.. What view does he hold on wine use? and frequency of the Supper?



Re Wine: only merlots are allowed. No cabernets.

Frequency: weekly.

I was kidding on the wine. He believes grape juice is not being faithful to scripture.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

Great, Sounds like a wonderful book, except..

the paedo communion... 

LoL, I know you said he did not affirmed the doctrine, but I guess I will just have to skip over that section since I hold to Adultus Creedo Baptizmo and in turn hold the same for the Supper... 

Michael



Draught Horse said:


> Re Wine: only merlots are allowed. No cabernets.
> 
> Frequency: weekly.
> 
> I was kidding on the wine. He believes grape juice is not being faithful to scripture.


----------



## MW (May 27, 2007)

I suggest, as a clarification to the spiritual presence idea, William Cunningham's 'Zwingle, and the Doctrine fo the Sacraments;' in "The Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation." Too often Calvin's view is presented in absolute terms as if Christ is unconditionally present in the Supper, whereas the proper view is that Christ is present to the believer.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

I would agree that Christ in only present and efficious to the believer and not to the unbeliever... and of course the unbeliever by partaking will receive the curses...


Michael




armourbearer said:


> I suggest, as a clarification to the spiritual presence idea, William Cunningham's 'Zwingle, and the Doctrine fo the Sacraments;' in "The Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation." Too often Calvin's view is presented in absolute terms as if Christ is unconditionally present in the Supper, whereas the proper view is that Christ is present to the believer.


----------



## SRoper (May 27, 2007)

I just wanted to point out that weekly communion is not _the_ Reformed view; while I agree that weekly is good, there really isn't a Reformed view on frequency.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

Calvin espoused it and wanted it but was rejected by the genevan government...

So, Reformed in my view... 



SRoper said:


> I just wanted to point out that weekly communion is not _the_ Reformed view; while I agree that weekly is good, there really isn't a Reformed view on frequency.


----------



## ReformedWretch (May 27, 2007)

thunaer said:


> I would agree that Christ in only present and efficious to the believer and not to the unbeliever... and of course the unbeliever by partaking will receive the curses...
> 
> 
> Michael



Scary for my former work place who (at chapel) knowingly encouraged anyone who wished to partake. Scary for the partakers AND the givers!


----------



## MW (May 27, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Calvin espoused it and wanted it but was rejected by the genevan government...



That sounds like a fanciful reconstruction of events.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

??????

I am unsure what you mean?

Of course what I wrote I read it in aleast 3 or 4 different books....

Michael



armourbearer said:


> That sounds like a fanciful reconstruction of events.


----------



## MW (May 27, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Of course what I wrote I read it in aleast 3 or 4 different books....



Maybe it would be worth your while double checking references and seeing whether or not those three or four different books were justified in making that assertion.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

Regards of the government issue, I know I read Calvin's Institutes and he was for weekly communion....



armourbearer said:


> Maybe it would be worth your while double checking references and seeing whether or not those three or four different books were justified in ,making that assertion.


----------



## etexas (May 27, 2007)

Weekly Holy Communion is the only way to fly!


----------



## MW (May 27, 2007)

thunaer said:


> Regards of the government issue, I know I read Calvin's Institutes and he was for weekly communion....



Was he? He did not say that every believer should commune every week. He said there should be a weekly administration without stating what is implied in your particular position -- that every church should administer the communion every week. There are letters where he agrees with other pastors holding off the communion and where he announces his own deference. I think it can be established that Calvin held to frequent communion, and that his own practice was one of quarterly celebration. But he did not teach that every congregation should celebrate weekly. His commentaries certainly do not espouse any kind of biblical necessity for such a position.


----------



## RamistThomist (May 27, 2007)

I think Michael Horton wrote an article favorable to weekly communion (or it not totally favorable, more so than most). For all of my disagreements with Horton on theonomy and eschatology, I really like his take on worship.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

In the centuries prior to the Reformation a number of serious abuses crept into the life of the church, some of which affected the celebration of the Lord's Supper. The medieval church continued to celebrate the supper (in the form of the Mass) whenever it met, but with the passage of centuries, fewer and fewer people were able to partake of the sacrament. Often only the "celebrants," that is, the presiding clergy, received the bread and wine, while the vast majority of parishioners watched the ceremony passively from a distance. Laypersons who wanted to participate in the sacrament were required to do penance before partaking of the sacrament, and that proved to be a burdensome obstacle to regular participation. As a result, ordinary Christians often received the sacrament on an annual basis only, the absolute minimum permitted by church authorities. This was the situation the Reformers found at the beginning of the sixteenth century.

John Calvin was clearly disturbed by this unbiblical practice and tried to change it in the Genevan church. He used surprisingly strong language in condemning the custom of his day:

*"Plainly this custom which enjoins us to take communion once a year is a veritable invention of the devil, whoever was instrumental in introducing it...For there is not the least doubt that the Sacred Supper was in that era [the early church] set before the believers every time they met together; and there is no doubt that a majority of them took communion..."*

Calvin regretted that worshipping Christians were ordinarily prohibited from receiving the sacrament and urged reform:

It should have been done far differently: *"the Lord's Table should have been spread at least once a week for the assembly of Christians, and the promises declared in it should feed us spiritually.*
[Inst. IV. XVII. 46, emphasis mine].

Unfortunately, the prevailing tradition of Calvin's day reasserted itself. *The city fathers of Geneva were unwilling to see the Reformation go this far,* at least partly because they felt obligated to examine and approve prospective communicants—a gigantic task that would have made weekly celebration impractical. Consequently, they forced Calvin to settle for a compromise: The people would receive the Lord's Supper four times a year, and the other worship services would become preaching services at which the sacrament would not be celebrated at all. This second-best solution was preferable to a weekly celebration in which most people did not participate.

Calvin could scarcely conceal his disappointment, but he nevertheless foresaw a time when matters might be put right. Towards the end of his life he wrote:

*I have taken care to record publicly that our custom is defective, so that those who come after me may be able to correct it the more freely and easily.
[Bretschneider, Corpus Reformatorum, XXXVIII, i, p. 213].*

Unfortunately, even defective traditions are not changed quite so "freely and easily." In our celebration of communion, we in the Reformed churches have inherited not the more Reformed practice urged by Calvin, but the less-than-Reformed compromise imposed on him by a city used to the old ways. Is it at last time to think about changing our custom?

from reformedworship



armourbearer said:


> Was he? He did not say that every believer should commune every week. He said there should be a weekly administration without stating what is implied in your particular position -- that every church should administer the communion every week. There are letters where he agrees with other pastors holding off the communion and where he announces his own deference. I think it can be established that Calvin held to frequent communion, and that his own practice was one of quarterly celebration. But he did not teach that every congregation should celebrate weekly. His commentaries certainly do not espouse any kind of biblical necessity for such a position.


----------



## MW (May 27, 2007)

thunaer said:


> from reformedworship



And now it would be in your best interests to investigate the matter for yourself.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 27, 2007)

But these quotes still do not require that Calvin viewed that Each and Every particular church present the L.S. on every given Sunday.

Calvin was a Presbyterian. The CHURCH in Geneva was similar to the CHURCH in Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, etc. What seems important to Calvin was that the Supper be _available_ far more frequently than once a year, or even once a quarter. Which would mean, practically speaking, that communion could be presented on different occasions across the city. It seems clear to me that Calvin would not have supported the mandatory observance of the L.S. at each Sunday gathering of each congregation.

And that, I think, is Matthew's point about trying to make certain of Calvin's statements prove too much. What else did he say on the subject?


----------



## KMK (May 27, 2007)

I recommend "The Mystery of the Lord's Supper: Sermons on the Sacrament preached in the Kirk of Edinburgh in AD 1589" by Robert Bruce. The copy I have was published by James Clarke & Co. Ltd, London and published in 1958. I do not know if any others publish it. 

Maybe Andrew could tell us if it available online...


----------



## Coram Deo (May 27, 2007)

This is the second time this has happened this week, but in another thread...

Just wondering if there is a complete language breakdown in our society or not?

Because the language that I read in those quotes leads me to believe that Calvin supported weekly communion in every church.

Not sure what else to say at this point...

Michael




Contra_Mundum said:


> But these quotes still do not require that Calvin viewed that Each and Every particular church present the L.S. on every given Sunday.
> 
> Calvin was a Presbyterian. The CHURCH in Geneva was similar to the CHURCH in Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, etc. What seems important to Calvin was that the Supper be _available_ far more frequently than once a year, or even once a quarter. Which would mean, practically speaking, that communion could be presented on different occasions across the city. It seems clear to me that Calvin would not have supported the mandatory observance of the L.S. at each Sunday gathering of each congregation.
> 
> And that, I think, is Matthew's point about trying to make certain of Calvin's statements prove too much. What else did he say on the subject?


----------



## Herald (May 27, 2007)

Michael - we celebrate the Lord's Supper weekly and have been doing so since October of last year. The elders are convinced that, "as often as you do this" means to do it often. We are purposed not to allow the sacrament to become just another thing we do. It is a time of solemn meditation and a spiritual feast of which Christ is the center. With that in mind we could find no good reason not to celebrate it weekly.


----------



## Coram Deo (May 28, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> Michael - we celebrate the Lord's Supper weekly and have been doing so since October of last year. The elders are convinced that, "as often as you do this" means to do it often. We are purposed not to allow the sacrament to become just another thing we do. It is a time of solemn meditation and a spiritual feast of which Christ is the center. With that in mind we could find no good reason not to celebrate it weekly.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 28, 2007)

Contra_Mundum said:


> ... Calvin would not have supported the mandatory observance of the L.S. at each Sunday gathering of each congregation.


This is the position of the Westminster Directory for Public Worship; i.e. frequency of the sacrament is left to the descretion and wisdom of the congregation's elders and a particular frequency is not mandated in Scripture. _THE communion, or supper of the Lord, is frequently to be celebrated; but how often, may be considered and determined by the ministers, and other church-governors of each congregation, as they shall find most convenient for the comfort and edification of the people committed to their charge. And, when it shall be administered, we judge it convenient to be done after the morning sermon._

The Westminster Assembly do add that if _this sacrament cannot with convenience be frequently administered, it is requisite that publick warning be given the sabbath-day before the administration thereof: and that either then, or on some day of that week, something concerning that ordinance, and the due preparation thereunto, and participation thereof, be taught; that, by the diligent use of all means sanctified of God to that end, both in publick and private, all may come better prepared to that heavenly feast._


----------



## AV1611 (May 28, 2007)

thunaer said:


> My question is, Does anybody know of a modern complete book on the Reformed view of the Lord's Supper that includes more details on the spiritual presence along with the bread and wine elements and a weekly partaking?



I would suggest you find a copy of Thomas Cranmer's _A defence of the true and Catholike doctrine of the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Saviour Christ_.

Also: 
http://anglicanhistory.org/reformation/ps/ridley/lords_supper.pdf
http://anglicanhistory.org/reformation/ps/ridley/determination_decretals.pdf


----------



## Puritan Sailor (May 28, 2007)

thunaer said:


> In the past year through many internet articles I have come to accept the Reformed view of the Lord's Supper which is Christ Spiritual Presence in the Bread and the Wine. I have also come to accept that the elements of the Lord's Supper must be bread and wine and I have also come to a weekly partaking of the Covenant meal.
> 
> Tonight since I was home sick my wife and I was listening to the "Wild Boar Podcast" by Pastor McMahon on the Lord's Supper and enjoyed them very much.
> 
> My question is, Does anybody know of a modern complete book on the Reformed view of the Lord's Supper that includes more details on the spiritual presence along with the bread and wine elements and a weekly partaking? A book that gives a complete Reformed view on the Lord's Supper in total detail?



Calvin's view was more than just saying Christ was spiritual present at the Supper. According to Calvin, we actually commune and our nourished with the physical body of Jesus by faith, as we partake of the elements by mouth. It's not that Christ descends down. But we are actually transported into heaven by faith, through the Holy Spirit, to commune with Christ in heaven. This is in other circles known as "virtualism."


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (May 28, 2007)

Puritan Sailor said:


> Calvin's view was more than just saying Christ was spiritual present at the Supper. According to Calvin, we actually commune and our nourished with the physical body of Jesus by faith, as we partake of the elements by mouth. It's not that Christ descends down. But we are actually transported into heaven by faith, through the Holy Spirit, to commune with Christ in heaven. This is in other circles known as "virtualism."


 
Its like talking to someone on a cell phone.

See my last two podcasts at APM on the Lord's Supper.


----------



## etexas (May 28, 2007)

AV1611 said:


> I would suggest you find a copy of Thomas Cranmer's _A defence of the true and Catholike doctrine of the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Saviour Christ_.
> 
> Also:
> http://anglicanhistory.org/reformation/ps/ridley/lords_supper.pdf
> http://anglicanhistory.org/reformation/ps/ridley/determination_decretals.pdf


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (May 28, 2007)

KMK said:


> I recommend "The Mystery of the Lord's Supper: Sermons on the Sacrament preached in the Kirk of Edinburgh in AD 1589" by Robert Bruce. The copy I have was published by James Clarke & Co. Ltd, London and published in 1958. I do not know if any others publish it.
> 
> Maybe Andrew could tell us if it available online...



Not sure if the sermon you referenced is included, but some sermons by Robert Bruce on the Lord's Supper may be found here.


----------



## AV1611 (May 29, 2007)

One of the best explanations of the Eucharist is by Cranmer in the Black Rubric:

"WHEREAS it is ordained in this Office for the Administration of the Lord's Supper, that the Communicants should receive the same kneeling; (which order is well meant, for a signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers, and for the avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the holy Communion, as might otherwise ensue; ) yet, lest the same kneeling should by any persons, either out of ignorance and infirmity, or out of malice and obstinacy, be misconstrued and depraved: It is hereby declared, That thereby no adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ's natural Flesh and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be adored; (for that were Idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians; ) and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and not here; it being against the truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time in more places than one."


----------



## KMK (May 29, 2007)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Not sure if the sermon you referenced is included, but some sermons by Robert Bruce on the Lord's Supper may be found here.



You are awesome, Andrew! Now if I can figure out how to download it...


----------

