My wife and I are working to get a grasp on the sacraments and what the Bible teaches us about them: i.e., what they are, what they do, and why God gives them to us. One thing we have noticed in even a cursory consideration of the topic is that relative to the Protestant Reformation, viz. the Magisterial flavor, there has been an unbelievable degradation of the sacraments in the practice of Reformed and Presbyterian churches.
One trajectory I am exploring with the help of Keith Mathison's book, Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper, is that many Reformed and Presbyterian Protestants are quite estranged from their traditional heritage. For example, ninety-nine percent of the discussions I hear on Calvinism all revolve around the so called Five Points (as if Calvin were that simplistic) and hinge on the doctrine of Predestination. It is a strange contrast over against this contemporary caricature of Calvin (by self-professing Calvinists!!) that we find two significant points.
First, Calvin does not address predestination until Book III of the Institutes which is the pastoral section, the place where Calvin seeks to comfort believers directing them to their assurance in Christ. Calvin did not lead with predestination and seems to primarily use the issue as a means of pastoral comfort to his believing readership.
Second, the orbit of Calvin's theology does not circle around the constellation of the so called Five Points. By way of reminder, the Synod of Dordt did not convene until 1618. Calvin died May 27, 1564 in
It is this center of
Recently, a PCA pastor friend of mine shared with me a story of a time he was at a baptism as a congregant in another church. He was sitting in the balcony and noticed that during the baptism, which in PCA churches is performed at the front of the sanctuary, two young men in the pews in front of him were goofing off, sending text messages to each other and basically dismissing the ritual. After the service, he reached forward and touched their shoulders. They spun around to face him and he said to them, “You missed it.”
They replied, “Missed what?”
“You missed the baptism,” he said.
“So? … I guess we did.”
“There was grace in that for you and you missed it,” the pastor continued.
My friend explained to me that baptism is not simply for that little baby in the front of the church, but it communicates the grace of Christ to the community of believers, the cloud of witnesses as it were, who very much are participating in the infant’s baptism. There is much assurance for the believing witnesses.
Calvin seems to resonate with a similar thought in the way he seems to have understood the sacramental union between the signs and the things signified. Mathison elucidates four main points. First, the union between the two is so close that the sign and the signified are practically identical. Second, the sign does not become the thing signified. A distinction is always maintained. Third, there is no analogy for this union in the natural realm, the only exception being the Incarnation. Fourth, Calvin consequently sees the Incarnation, the everlasting union of God and humanity in Jesus Christ, as the analogy that serves to govern his thought on the mystery involved in sacramental union.[2]
Unfortunately, this is but a jotting for me this morning and as such I think and hope I have laid out some notions that Mathison sees (and I have seen) in Calvin that for most readers will sound strange to their ears. The dissonance comes from two sources in the Protestant West. First, we do not understand our own tradition and in many cases we stand on the shoulders of mere caricature, something other than what has historically been Reformed Protestant tradition. Second, for reasons about which I might only speculate now, the Protestant West has largely forgotten the Incarnation and its cosmic ramifications upon all humanity and especially those whose life is now in Christ.
May God have mercy, sending His Spirit that all of the minds of all of His people would be all the more illumined. Amen.
4 comments:
Then the key issue then is, what is Calvin's view of the Union in the Incarnation?
What constitutes the union? Is it entitative, causal, relational?
If the sacrments are instruments, then what is the humanity of Christ? What kind of union is an instrumental union?
Will,
You should seriously consider reading John Williamson Nevin's "The Mystical Presence: A Vindication of the Reformed or Calvinistic Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist." You might not agree with everything he says, but his overview of Puritans on the Eucharist (regarding how far they moved from Calvin's view towards out-and-out Zwinglianism) is eye opening. You should also take a look at the more recent work by Brian Gerrish, "Grace and Gratitude: The Eucharistic Theology of John Calvin," which is helpful in understanding both Calvin & Nevin. You & your wife are probably already be aware of these works, because you're both extremely well read. However, in case you didn't know, there you go. Enjoy!
Mr. Tekko,
I had only heard of the Nevin/Hodge controversy recently. So thanks for the tip on the reading. The more I read, the less well-read I consider myself to be.
Go well.
Will,
On the Hodge/Nevin controversy, in addition to Mathison that you're reading you, might also find the following link helpful (http://www.peterwallace.org/hn.htm).
Dr. Wallace is an OPC minister.
I forgot to mention in my last post that you might find Ronald Wallace's (no relation to Peter that I know) classic work "Calvin's Doctrine of Word & Sacrament" very helpful. He quotes extensively from the whole range of Calvin's work in outline form to give the big picture of Calvin on these topics.
I too have struggled with these issues, and I suggest them to you because I found them to be very helpful. Glad to hear you're reading Mathison... that's an excellent work that deserves a wide reading in the Reformed world.
Peace,
Mr. Teko (one 'k')
Post a Comment