Rating: 
Summary: Koinonia, Calvin &The Lord's Supper
Review: A thumb nail sketch ,at the start of the book, is given about the differences between transubstantiation, consubstantiation, and symbolic memorialism. I believe reading about these competing Eucharistic doctrines on pages 239 to 269 before reading about Calvin's doctrine on the Lord's Supper (pgs.. 7-48)would make Calvin's arguments clearer. One hundred pages on reformed developments of the Lord's Supper from Calvin to the present is a slow read and not very illuminating. Mathison's presentation and description of bible passages and his understanding of the Lord's Supper is very interesting. He starts with a ten page discussion about the establishment of Passover referring to the book of Exodus. In one page he talks of the bread from heaven to the nation of Israel- that it is God that provided the bread. He then goes unto describe the blood of the covenant. Using the third and fourth chapter of Leviticus, he describes the peace offering the Israelites offered up to God. Arguments are given by the author about the need for continued sacrifice. It was an imperfect system to cleanse and sanctify the sinner unto a more perfect sacrifice would be presented.
"Oh, that there were among you who would shut the doors, that you would not kindle fire upon my altar in vain! I have no pleasure in you, I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand". Malachi 1:10
Keith Mathison calls this concept "pure sacrifice". What is needed for a sacrifice to be acceptable to God. Yes man should be repentive for one's disobedience to God and to hold God in reverence. One should be thankful for who God is and praise Him for His long-suffering. Mathison argues that the book of Malachi lays out an argument for a more perfect sacrificial system plus the need to imprint the love of God on people's hearts. He believes Christ death and resurrection brought this into being.
Psalms 113-118 may have been used as the songs sung as part of the Passover feast in Jesus time. Mathison further elaborates that Passover liturgy uses the words: "This is the bread of affliction which our ancestors ate when they came out of Egypt." He argues those reading the phrase or making the statement did not believe the bread to be the exact same bread that was baked in Egypt. No the bread was like the bread consumed in Egypt. That it was eaten today as to share in the original experience. When Jesus says, "this is My body". He is telling us that the Bread represents the new covenant. One is no longer saved through animal sacrifice but the sacrifice of Himself. That the believers deeds are put on the account of Jesus. In a way we our accepting Jesus as paying the price for sins. Without partaking in Jesus the sinner is doomed. Mathison distinguishes between Catholic orthodoxy and Reformed. In Catholicism , the Lord's Supper is a renewal of the sacrifice each time it is partaken. In Reform theology , participants are partakers with Christ. An acknowledgment of dependence of Christ, but not a renewal of the sacrifice.
In the early church, as described in the book titled the acts of the Apostles, it is described that believers broke bread together. Mathison states this is how fellow Christians refered to the Lord's Supper.
The cup of blessing which we bless, is not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
1 Corinthians 10:16 King James
In the revised standard version the word participation is used instead of the word communion. Both are translations from the Greek word Koinonia. The ordinance or sacrament is not to be practiced in isolation, but together in a corporate worship. That all believers come together to share in the body and blood of Jesus Christ their Savior. Jesus is the host and provider of the sacrifice once and for all to those who believe. The meal serves as a reminder, but God also uses the event to sustain, nourish, and to increase the believers communion with their Savior.
Jesus states in Matthew 26:29:
But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it with you in my Father's kingdom.
The author says this means that Jesus will not drink the cup unto the second Advent of Christ. This is a promise of another Lord's Supper where all of God's elect are with a physical present living Savior. When a Lord's Supper is practiced today, Jesus is there and living--but we cannot perceive Him through sight and He is not drinking the cup with us.
The Lord's Supper serves as a sign of the new covenant. The blood of lambs is no longer desired by the Father, but only the Blood of The Lamb -- The Blood of God's Son Jesus Christ. There is no longer the need for continual sacrifice, because the most perfect permanent sacrifice was made once and for all.
The Bread of Life discourse is told in John Chapter six. Unless you eat my body and drink my blood, you will have no part of my Kingdom. Mathison explains how a Christian is to partake of Jesus? Salvation does not comes to those who do not identify themselves with the one who died on the cross. Both Catholic and Lutheran theology argue for a mere physical consumption of the body and blood of Jesus.
Rating: 
Summary: Another Great Book from Dr. Mathison
Review: Dr. Keith Mathison has produced an excellent followup to his last excellent work, the Shape of Sola Scriptura. Like that work, this book is concerned with recovering the richness of doctrine from the Reformation. Here, the author is recovering, defending, and defining Calvin's view of the Eucharist. Calvin's view involves the Real Presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. Since he doesn't fall into transubstantiation Roman Catholics will think he denies the Real Presence. Since most Protestants (including the Reformed) deny any sort of Real Presence, this will seem weird at best, Romish at worst.This book fits into a general category I would call "the catholic Reformed" movement. There is a significant and growing number of people who are Reformed but at the same time more broadly catholic. In other words, they are connected to and give consideration to the church prior to the Reformation. Also, the catholic Reformed (and some others) have views closer to the original Reformers than many modern Reformed, although these two groups still share a lot in common. There are a variety of reasons for this, but this book cannot be understood apart from this context. This book is written primarily for those who are Reformed, so all can recover the richness of Calvin's doctrine. Almost immediately into the book, Dr. Matthison covers the original Reformed Eucharistic beliefs and how a divergence from those beliefs came about. If you are not Reformed, would you care about this? Probably not. If you are arguing about fidelity to the Westminster Confessions, etc., this matters. Dr. Matthison then goes on to give a biblical defense of his position. He also critiques other views. He gives a wonderful, but short, critique of the Roman Catholic position. He also wonderfully highlights the significance of the Passover meal in a way that supports his position. In the appendix he covers Eucharistic views from the Didache to Aquinas, and that section is most helpful and useful. Lastly, Dr. Mathison covers controversial practical issues like the use of wine and padeocommunion. If you are Reformed, this book is a must. If you want to understand the Lord's Supper better, it is also a must. This book will be useful in general. This book is a gift and should be read and bought.
Rating:
Summary: Another Great Book from Dr. Mathison
Review: Dr. Keith Mathison has produced an excellent followup to his last excellent work, the Shape of Sola Scriptura. Like that work, this book is concerned with recovering the richness of doctrine from the Reformation. Here, the author is recovering, defending, and defining Calvin's view of the Eucharist. Calvin's view involves the Real Presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. Since he doesn't fall into transubstantiation Roman Catholics will think he denies the Real Presence. Since most Protestants (including the Reformed) deny any sort of Real Presence, this will seem weird at best, Romish at worst. This book fits into a general category I would call "the catholic Reformed" movement. There is a significant and growing number of people who are Reformed but at the same time more broadly catholic. In other words, they are connected to and give consideration to the church prior to the Reformation. Also, the catholic Reformed (and some others) have views closer to the original Reformers than many modern Reformed, although these two groups still share a lot in common. There are a variety of reasons for this, but this book cannot be understood apart from this context. This book is written primarily for those who are Reformed, so all can recover the richness of Calvin's doctrine. Almost immediately into the book, Dr. Matthison covers the original Reformed Eucharistic beliefs and how a divergence from those beliefs came about. If you are not Reformed, would you care about this? Probably not. If you are arguing about fidelity to the Westminster Confessions, etc., this matters. Dr. Matthison then goes on to give a biblical defense of his position. He also critiques other views. He gives a wonderful, but short, critique of the Roman Catholic position. He also wonderfully highlights the significance of the Passover meal in a way that supports his position. In the appendix he covers Eucharistic views from the Didache to Aquinas, and that section is most helpful and useful. Lastly, Dr. Mathison covers controversial practical issues like the use of wine and padeocommunion. If you are Reformed, this book is a must. If you want to understand the Lord's Supper better, it is also a must. This book will be useful in general. This book is a gift and should be read and bought.
Rating:
Summary: Great historical theological look at the Lord's Supper
Review: I bought this book an a whim and was very glad that I did. Mathison has done contemporary Christianity a service buy publishing this work.
He gives the reader a solid background in the issues concerning the Reformation debate on the Eucharist. In it, I believe, he vindicates the three major players - Luther, Zwingli and Calvin - explaining how Calvin wasn't as far from Luther and how Zwingli eventually came over the Calvin's position. Thus almost unifying the magesterial reformers on such an important reformational topic.
Mathison also gives us a masterful look at post-reformation thought on the issue, citing all of the major confessions and catechisms from the Reformation to today - as well as looking at major theologians throughout church history.
The one drawback was his treatment of Jonathan Edwards - which is understandable considering the only published sermons of Edwards on the Supper make him appear Zwingliian. However there are a series of unpublished sermons on the Lord's Supper that clearly prove that Edwards was a Calvinist when it came to this means of grace. There is an excellent article in Pro Ecclesia - A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology (Vol. vii - No. 3 - Summer 98) by William J. Danaher, Jr. that exposes Edwards for the Calvinist that he is.
Also, it would be nice in a subsequent edition if Mathison would highlight the view of the early Particular Baptists which was undoubtedly Calvinistic - as opposed to some of the later one's who developed a memorialist view.
Mathison's exegesis of Old and New Testament texts enlighten the reader to see how Biblical Calvin's view is. We would do well to harken to Mathison's exhortation to return to this rich view of the Supper.
Rating:
Summary: Great historical theological look at the Lord's Supper
Review: I bought this book an a whim and was very glad that I did. Mathison has done contemporary Christianity a service buy publishing this work.
He gives the reader a solid background in the issues concerning the Reformation debate on the Eucharist. In it, I believe, he vindicates the three major players - Luther, Zwingli and Calvin - explaining how Calvin wasn't as far from Luther and how Zwingli eventually came over the Calvin's position. Thus almost unifying the magesterial reformers on such an important reformational topic.
Mathison also gives us a masterful look at post-reformation thought on the issue, citing all of the major confessions and catechisms from the Reformation to today - as well as looking at major theologians throughout church history.
The one drawback was his treatment of Jonathan Edwards - which is understandable considering the only published sermons of Edwards on the Supper make him appear Zwingliian. However there are a series of unpublished sermons on the Lord's Supper that clearly prove that Edwards was a Calvinist when it came to this means of grace. There is an excellent article in Pro Ecclesia - A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology (Vol. vii - No. 3 - Summer 98) by William J. Danaher, Jr. that exposes Edwards for the Calvinist that he is.
Also, it would be nice in a subsequent edition if Mathison would highlight the view of the early Particular Baptists which was undoubtedly Calvinistic - as opposed to some of the later one's who developed a memorialist view.
Mathison's exegesis of Old and New Testament texts enlighten the reader to see how Biblical Calvin's view is. We would do well to harken to Mathison's exhortation to return to this rich view of the Supper.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent text on the Holy Communion
Review: I have no doubt the material in this book will make waves for decades if not centuries to come. Layman- buy a copy for yourself, read it, then buy a copy for your elder(s) (if you don't want to pass your copy on). Elder or Pastor- you must thoughtfully read this and evaluate how you are sacramentally leading God's people, repent where needed and lead Christ's flock into greater covenantal union with Him. Mathison in his signature biblical, orderly and methodical manner persuasively shows forth Calvin's doctrine of the Lord's table (real spiritual presence of Christ). The eucharistic conflicts of the 16th century are not only brought to light, but presented as the main issues the reformers wrote on and spilt their blood over. In the beginning chapters you will see how Calvin's eucharistic doctrine was amazaingly close to Luther's (Newsflash- Calvin signed on to the Augsburg's stance!) and light years away from Zwingli's memorialist doctrine. You will then be given a very eye-opening history lesson in reformed eucharistic confession and practice from the 16th to 20th century. The gradual movement away from the original reformed doctrine is excellently chronicled here. The pinnacle of this section for me was the intense debate between John Nevin (real presence) and Charles Hodge (memorialist). The next section faithfully maps out the significant OT and NT texts on Passover and the Lord's Table. The Final section defines, analyzes and refutes transubstantiation (Romanist), consubstantiation (Lutheran) and memorialist (majority Evangelical) eucharistic practices as well as laying out the hot issues of regularity (weekly, monthly, etc.), use of wine and paedocommunion (baptized children partaking covenantally). You'll have to read it for yourself to find out where Mathison weighs in. After reading and contemplating only a few chapters of this book the Lord's Table became an experience unparalleled by anything else for me.
Rating:
Summary: Higher Heights
Review: I have no doubt the material in this book will make waves for decades if not centuries to come. Layman- buy a copy for yourself, read it, then buy a copy for your elder(s) (if you don't want to pass your copy on). Elder or Pastor- you must thoughtfully read this and evaluate how you are sacramentally leading God's people, repent where needed and lead Christ's flock into greater covenantal union with Him. Mathison in his signature biblical, orderly and methodical manner persuasively shows forth Calvin's doctrine of the Lord's table (real spiritual presence of Christ). The eucharistic conflicts of the 16th century are not only brought to light, but presented as the main issues the reformers wrote on and spilt their blood over. In the beginning chapters you will see how Calvin's eucharistic doctrine was amazaingly close to Luther's (Newsflash- Calvin signed on to the Augsburg's stance!) and light years away from Zwingli's memorialist doctrine. You will then be given a very eye-opening history lesson in reformed eucharistic confession and practice from the 16th to 20th century. The gradual movement away from the original reformed doctrine is excellently chronicled here. The pinnacle of this section for me was the intense debate between John Nevin (real presence) and Charles Hodge (memorialist). The next section faithfully maps out the significant OT and NT texts on Passover and the Lord's Table. The Final section defines, analyzes and refutes transubstantiation (Romanist), consubstantiation (Lutheran) and memorialist (majority Evangelical) eucharistic practices as well as laying out the hot issues of regularity (weekly, monthly, etc.), use of wine and paedocommunion (baptized children partaking covenantally). You'll have to read it for yourself to find out where Mathison weighs in. After reading and contemplating only a few chapters of this book the Lord's Table became an experience unparalleled by anything else for me.
Rating:
Summary: If you only buy one book on the Supper....
Review: Mathison's Given For You on Calvin's view of the Supper is a must have. Not overly profound; reads kind of like a really, really good, long seminary paper, and occasionally cliched. But about as good of an overview as I've seen. Lots of nice, clearly outlined, short sub-chapters. Makes a good argument for wine in the Meal and even for paedo-communion. The part on Nevin is especially good. He also shows there were important differences on the meal between fellow Princeton theologians (as well as between fellow Scottish theologians, Southern, etc.). Because he wrote a book on postmillennialism I had avoided this one for some time, but I'm glad I gave him a chance.
Three other books to consider: NT Wright's The Meal Jesus Gave Us; Peter Leithart's Blessed are the Hungry; and Robert Letham's one (Letham gives a counter-balance to Mathison on the Paedo-communion stuff).
Rating:
Summary: not just a "symbol"
Review: My 2.5 decades of Christian life have largely been spent in churches which hold to a purely symbolic and/or "memorial" meaning of the Eucharist/Communion (and Baptism as well). Reading the Early Church Fathers and the New Testament caused me to believe that the Early Church did not hold a merely symbolic view of these things, but I was not convinced by Catholic arguments for transubstantiation -- and other aspects and teachings of the liturgical, orthodox churches (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox) were problematic such that to leave Protestantism to join them for the sake of a "more meaningful" Eucharist was not an option. Almost two years ago I had a quasi-mystical experience of the Lord's presence during communion that increased my desire to know what to make of this "ritual" or "sacrament" and what it signified and how Christ's presence (or lack thereof) at the Eucharist should best be explained or understood or taught. No specific answers were forthcoming, nor additional "illumination." Then I came across this book and it rekindled my interest in the subject. (Interestingly, for the last 3 years we have been attending a "Bible Church" whose pastor is strongly Calvinistic in his beliefs and teaches a purely symbolic and "memorial" view of the Eucharist -- the very thing the author of this book critiques and rejects as being non-Calvinist and foreign to historic Christian teaching). This book could create some serious theological disturbances in denominations and churches which hold to a purely symbolic or memorial view of communion, and even if they choose to reject the author's position, I think every such church should read this book. This book is NOT just for reformed churches or Christians, but for every Christian like me who has asked "Why bother with communion or baptism if they're just symbols ... and if they're NOT just symbols, then what are they?" My personal experience was of Christ being present with us as we broke the bread and drank the cup, dining with us in His Father's Kingdom, at His table. Mathison's book doesn't present this view, but he does seriously present the argument that Christ is present to the believer and that the believer truly does (by faith) eat and drink Christ at the Eucharist.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent text on the Holy Communion
Review: This book is an excellent and thorough overview and defense of John Calvin's orthodox position and teaching concerning the Holy Eucharist. Today's Protestants have all but completely forgotten that the Reformation was fought around the issues of the Holy Communion and what it meant. Calvin arrived at the most orthodox answer, in keeping with the Bible and the Church Fathers. However, his followers essentially abandoned Calvin's position on the Eucharist and adopted the "memorialism" of Zwingli (this was observed in the 1860s by the Anglican theologian and Bishop of Winchester Edward Browne). Mathison takes these individuals and their teachings to task, pointing out that of all of the views on the Communion (the Roman Catholic, the Lutheran, and Calvin's) only Zwingli's memorialism stands markedly outside of the Christian tradition. I'd like to comment to Mathison that the Anglican tradition has consistently embraced Calvin's Eucharistic doctrine, by such men as Archbishop Cranmer, the Wesleys, and Bishop Charles Gore (not to mention the offical Articles of Religion of the Church of England). Mathison discusses Lutheran teaching and ignores the Anglican Church and her Reformation doctrines entirely, mentioning Cranmer only in passing.
|
