Comments on: Frequency of the Lord’s Supper in 17th Century Britain http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/ It's a Seventeenth Century World Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:12:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Barry Wallace http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-105 Barry Wallace Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:32:04 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-105 Unlike the vast majority of my fellow Baptists, I'm still with Calvin in his view of the Lord's Supper. Unlike the vast majority of my fellow Baptists, I’m still with Calvin in his view of the Lord’s Supper.

]]> By: Mark Jones http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-101 Mark Jones Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:49:12 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-101 "Never write anything within Muller's sphere" - oh dear, that leaves you pretty limited, doesn't it? I don't remember Muller taking on the three categories. But I think the Westminster divines were more in line with Bullinger than Calvin. That said, I've read statements from Zwingli that defy the usual understanding of symbolic memorialism. For example, he writes: “in the Lord’s Supper that natural and substantial body of Christ, in which he suffered here and in which he now sits at the right hand of the Father in heaven, is not eaten naturally and in its essence, but spiritually only …. To eat the body of Christ sacramentally, when we wish to speak properly, is, when connected with the sacrament, to eat the body of Christ in mind and in spirit”. Interesting, don't you think? “Never write anything within Muller’s sphere” – oh dear, that leaves you pretty limited, doesn’t it?

I don’t remember Muller taking on the three categories. But I think the Westminster divines were more in line with Bullinger than Calvin.

That said, I’ve read statements from Zwingli that defy the usual understanding of symbolic memorialism. For example, he writes:

“in the Lord’s Supper that natural and substantial body of Christ, in which he suffered here and in which he now sits at the right hand of the Father in heaven, is not eaten naturally and in its essence, but spiritually only …. To eat the body of Christ sacramentally, when we wish to speak properly, is, when connected with the sacrament, to eat the body of Christ in mind and in spirit”.

Interesting, don’t you think?

]]> By: Danny Hyde http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-100 Danny Hyde Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:59:42 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-100 Hi Mark, Yes, I read Grace and Gratitude while in Sem as well as Muller's thrashing! Hence my two life purposes: 1. Serve Christ and 2. Never write anything within Muller's sphere! Since my reading was quite a while ago, does Muller actually take on the 3 categories? I don't remember that being addressed in Grace and Gratitude. Hi Mark,

Yes, I read Grace and Gratitude while in Sem as well as Muller’s thrashing! Hence my two life purposes: 1. Serve Christ and 2. Never write anything within Muller’s sphere!

Since my reading was quite a while ago, does Muller actually take on the 3 categories? I don’t remember that being addressed in Grace and Gratitude.

]]> By: Adam Brink http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-98 Adam Brink Mon, 14 Sep 2009 05:04:06 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-98 Good stuff! Thanks for sharing. Good stuff! Thanks for sharing.

]]> By: Mark Jones http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-97 Mark Jones Mon, 14 Sep 2009 04:42:15 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-97 Danny, have you read Richard Muller's review of Gerrish's book, "Grace and Gratitude"? Yikes. I hope I don't get reviewed like that - ever! Not that I'm saying the distinctions are unhelpful, but Gerrish's work isn't without its shortcomings. Danny, have you read Richard Muller’s review of Gerrish’s book, “Grace and Gratitude”? Yikes. I hope I don’t get reviewed like that – ever! Not that I’m saying the distinctions are unhelpful, but Gerrish’s work isn’t without its shortcomings.

]]> By: Danny Hyde http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-96 Danny Hyde Mon, 14 Sep 2009 03:55:54 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-96 Brothers, I've always found Brian Gerrish's threefold distinction of the view of the Lord's Supper in the Reformed corpus confessionum helpful. He argues that there are three views: symbolic memorialism (Zwingli), symbolic parallelism (Bullinger), and symbolic instrumentalism (Calvin). B.A. Gerrish, The Old Protestantism and the New: Essays on the Reformation Heritage (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), 118–130. Brothers,

I’ve always found Brian Gerrish’s threefold distinction of the view of the Lord’s Supper in the Reformed corpus confessionum helpful. He argues that there are three views: symbolic memorialism (Zwingli), symbolic parallelism (Bullinger), and symbolic instrumentalism (Calvin).

B.A. Gerrish, The Old Protestantism and the New: Essays on the Reformation Heritage (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), 118–130.

]]> By: Mark Jones http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/13/frequency-of-the-lords-supper-in-17th-century-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-95 Mark Jones Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:26:12 +0000 http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=518#comment-95 Thanks for this. Spear's essay is going to ruffle a few feathers of those who think there is one - or ought to be one - way of understanding the Lord's Supper, namely, Calvin's way. I was never convinced by Keith Mathison's book. MJ Thanks for this. Spear’s essay is going to ruffle a few feathers of those who think there is one – or ought to be one – way of understanding the Lord’s Supper, namely, Calvin’s way. I was never convinced by Keith Mathison’s book.

MJ

]]>