NICHOLS: So, of course, this was a significant debate in the Reformation and
coming out of the transubstantiation view of the Catholic Church where
the cup and the wafer become the literal body and blood of Christ.
Luther, of course, did not like the Latin substantia and did not like the philosophical
element of that. So, his view sometimes is called consubstantiation, but he didn't like that sort
of expression, but he spoke of Christ being around and sort of surrounding the element.
So, His presence is with the element as we partake of the Lord's Supper.
And you should look at Luther's catechism. He says something here that I think gets lost sometimes in
the debate about this, or we move off of Luther's view as Reformed folk, but he says, "We're in
a battle." "We're in a battle, and so we come to the Lord's Table for refreshment and nourishment."
And I think that's just a helpful perspective. We may not agree with his view of consubstantiation,
but I think he highlights for us, especially in certain pockets of American evangelicalism that
might have a lower view of the Lord's Supper, a perfunctory view perhaps of the Lord's Supper,
that we really take this seriously or the necessity of it for our walk. You should
speak more directly to this, Dr. Thomas, in terms of Calvin's view, but Calvin speaks not so much of
communion as Christ's presence down with us, but in one sense we are having a foretaste of the
marriage supper of the Lamb to come. And so, we, as it were, are transported up into the presence
of Christ at the Lord's Supper. And, of course, that's a different view than the Zwinglian or the
simply memorial view that the elements are just simply in memory of. So, Calvin sort of carves,
I think a different view there altogether, and I think it's worthy of our reflection.
THOMAS: Yes, actually, it's interesting. I mean Calvin writes
a couple of very important letters where he has a very high view of the Lord's Supper,
and, of course, he treats it at length in the Institutes, but I think it's easier to see it
from a liturgical point of view. When Calvin reformed the liturgy in Geneva, he took
the skeleton of the medieval Roman Mass liturgy. And there's a section of that liturgy that goes
back to the early church, the sursum corda, "Lift up your hearts," and he moved it from the liturgy
of the Word to the liturgy of the Supper. So, the sursum corda comes right before the Supper. And I
think Calvin's giving you a clue that, you know, a lot of evangelicals think that at the Supper
Jesus, sort of, comes down and you close your eyes and you have a little personal moment with Jesus.
But I think Calvin is saying the exact opposite. You are actually being taken
spiritually to where Jesus is. And where is the human body of Jesus? Well, it's not here. It's
in heaven. It's at the right hand of God. And I think viewing it as a vertical moment rather than
a descending moment, I think, is helpful, and I think that's what Calvin is doing liturgically.
REEVES: I think it's worth seeing why the Reformers believed this was a very important
question because it could seem to some to be one of those questions scholastic theologians
love playing around with, but, you see, in the way Luther opposed the Roman Catholic idea of
transubstantiation, what the Reformers saw was the problem, the primary problem, at least there,
was that in the Mass you have an ongoing sacrifice that is taking away from the absolute sufficiency
of His work completed for us once for all on the cross. So, there's the first,
there are other problems, there's the first problem with transubstantiation.
And at the other end of the spectrum, the problem with mere memorialism Luther
expressed in his debate with Zwingli, is that communion becomes an opportunity merely for
us to do something whereas what's actually happening in communion is we're being given
communion with Christ, taken up to feast on, to enjoy and encounter Him. It's not merely
a chance for us to renew our allegiance or do something for Him.