From: jvanderw@darwin.helios.nd.edu (jeff vanderwilt)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Calvin's eucharistic theology
Date: 6 Nov 92 08:38:07 GMT
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame

>  9) requirement of communion at Easter.  While Calvin would certainly
>        consider communion at least yearly a very good thing, a specific
>        law to receive it at Easter is contrary to his general approach
>  10) communion of a priest without a congregation
>  11) requirement of confession before reception of the sacrament.  In
>        some form repentance is of course required, but I don't think
>        he would accept the form given here


Calvin attempted (unsuccessfully) to convince the Geneva City Council
to permit weekly communion services in the Genevan Churches. The
practice of quarterly communion was accepted as a compromise.

Calvin had very strong opinions about the "power of the keys," the
authority of the church, through its ministers, to bind and loose
sins, etc. . . Until recently, in calvinist churches, admission to
communion was granted only after an interview with a member of the
consistory, an elder or the minister of the word. "Communion tokens"
were given at the interview which would admit a person to communion
the following week.

Ganoczy is a reliable and careful scholar. It is a shame to see him
slandered. True, he may have had an overly *optimistic* estimation
of Calvin's eucharistic theology -- and I don't believe that
Calvin and Trent really are reconcilable -- it remains true that
Calvin's eucharistic theology is worth reading carefully. He
says many things, and with great subtlety, which confounds both
protestant and catholic polemics. (In my experience most American
protestants are *Zwinglian* when it comes to the sacraments, not
Calvinist; most catholics, *ultra-realists*.)

The attraction to Calvin, for many modern scholars, is indeed his
*via media* between Zwinglian memorialism and Lutheran/Catholic
essentialism.

Let's get the discussion raised a little. . . . When *Calvin* is discussed
let's talk about Calvin, not modern catholic/protestant polemic.

        "The reign of Christ is in no way limited to any places
        in space, and in no way determined by any bounds that
        Jesus Christ should not show his power wherever he pleases,
        in heaven or on earth, that he should not declare himself
        present by his power and virtue, that he should not ever
        aid his own, breathing living life into them, sustaining
        them, strengthening them, giving them vigour, and
        ministering to them no less than if he were present in body;
        in fine, that he should nourish them with his own body,
        the participation whereof he makes to flow into them
        by the power of his Spirit. Such, then, is the mode of
        receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in the
        sacrament."     Institutes IV,27,18.
                        Cited in Dix, _The Shape of the Liturgy_,
                        Dacre Press, Westminster, 1945.

IMHO, theologians (of whatever stripe) should be read in order
to discuss the wisdom and richness they bring to the Christian
faith. When we read them, solely in order to undergird our
own (typically *SMALL-MINDED*) opinions, our faith suffers --
it starves on its own bulemia.