Audio for the following may be found here. You may also listen to podcast episodes here.
THE SACRAMENTS
The sacred actions of worship are what comprise the totality of the
dialogue between God and his people, especially Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
These two actions are referred to commonly as sacraments or ordinances. In a
symbolic way, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper represent the people who live
within the reality of the life of Christ. In a corporeal way, participation in
the sacraments ensures a sign and a seal of membership in the family of God.
Theological implications of Baptism are vast and many but revolve around the
new life that subsists because of one’s salvation. Additionally, one’s Baptism
into the family of God allows him or her to participate in the mystical reality
that is the Lord’s Table.
The sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist shall be examined here with special attention given to their theological implications. The meaning of Baptism’s application will be considered, and a theological trajectory through three Puritans who offer succinct and precise theologies of the Lord’s Supper will be surveyed—namely Thomas Watson (c. 1620-1686 AD), John Owen 1616-1683 AD), and Edward Reynolds (1599-1676 AD).
Baptism
Baptism is both and ordinance (a
sacred act ordained and instituted by Jesus Christ in which the church
participates communally) and a sacrament (an act through which God’s people may
participate with Christ and each other in a mystical manner) with multifarious
theological implications. Such implications, however, are rooted in a reality,
without which the practice of Baptism does not have a foundation. Baptism
symbolizes a new way of life. For the baptismal candidate, the way God changes
a person is consummate. The new way of life, therefore, includes a public
commitment to God and his people and is indissolubly connected to repentance
(i.e. without evidence of a changed life, Baptism is unfounded).
Moreover, Baptism symbolizes an
expectation of suffering for Christians. Suffering is a certainty for all
believers. Theological implications surrounding Baptism should include such an
expectation. Although God’s people are assured difficulty, however, Jesus has
mediated a covenant, which yields a better outcome for them, which is why
believers are blessed (Matt 5:10) for suffering. Baptism represents one’s
decision to follow Christ, share in his suffering, and to do so with joy.
Overall, Baptism symbolizes a
new desire. Where the baptismal candidate once held a sinful desire, he or she
now possesses a matchless desire for Christ and for his glory. When the
believer is immersed beneath and baptismal waters, in a mystical way, he or she
arises cleansed by Christ and with a newfound desire to take up their cross and
follow Christ. These theological implications are foundational but contradict
the ways of the world and represent the way of the gospel.
A New Way of Life
A chief theological implication
of Baptism is the reality of new life. In response to Nicodemus’ inquiry
regarding Jesus’ miracles, Jesus said, “…unless one is born again, he cannot
see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3) and later clarified the meaning of both
water and Spirit birth (John 3:5). The Christian concept of rebirth is
essential to Baptism, for not only is the sacrament a symbol of reality, it is
part of such a reality.
Nicodemus’ inquiry of Jesus is
perhaps overshadowed by his motive for the encounter. The text in John 3
follows shortly after John’s account of Jesus cleansing the Temple. Thus, Jesus
likely already faced hostility from religious leaders. Nicodemus, a Pharisee,
insists that it is clear who Jesus is, “for no one can do these signs you can
do unless God is with him” (John 3:2). In response, Jesus, beholding true
motive and intent, pivots in his response by rejecting the priority of
Nicodemus and “radically questions his qualification for
sorting out ‘heavenly things.”[1]
The idea of a rebirth is foreign to Nicodemus, which is clear in his subsequent
question. “How can a man be born when he is old” (John 3:4)? “Even more
fundamentally, if there is any possibility at all that Jesus is the promised
Messiah, it would be more fitting for Nicodemus to ask himself if he is ready
for him.”[2]
Baptism is perhaps the most visible and real
symbol of a Christian’s faith in Christ.
As Christians today contemplate the Lord’s
return aright only if, in consequence, they purify themselves (1 Jn. 3:1–3), so
Jews in Jesus’ day best anticipated the coming of the Messiah when they most
wanted to be transformed in line with the promises of life under the messianic
age—to enjoy a new heart for God, cleansing and the fulness of the Spirit.[3]
Said another way, Baptism, symbolizing reality,
is a part of the reality the candidate displays, for he or she conveys his or
her commitment to and faith in Christ through the rite, which is staunchly
linked to a genuine cleansing: new life. Without the reality of new life, the
rite of Baptism has not occurred but a mere meaningless ritual. Baptism is to
be obeyed by God’s people but only with a cleansed life.
Within the confines of the new way of life,
Baptism is the burial of the old life. Living in a new way of life is dependent
on removing the old way of life. Josephus “mentions that John’s baptism, while
an outward symbol, was a purification ritual that took place only when ‘the
soul had been cleansed already by righteousness.’”[4]
Jesus gave his followers the radical commandment to take up their crosses and
follow him (Matt 16:24). Central to Baptism, therefore, is the notion of
obedience to Christ in the most difficult and extreme of circumstances this
side of heaven.[5]
The call to follow Christ, thus, is closely connected with a destruction of the
old life and an embracing of the new.
In Acts, there is no systematic
description behind the theology and practice of Baptism, but several themes
exist, including:
• The
priority of faith and repentance prior to Baptism
• The
forgiveness of sins
• The
initiation into Christian fellowship
• The
impartation of the Holy Spirit.[6]
Moreover, “Baptism events in Acts
demonstrate the belief that Baptism is to take place immediately after
conversion.”[7] In
any case, biblical Baptism cannot be detached from repentance, for what the
sacrament symbolizes must be reality to be legitimate. Thus, the theological
implication of repentance is essential to the sacrament of Baptism.
Upon the Baptism of the believer, he or
she reveals to God’s people both being a part of a covenant with them and
rising from the old way of life to the new life in Christ. In a twofold manner,
Baptism is 1) a covenant before God’s people that one has been changed on the
inside (which impacts the way life is lived externally) and 2) a symbol of
perpetual unity with God’s people and union with Christ. The Apostle Paul
writes, “For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one
body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one
Spirit” (1 Cor 12:13). The mystery of Baptism is that it is an external
expression of an internal reality and, thus, a succeeding
external reality (i.e. what will follow a believer’s salvation and Baptism is
obedience to Christ).
Baptism is a covenant with God’s
people. No longer are God’s chosen people limited by bloodline (Gal 3:28), for
Christ has created a new and better way (Heb 8:6). As with Communion, (when
possible) Baptism is to be employed publicly, for it is a communal statement of
identity with Christ. Baptism is both a covenant between the baptismal
candidate and the family into which he or she is baptized.
Additionally, Baptism is a symbol of
unity with God’s people and union with Christ. Primarily a symbol of identity,
when one is baptized, he or she is publicly linked to a changed life and
oneness with Christ. All of God’s people are one in Christ (1 Cor 12:12).
Individuals, furthermore, are one with Christ and one with each other. Baptism
then is an initiation into the family of God—the mystery of participation in
the body of Christ.
Expectation of Persecution and
Difficulty
The Christian life can best be
described as identification with Christ, and that includes in all ways. For
example, following Christ is not only sharing in his glory but also in his
suffering (Rom 8:17-18, 1 Pet 4:12-19). For that reason, Christians must come
to expect persecution and difficulty for the namesake of Christ. Entering a
relationship with Christ without such an expectation gives a false sense of
anticipation that contradicts a world that hates Christ. Baptism symbolizes not
only new life in Christ but the reality of such a life. In four ways, Baptism
symbolizes the reality of sharing in the sufferings of Christ.
1)
The
blessedness of facing difficulty
2)
The
call to carry the cross
3)
The
connection to repentance
4)
The
basis of renewing the mind
In the well-known passage of the
Beatitudes, Jesus tells his people, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for
righteousness’ sake, for there is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:10).
Foundationally, Christians should realize that although, persecution is inevitable,
the deep-seated disposition for God’s people is blessed. The Greek word for
blessed could be translated as happy or fortunate. What Jesus is not saying is
that following him will yield riches and ease. Rather, Jesus links the choice
to follow him as well worth it. “It may be that the Matthean beatitude draws
inspiration from the martyr tradition of the Maccabean period.”[8] The
persecution of the godly hold a strong link in the Psalms where it is evident
that God has a special concern for the weak and persecuted. Jesus exemplifies
such a care in the Beatitudes.
Most people would likely not
automatically connect blessedness to persecution, but in God’s economy, a
person’s loss is his or her gain (Matt 10:39). The Apostles surely knew this
truth, as they confronted pain and suffering on an unforeseen scale. “Persecution
for righteousness’ sake is to be set over against compromise and apostasy; it
marks fidelity to God despite all kinds of pressure. This, too, the poor in
spirit have been bearing with patient endurance. The kingdom of heaven is now
promised them in their need.”[9]
Jesus guarantees persecution for his
people. The Apostle Peter reminds God’s people, however, to rejoice in their
sufferings for Christ (1 Pet 4:13). Difficulty, therefore, should be expected
for Christians. Baptism sends a message to the congregation that one has
decided to abandon personal desires for the desires of Christ and, thus, share
in his sufferings.
Entering a personal relationship with
Jesus Christ, moreover, involves carrying one’s cross. Jesus commands, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself
and take up his cross and follow me” (Matt 16:24). The bid to follow
Christ and expect difficulty then cannot be detached. The concept of a cross
here is metaphorical, although it certainly could include a literal cross.
While many might consider the call to carry a cross as the cross of Jesus, it
must be remembered that the cross was not yet associated with Jesus as he spoke
these words. “The life-threatening
behavior called for is, therefore, patterned on that of Jesus. The call is to
join Jesus as he behaves in ways which involve setting aside the claims of the
inner drive to self-preservation and care for one’s own interests for the sake
of a greater good.”[10]
Baptism then symbolizes one’s denial of self and commitment to live with a new
desire—namely the passion exhibited by Christ.
To take up one’s cross and follow Christ, he or she must
continuously deny their own fleshly desires and live in a new a fresh way of
life, which is required for repentance: the third imperative in this concept of
persecution and difficulty. To deny oneself is to renounce allegiance to
oneself. It is not actively seeking a cross but being prepared for and
expecting it.[11]
Repentance is necessary for following Christ. In fact, without turning from the
old way of life, one’s Baptism does not represent reality. Therefore, those who
are baptized should reveal the reality of repentance in their own life. Baptism
and repentance then are unbreakably linked. “Water
Baptism symbolizes our spiritual Baptism, our regeneration by the Holy Spirit,
just as physical circumcision symbolized spiritual regeneration.”[12]
If the baptismal candidate is immersed
beneath the waters but does not comprehend the call to carry their cross, he or
she does not fully understand the cost of being a Christian. Jesus’ instruction
to carry one’s cross is coupled with a renouncement of selfish and sinful
desires. In other words, one’s nature must change, which is symbolized through
the sacrament of Baptism. Repentance is key to the theological implication of
Baptism.
Further, Baptism symbolizes a
realization of persecution and difficulty in that a person’s changed life is
driven by the renewal of his or her mind. Paul instructs believers to be
transformed by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2). Often, the heart is discussed
more than the mind because the heart represents the seed of the emotions.
Nonetheless, the mind should be a variable in Baptism too.
The mind’s renewal is a chief piece of
theological implication surrounding Baptism. What should be understood here is
that Jesus transforms every part of a person—not merely the heart—for
Christians are called to love God with all the heart, soul, mind, and strength
(Mark 12:30). “In
Christian obedience, we confirm in practice the offering of our bodies which
occurred in baptismal ritual.”[13]
To expect persecution and
difficulty and face them with joy, the mind must be renewed. Considering
difficulties as joyful experiences opposes the perspective of the world, but
when Christians realize that Jesus has brokered a deal better than could be imagined,
any encounters with difficulty are seen correctly. Christians are blessed to
share in the sufferings of Christ and perceive such accurately. Baptism
symbolizes such a changed state of mind and the reality that the baptismal
candidate now expects to share in the sufferings of Christ and will do so
joyfully.
The Implication of a Changed Desire:
Christ
A recent adage suggests that if you are
okay with heaven without Jesus, you probably will not be there. God commands
his people, “Delight yourself in the Lord and he will give you the desires of
your heart” (Ps 37:4).[14]
Satisfaction in God is the root of obedience. Said another way, when one is
satisfied in God, he or she naturally lives a life of obedience.[15]
The theological implication of a change in desire is vital to Baptism. When one
is immersed beneath the baptismal waters and arises to a new way of life, it is
revealed before the congregation of God’s people that the former selfish
desires are no more.
For Baptism to symbolize a newfound
desire, external evidence must subsist—namely fruit (Gal 5:22-23), which means
that Christ must work within a person to change what is visible in action. In
other words, Baptism should represent one’s change in desire from the former
selfish desires to Christ—not the benefits of Christ but Christ himself.
Anecdotally, Christians desire that which Christ can give them or do for them
rather than Christ himself. At a fundamental level, however, before one can
receive the benefits of Christ, there must subsist a desire for Christ. Baptism
reveals identification with Jesus in such a way that the new way of life
mirrors that which Christ desires.
Additionally, one who is baptized
effectively commits their life in service to him. Baptism holds a mystical
meaning of participation. Thus, once the sacrament has been employed, in a
cyclical manner, such an act is the beginning of participation with Christ and
with his body: the church.
While baptism does signify our death
and resurrection in Christ, its meaning is much broader. The Westminster Larger
Catechism lists seven different truths symbolized in Baptism: “ingrafting into
Christ, forgiveness of sins by his blood, regeneration by the Holy Spirit,
adoption as God’s children, resurrection to everlasting life, admission to the
visible church, and engagement to be the Lord’s.”[16]
Because the baptismal candidate’s heart
has been changed by Jesus Christ, an outward process of sanctification has
begun, thus, signifying identity with and in Christ and a desire to follow him.
Where such a desire is not evident, the professing believer does not have
sufficient proof of his or her faith before the congregation of saints nor
before an onlooking world.
In service to the Lord, Believer’s
Baptism realizes the cost of following Christ. Jesus tells his followers they
would be hated and persecuted for his namesake (Matt 10:22). To deny such a
cost is to live a lie or at least not acknowledge difficulties that will be
faced in the world for committing to Jesus. The lives of the Twelve Apostles
offer a look into the cost of following Christ. Each Apostle (except John) was
martyred for their faith, and John ultimately was exiled to Patmos. Baptism
certainly embodies the benefits of following Christ, but the baptismal
candidate must understand the cost, for such is crucial to following Christ
(i.e. the call to follow Christ is a call to die).
More than the cost, however, Baptism
represents the exceeding bargain God’s people receive. Paul puts it this way: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present
time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us”
(Rom 8:18). As costly as following Jesus will assuredly be this side of
eternity, any difficulties faced are more than worth what is received in
eternal value. Although Baptism symbolizes death to self, new and glorious life
is also represented in the act, which supersedes any difficulties God’s people
may encounter in this life.
Living in the Reality of Baptism
Theological implications of Baptism are manifold but include
common themes, most of which run counterculturally to the world’s understanding
of life. Baptism certainly displays the reality of a new way of life for
candidates, but the sacrament concurrently represents a dismissal of the old
way of life. One may not be present without the other. Therefore, baptismal
candidates should understand the connection of Baptism to repentance.
Moreover, Baptism declares before God’s people that a person
has covenanted with God and with the body to live with the expectation of
suffering, as Christ suffered during his ministry on earth. In union with
Jesus, therefore, Christians live in the reality of their Baptism, as they face
suffering with joy for the namesake of Jesus Christ.
Baptism
symbolizes that one’s desire has changed, for he or she now lives with a
singular desire—namely Jesus Christ. Humankind’s natural desire is sin.
Baptism, however, represents the reality of a changed desire. Each of these
aspects should ring true in Christians’ lives, for without their realities, the
act of Baptism has not occurred. More than a mere one-time public display
before God’s people, a mystical experience occurs during the sacrament of
Baptism. The sacrament of Baptism, therefore, is not only a call to publicly
declare death to self and the reality of a new way of life but also a call to
remember and live in the reality of one’s Baptism.
The Lord’s Table
The
culmination of spiritual reality in the worship gathering is the Lord’s Table,
although it could be argued that the sacrament is one of the most commonly
neglected but most essential sacred acts in which the church participates.[17] As a
mystical participation in the life of Christ, a trajectory of theological
realities about the Lord’s Supper may be evident in the teachings of Thomas
Watson, John Owen, and Edward Reynolds.
The
Mystical Nature of the Lord’s Table[18]
Thomas
Watson’s eucharistic theology deals primarily with mysticism. While
unfalteringly opposed to the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, Watson
presents a theology which vividly adheres to mysticism and the church’s union
with God through Christ. More than a mere mental anamnesis, Watson’s
eucharistic theology represents a (seemingly) declining thought that the Lord’s
Table subsists as an act of experience rather than merely remembrance. To
Watson, the church shares in the life of Christ during the Lord’s Table by
sharing in his suffering, his glory, and indeed his body.
Furthermore,
Watson is instrumental in transforming the concept of meditation. The command
Christ gives is to take in remembrance of himself; yet, contrary to common
notion, Watson suggests that meditation should fill the mind rather than empty
the mind. When Christians partake in the sacrament of Communion, a consummate
union with Christ is experienced and, thus, a filling with Christ rather than
merely an emptying of the mind and thoughts (i.e. to remember Christ is to fill
the heart, soul, and mind with him).
Watson,
moreover, realizes the unified corporate body in the Lord’s Table. A Puritan
eucharistic theology understands the Table to be employed solely in a corporate
manner, for the ordinances are given to the church as a unified body rather
than mere individuals. Watson realizes the church’s corporate nature and shared
peace with Christ, both of which are exemplified in Communion. Reformed models
of worship gatherings have historically linked the Lord’s Table to the holy
wish of peace. Peace and unity may only exist in Christ. The church’s unity and
peace, through the Lord’s Table, is exhibited in a visible manner. For Watson,
the mystery of the Lord’s Table is not only the great love of Christ which is
remembered but the effect thereof: the church’s union with Christ and peace in
his name.
Crucial
to understanding Watson’s eucharistic theology is understanding his
foundational thoughts of mysticism. To Watson, the church’s oneness with Christ
is fundamental to participating in the Lord’s Table in an appropriate manner.
Watson held a firm believe that from the church’s union with Christ stems from
a common sharing.
The
church, first, shares in the suffering of Christ. To remember Christ and his
sacrifice is to also suffer with him, as the Apostle Peter instructs (1 Pet
4:13). Suffering, however, does not occur alone, for God’s people both rejoice
and suffer together as one body. The ordinance of Communion, a symbol of
reality, offers Christians the opportunity to not only remember Christ’s
suffering but to also experience his suffering as his body on earth. In a
mystical way then, the church shares in the suffering of Christ, for the
church, unified in him, is his body on earth.
Watson
also alludes to Christians sharing in the glory of Christ. Through the Lord’s
Table, the church not only remembers Christ but also participates in the
benefits of his death by faith.[19] A
great miracle of the covenant of grace is God the Son offering his perfect life
as a sacrifice for his enemies (Rom 5:10) so that they might be one with him.
Christ’s mediation, therefore, allows and even causes the church to be
perpetually unified in Christ and part of his blessing and righteousness.
Remembrance during the Lord’s Table then does not cease with his death, burial,
and resurrection, for it continues to the point of union with Christ and a
common sharing, among God’s people, in his holiness (i.e. God’s people not only
remember what Christ has done during Communion but also experience and share in
his life).
Further,
Watson’s eucharistic theology points to sharing in Christ’s body. By his
presence in the lives of his people, the church shares in his body and is
indeed his body on earth. An exceedingly great mystery of the Lord’s Table is
the presence of Christ. To Watson, believers share in Christ’s body, through
the Table, in not only his divine nature but (mystically) the person of Christ
also. The aforementioned mysteries here are significant in a Puritan
eucharistic theology acquired from the teachings of Thomas Watson.
Perhaps
more than Owen and Reynolds, Thomas Watson also discusses the concept of
reflection during the Lord’s Table and does so by way of meditation.
Meditation, however, involves a filling of the mind rather than an emptying of
it. In fact, Watson contends that to properly meditate, one must first prepare.[20]
To Watson, a grave mistake is committed when one approaches the Table without
proper preparation.[21]
Watson does not convey an empty application of Communion but one which is
somberly considered and employed. The Apostle Paul cautions believers of
partaking in the Lord’s Table improperly (1 Cor 11:27). Watson adheres to the
Apostle’s teaching and takes earnestly the obligation of reflection. To
appropriately meditate during the Lord’s Table, therefore, meditation must also
occur beforehand. Without a preparation of the heart, soul, mind, and strength,
fitting reflection during the Table is virtually impossible.
Moreover,
Thomas Watson’s eucharistic theology aids in laying the foundation for Puritan
thought in the corporate body of Christ realized during Communion. While this
study argues from an ordinal perspective, at the center of the Table’s
application is the corporate nature of the church, which is why the sacrament
should only be employed corporately. During the Table, individuals participate
in the sacrament and yet as one, for there is one body, one Spirit, one hope,
one faith, one Lord, one baptism, one God, and one Father (Eph 4:4-5). Watson’s
realization of the corporate body of Christ is not new and was not new among
his contemporaries and predecessors; yet, his theology aids in securing Puritan
thought that the Lord’s Table should be employed corporately.
Watson
says that all believers lie near to the heart of Christ.[22]
Such nearness is exhibited vividly through the Lord’s Table. As God’s people
eat the bread and drink the wine, it is no empty act, for as one, Christians
participate as one body comprised of a plurality of believers from multiple
origins, generations, and ethnicities. The commonality is the sharing of and
participation in the body of Christ.
An
sacrament of obsignation, Watson teaches that only the elect should come to the
Table (i.e. the sacrament should be fenced from those who do not qualify). In
Watson’s view, however, such qualification comes only from Christ, for humanity
is depraved without the righteousness of Christ. In Christ, the church stands
redeemed and is found as one body in him and, thus, able to participate in Holy
Communion, to which Christ calls his people.
Watson’s
primary eucharistic thoughts are derived from three imperatives: the mystery of
Communion (especially in sharing), the obligation of reflection (i.e.
meditation, and the realization of the corporate body of Christ in the church).
A concise Puritan theology of the Lord’s Table does not take the common
Catholic notion of transubstantiation or a sacrament as an end but rather an
ordinance which is a means to an end (i.e. a vital part of Christian worship).
Furthermore, Puritan eucharistic theology does not consider the Lord’s Table to
be only a mental act of remembrance and nothing more, for the ordinance is
certainly an experience with deeply spiritual implications and realities.
While
Jennifer C. Neimeyer vividly discusses Watson’s thoughts of meditation, the
literature fails to address its link to the church’s corporate nature (i.e. how
believers are to corporately meditate rather than merely individually,
especially during the ordinances). This study has built upon the foundation of
individual participation through meditation by furthering the thought in a
corporate context, given that the Lord’s Table is to be practiced corporately.
The church subsists as the unified body of Christ. Unity in Christ is an inevitable result of salvation. Therefore, the church’s unity is a perpetual fact that should be exhibited rather than achieved. The Lord’s Table affords Christians the unique opportunity to not only remember Christ’s sacrifice but to also participate in his life, body, resurrection, and benefits. Eucharistic anamnesis should not be considered merely mental remembrance but a consummate participation in the life of Christ, a mystery greatly taught and clarified by Thomas Watson. Such a mystery is essential to Puritan eucharistic theology and central to suitably partaking in the Lord’s Table.
The
Trinitarian Nature of the Lord’s Table
In
addition to forming a concise Puritan eucharistic theology by processing the
mystical nature of the Lord’s Table primarily through the theology of Thomas
Watson, this study has approached the ordinance from a trinitarian perspective
mainly through the teachings of John Owen. While both the mystical and
trinitarian nature of the Lord’s Table are evident in the theologies of all
three Puritans on which this study focuses, each Puritan subsidizes more of one
aspect than the other two Puritans. John Owen’s significant contribution is
surely the trinitarian nature of the Lord’s Table.
John
Owen was instrumental in the formulation of the pactus salitus or
covenant of redemption.[23]
Covenant theology might be considered in a twofold manner: the covenant of
grace and the covenant of redemption. Seemingly, most professing Christians are
remotely familiar with the covenant of grace and Jesus’ sacrificial
substitution as part of such covenant. Nonetheless, reformed covenant theology
suggests a covenant before time in which the three members of the Godhead
formed a pact as to how the chosen and bequeathed people would be redeemed;
this pact is known as the covenant of redemption, the formulation of which is
greatly attributed to Puritan, John Owen.
The
covenant of redemption is significant in the Lord’s Table because such a pact
infers trinitarian work in salvation rather than solely the work of the Son.
Therefore, to partake in remembrance of Christ, who is one with both the Father
and the Spirit, is to also partake in remembrance of the complete Godhead.
Without the bequeathal of a people to the Son, there would be not a bride to
redeem; without the Son’s promise to atone for sin, the church would not stand
in righteousness before the Father; and without the calling work of the Spirit,
the chosen people would not receive the mediation of the Son. Salvation then is
not only the work of the Son but also the Father and Spirit. A Puritan
eucharistic theology implies a consummate trinitarian anamnesis rather than a
mere remembrance of the Son.
This
study has presented John Owen’s teachings and divulged a trinitarian
eucharistic theology. Scholars such as Ryan L. Rippee, Bernard Thorogood,
Laurence R. O’Donnell III, and Benedict Bird discuss Owen’s thoughts on God the
Father and Son. While O’Donnell specifically focuses on the work of the Holy
Spirit in the theology of Owen, others suggest the third person of the Trinity
to be all but absent from his work. Nevertheless, Owen writes significantly of
the person and work of the Holy Spirit including in his treatise on the matter
entitled “Pneumatologia.” One should consider the complete canon of Owenian
work to reconcile the Puritan’s trinitarian connection in the Lord’s Table.
John
Owen does not neglect the Holy Spirit’s work in Communion or in the covenant of
redemption. All three persons of the Godhead play a crucial role in the
redemption of the church. Owen rather compartmentalizes the work of the Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit by discussing them as distinct persons with distinct
functions and yet also realizes the Trinity as a singular God. In this way and
because God the Son is one with the Father and Spirit, a remembrance of Jesus
is also a remembrance of the entire Trinity. Believers should eat the bread and
drink of the cup certainly in remembrance of Christ but also in remembrance of
the complete work of triune God.
Additionally,
a theology of the Lord’s Table through the framework of Watson, Owen, and
Reynolds minds the end means of Christ’s oblation: namely holiness. Holiness is
imputed to the people of God; yet, holiness is also reality. Disparate from the
traditional Catholic viewpoint that the Lord’s Table is an end, Owen approached
the ordinance as a means to an end.[24]
To Owen, appropriate remembrance of Christ demands a realization of Christ’s
holiness, for the Son became sin on behalf of his people so that they might be
the righteousness of God (2 Cor 5:21).
Christ’s
oblation is once and for all and, yet, eternally effective in that Christians
are not only positionally righteous but are being made actually righteous (2
Cor 3:18) and will one day be made completely righteous (Phil 1:6). Partaking
in Communion then is to not only remember the oblation of Christ in the past
but also his current oblation, for Jesus still stands as the atonement for his
people. To Owen and in a Puritan eucharistic theology, the Lord’s Table is a
mechanism of the church’s sanctification, not in a salvific sense but rather
one of practical holiness.[25]
If Christ’s oblation was only for the purpose of positional holiness, any
further Christian action beyond that point would be futile. Christ, however,
still intercedes to the Father on behalf of his people as they are conformed to
the image of the Son.
John
Owen contributes to Puritan eucharistic theology in the way of effective
holiness. Through his own life and teaching, Owen renders the Lord’s Table to
be a display of reality, for the bread and wine not only represent Christ but
also the church’s union with and holiness in him.
The
three Puritans examined in this study take a sacramental approach to the Lord’s
Table. In its essence, a sacrament is a sacred action. For reasons of common
misunderstanding, however, I have taken an ordinal approach: Baptism and the
Lord’s Table are ordinances in that Christ has ordained them and instituted
them for the church as acts which display reality. Watson, Owen, and Reynolds
find the middle ground between the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and
the ostensibly common Protestant view of the ordinance as (nearly) empty
motions. What this study does, therefore, is reconcile the two extremes
utilizing the teachings of three Puritans who neither overemphasize the Lord’s
Table nor diminish it to less than what it is.
In
Owen’s thoughts and teachings on the Lord’s Table, a compatibility exists
between the ordinance’s trinitarian and christocentric nature (i.e. while
redemption is a trinitarian act, it is also christocentric since Jesus serves
as the mediator on behalf of the church). This study reconciles these two
natures of both redemption of the remembrance thereof through the Lord’s Table.
Scholars
have been critical of Owen’s seeming lack of material on the Holy Spirit.[26]
Not only does O’Donnell discuss such criticism of Owen’s work, Ryan L. Rippee
neglects to connect Owen’s teachings on the Holy Spirit to that on the Father
and Son, although in the totality of Owen’s work, substantial material exists
on the Holy Spirit, e.g. his treatises, “Pneumatologia” and “Of Communion with
God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.” To develop a concise Puritan eucharistic
theology using the framework of John Owen, the ordinance’s trinitarian nature
must be considered. What this study also contributes, therefore, is reconciling
the both trinitarian and christocentric nature of Communion as well as
connecting the work of the Holy Spirit to that of the Father and Son in the
work of John Owen.
A Puritan theology of the Lord’s Table not only remembers Christ but experiences and shares in his life as his body on earth: the church. Such an experience is only possible because of trinitarian work. Christians must never consider salvific work to only be that of the Son, for the Father and Spirit, one with Christ, play vital roles in the work of redemption. As a display and experience of reality, the Lord’s Table holds a trinitarian nature and is, nevertheless, christocentric, for Christ serves as the mediator in covenant of redemption and subsequent covenant of grace. Upon a trinitarian foundation then, God’s people partake in Communion realizing the work of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
The Church’s Union in the Lord’s Table
Edward Reynolds held to a firm belief in
the unity of the church. The Lord’s Table, an exhibition of reality, vividly
declares a unified body in Christ. A communal union of saints, the Lord’s
Supper does not unify the church, for Christians are perpetually unified in
Christ. The church, further, is unified because of her union both with Christ
and believers one with the others.
An
exceedingly profound mystery of the church is the union of believers to
comprise one body also in union with Christ. While both Watson and Owen speak
directly to the concept of union, Edward Reynolds’ significant contribution to
eucharistic theology in this study are his unwavering actions which professed
union and subsequent unity, although faced with both political and
ecclesiastical turmoil.
The
Lord’s Table realizes the church’s union with Christ and between brothers and
sisters in Christ. Reynolds expresses that, during Communion, believers
experience “shadows of…expected glory made unto the senses.”[27]
The Lord’s Table then affords the church a taste of eternal reality. The bread
and cup are not realities except that, through the elements, Christ is
experienced (i.e. the ordinary elements of bread and wine are made
extraordinary by the power of Christ). There exists no power in the elements
themselves but in the one who is remembered during the sacrament.
Often,
Christ is seemingly considered the object of the Table; yet, he is also the
subject (i.e. the one working in the ordinance). In this way, the Table should
be considered not only a remembrance but also an experience.
Reynolds
discusses the Lord’s Table, in his treatise on the sacrament, by alluding to
the eternal reality which Communion symbolizes. To Reynolds, although the
church is comprised of diverse backgrounds and external factors, the Table
symbolizes the oneness of diverse people. As one body, the church is nourished
and sustained by the Lord, for she is in union with him.
Reynolds’
teachings stem from a belief in literal union with Christ rather than
figurative. With Christ the head of the body, Christians form the church: the
Lord’s body on earth. Reynolds says that the body tastes and touches how good
the Lord is through the Lord’s Supper.[28]
He writes:
…he is pleased even to unrobe
his graces of their natural lustre, to overshadow his promises; and, as it
were, to obscure his glory, that they might be made proportioned to our dull
and earthly senses; to lock up so rich mysteries, as lie hidden in the
sacraments, in a basin of water, or a morsel of bread.[29]
More than a
mere empty remembrance, Edward Reynolds suggests the Lord’s Table to be an
experience of reality, for the body which remembers is one in union with
Christ.
Furthermore,
Reynolds’ theology draws parallels between the Communion elements and Jesus
himself. The mystery of choosing common elements for the Great Thanksgiving is
discussed in Reynolds’ treatise on the Table. In an overarching sense, God has
chosen bread and wine so that believers may be reminded of his desire and
ability to transform the ordinary into the extraordinary. Union with Christ
equates to common people being joined as one with the holiest and most uncommon
supreme being: Christ Jesus, God the Son. Bread and wine are common; yet, like
the elements’ blessed use for Communion, Christ was blessed, broken, and given,
as the church is to be blessed, broken, and given existing as one in Christ.
The
church’s union with Christ is vital for a fitting participation in the Lord’s
Table. Watson, Owen, and Reynolds do not exaggerate the sacrament of Communion;
nor, do they diminish it. To observe the Lord’s Supper as merely remembrance
without the reality of experience is certainly to diminish its fullness. One
with Christ, the corporate body tastes the eternal reality of God’s goodness
and experiences union with Jesus.
The
Lord’s Table, moreover, displays union between brothers and sisters in Christ.
Compared to Thomas Watson and John Owen, literature on Edward Reynolds is
broadly lacking. Nonetheless, much may be gained from examining the teachings
and writings of Reynolds himself. Devoting an entire treatise to the ordinance
of Communion, Reynolds perceptibly approaches the Lord’s Table as a display of
mystical union in the church with two primary realities, not the least of which
is the church’s union between brother and sister Christians. Reynolds contends
that the “immediate effect of this sacrament is to confirm the union of all the
members of the church.”[30]
The Apostle Paul speaks of the church in terms of a body (1 Cor 12). Likewise,
Reynolds discusses the church in relation to the elements of the Table (i.e. as
bread is comprised of many parts, the church is also comprised of many redeemed
people and yet formed as one unified body).
While
God has redeemed individual people, an individual’s redemption must never be
considered over the corporate nature of the church (i.e. God has covenanted
with a people rather than mere individuals). During the Lord’s Table, not only
is one bread a symbol of Jesus’ broken body but also a symbol of his body on
earth: the church.
Reynolds
is aware of the need for community in society[31]
but contends that the Christian communion one with another is sacred.[32]
The Table affords Christians a holy moment of not only remembering Christ’s
mediating sacrifice but also experiencing the subsequent oneness and fellowship
of the church. The sacred union between believers is only possible in union
with Christ. Thus, believers are first found in Christ and second one with each
other.
Reynolds,
furthermore, provides the reason breaking bread is crucial to the Lord’s Table:
Christ’s body was broken to be shared among his people and with the world. To
partake in the Lord’s Table is to realize the end and the means of Christ’s
broken body. Bread which is not broken may not be shared; Christ, however, has
broken his body to be shared among his people as the church’s source of
sustenance and an offering of hope for a hopeless world.
Reynolds
suggests that the church is made one with Christ by faith and one among
themselves by love.[33] A
Puritan eucharistic theology should approach Communion as not only a display of
reality but reality itself, for in obeying the command of Christ to partake,
believers not only remember but concurrently experience the union exhibited
through the Lord’s Table; yet, such a union would not be possible without the
sharing of Christ’s body. As the bread is broken and shared, Christ was broken
and shared among his people.
Reynolds
teaches that Christian union is a perpetual fact to be exhibited rather than
achieved. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the church to abide in her
reality. Christ has already achieved union. Christians then should realize both
union with Christ and with each other daily; the Lord’s Table, vital to such a
realization, is a corporate expression of one faith and one Lord. Through the
Lord’s Table, Reynolds says that “the concinnation of the body of Christ, the
fellowship, sympathy, and unity of his members, might be both signified and
professed.”[34]
The church has “but one soul, which is the Spirit of life,”[35]
writes Reynolds. The Lord’s Table, therefore, signifies the church eating and
drinking (together) and, thus, the body receiving nourishment from its
sustainer, Jesus Christ.
While
scholarly material on Edward Reynolds is deficient, part of this study’s
contribution is a concise Puritan eucharistic theology utilizing his work. A
significant output of this study is further information on Edward Reynolds’
theology through the scope of the Lord’s Table. In collaboration with the
momentous framework of Thomas Watson and John Owen, the work of Edward Reynolds
grants a complete perspective on Puritan eucharistic theology. Like Watson and
Owen, Reynolds does not overstate Communion to be a transubstantiationary
ordinance nor understate it as an empty act but rather a display and experience
of reality in Christ. In a mystical manner, Christians are (together) in union
with Christ and with each other.
While this study has primarily
built upon aforementioned material on Watson and Owen, the contribution here,
regarding the work of Edward Reynolds, is grassroots unfolding of eucharistic
theology which has not yet been examined. All three Puritans in this study hold
to a solidly Protestant eucharistic theology and yet not one which is devoid of
substance and reality. A Puritan theology of the Lord’s Table takes the
perspective that the sacrament is mystical, an earnest of eternal reality, and
a corporate act, which should not be neglected. One in Christ, the church
exhibits (an already achieved) union through the Lord’s Supper.
[1] D. A. Carson, The
Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary
(Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans,
1991), 187.
[2] Carson, The
Gospel according to John, 188.
[3] Carson, The
Gospel according to John, 188.
[4] Josephus, Antiquities,
18:116-117, in Benjamin Espinoza, “Baptism,” ed. John D.
Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary
(Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
[5] Not coincidentally, the
Greek word for witness is μάρτυρας (martyras), from where the word,
martyr is derived.
[6] Espinoza, “Baptism.”
[7] Espinoza, “Baptism.”
Such is the
reason historic Baptists consider Baptism to be legitimate only upon the
believer’s salvation. A Baptist theology of Baptism suggests that Baptism is
not connected to salvation (not necessary) but rather to obedience after
salvation. Baptists derive their name from their belief in Believer’s Baptism.
Even among traditions that believe in Baptism as the replacement for
circumcision, the concept of the New Covenant is seemingly neglected. Under the
Old Covenant, circumcision was the visible mark or sign of God’s people, which
was often tied to bloodline (e.g. the people of Israel). Under the New
Covenant, however, there is no such genetic distinction for God’s people, for
believers have been grafted as a part of God’s family (Rom 11:17).
[8] John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary
on the Greek Text, New
International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B.
Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2005), 206.
[9]
Nolland,
The Gospel of Matthew, 207.
[10]
Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, 691.
[11] P. P.
Levertoff, “Special
Introduction,” in A New Commentary
on Holy Scripture: Including the Apocrypha, ed. Charles Gore, Henry
Leighton Goudge, and Alfred Guillaume, vol. 3 (New York: The Macmillan Company,
1942), 170.
[12]
Battle, “The Significance of the Mode of Baptism,” 8.
[13]
Roberts, Baptism and the Body, 11.
Baptismal
candidates should be completely immersed in water because this mode best
displays the thorough and complete nature of God’s cleansing of an individual
life and the disparate way of life in which the new convert agrees to live.
[14] That
is the desires themselves (i.e. God places desires within the heart of one who
follows him).
[15] This
should not imply that obedience is easy, for certainly, Jesus promised
difficulty in the Christian life (John 16:33, 2 Tim 3:12).
[16]
Westminster Larger Catechism, 165, in John A. Battle, “The Significance of the
Mode of Baptism,” Western Reformed Seminary Journal 14:1 (February
2007): 7.
Any
claim that the sacraments are devoid of God’s grace misrepresents the
participation that occurs in union with Christ and his body throughout the
entire Christian life.
[17]
What is meant here is that local churches often do not employ the Table as
often as necessary. While there is no prescription of interval at which to
partake of the Table, the early church participated in the Eucharist each time
they met (Acts 2:42-47, Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 10:16).
[18] The
remainder of the chapter is revised from the book, The Lord’s Table through
the Framework of Three Puritans: Thomas Watson, John Owen, and Edward Reynolds.
[19] Thomas
Watson, The Lord’s Supper,
publisher’s foreword, first published as The
Holy Eucharist (1665) (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth, 2004), 3.
[20] Watson,
The Lord’s Supper, 39.
[21] Watson,
The Lord’s Supper, 39.
[22] Watson,
The Lord’s Supper, 15.
[23]
Laurence R. O’Donnell III, “The Holy Spirit’s Role in John Owen’s ‘Covenant of
the Mediator’ Formulation: A Case Study in Reformed Orthodox Formulations of
the Pactum Salutis,” Puritan
Reformed Journal 4, no. 1 (January 2012): 92.
[24]
Bernard Thorogood, “Coming to the Lord’s Table: A Reformed Viewpoint,” Ecumenical
Review 44, no. 1 (January 1992), 11.
[25] John
D. Payne, John Owen on the Lord’s Supper (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth,
2004), 28-29.
[26] See
O’Donnell.
[27] Edward Reynolds, The
Whole Works of the Right Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich,
vol. 3 (London, England: St. Paul’s Church-Yard, 1826), accessed April 24,
2018, http://digitalpuritan.net/edward-reynolds/, 7.
[28] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 10.
[29] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 10.
[30] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 78.
[31] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 55.
[32] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 55.
[33] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 79.
[34] Edward
Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right
Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 81.
[35] Edward Reynolds, The Whole Works of the Right Rev. Edward Reynolds, DD, Lord Bishop of Norwich, vol. 3, 81.
