If you are not listening to Preston Sprinkle’s podcast Theology in the Raw, then you are missing out big time. Preston includes a talk given by Francis Chan on how he’s come to see the Lord’s Supper as more central to Christian worship than the pulpit! It’s a great listen, very provocative, and full of passion!
I’d heard Chan’s comment but didn’t know how to find out more, so thanks. I have to say after a lifetime in church, the Lord’s supper still seems a bit of an empty re-enaction to me. So I hope this video brings more substance to it.
Sep 28, 2022·edited Sep 28, 2022Liked by Michael F. Bird
I think Chan is on to something and it's nice to see a well known leader in Evangelicalism be very public about this perspective. I find Calvin's view to be very robust and it's attractive to me. I'm wondering why you wouldn't consider the Lutheran or Orthodox/Catholic view? How is it that it seems most if not all the early church father's have this view of an actual change that occurs in the elements themselves? I also find it interesting that the churches with the most ancient roots (Catholic, Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Church of the East) all seem to hold something along the lines of that view. If they aren't right and Calvin is, I'm wondering how they all got off track so soon and I also wonder why no one seemed to be able to champion a view like Calvin's with any kind of staying power. Something I genuinely wrestle with. Either way we participate in Christ and experience his life transforming us from the inside out. I'm happy with that.
It could be just me, but it seems like Chan always has "the answer" for the church. I especially in this case don't really see any reason to juxtapose this issue against preaching. They are 2 different things, both important. That said, I do think he is right that in many memorial circles it has lost significance. The whole point of Communion to me is to keep our eyes on what Jesus did for us and it's central importance in our Christian life. And I think no question the Scripture makes clear it is more than a memorial, it is an encounter with Christ, regardless of exactly how that happens. I think we do have to say however, it is not a "physical" partaking of Christ, as Jesus made clear in John 6:63.
It’s great that Chan’s view is becoming more robust seemingly in the tradition of Calvin. I always get nervous though when guys who have been “big Eva” for lack of a better term start down this road with the sacrament. I get nervous that without proper guardrails they end up all the way in Rome which I would call an extreme over correction. (Sorry, my RC friends, but it’s true.)
I love Francis Chan and have followed him for some time. He raises an important issue especially for those like me who were raised with a memorialist understanding of the Eucharist. Today I am an Anglo-Catholic of twenty years. Seeing Christ as fully present in the Eucharist has revolutionized my partaking in the Lord's Supper. It has become pregnant with meaning and a source of blessing and receiving of sanctifying, empowering grace, a hallowed experience. This is over simplistic, but I believe the Protestants of Dr. Bird's understanding have got it right when it comes to justification and the Catholics when it comes to sanctification.
I’d heard Chan’s comment but didn’t know how to find out more, so thanks. I have to say after a lifetime in church, the Lord’s supper still seems a bit of an empty re-enaction to me. So I hope this video brings more substance to it.
I think Chan is on to something and it's nice to see a well known leader in Evangelicalism be very public about this perspective. I find Calvin's view to be very robust and it's attractive to me. I'm wondering why you wouldn't consider the Lutheran or Orthodox/Catholic view? How is it that it seems most if not all the early church father's have this view of an actual change that occurs in the elements themselves? I also find it interesting that the churches with the most ancient roots (Catholic, Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Church of the East) all seem to hold something along the lines of that view. If they aren't right and Calvin is, I'm wondering how they all got off track so soon and I also wonder why no one seemed to be able to champion a view like Calvin's with any kind of staying power. Something I genuinely wrestle with. Either way we participate in Christ and experience his life transforming us from the inside out. I'm happy with that.
It could be just me, but it seems like Chan always has "the answer" for the church. I especially in this case don't really see any reason to juxtapose this issue against preaching. They are 2 different things, both important. That said, I do think he is right that in many memorial circles it has lost significance. The whole point of Communion to me is to keep our eyes on what Jesus did for us and it's central importance in our Christian life. And I think no question the Scripture makes clear it is more than a memorial, it is an encounter with Christ, regardless of exactly how that happens. I think we do have to say however, it is not a "physical" partaking of Christ, as Jesus made clear in John 6:63.
It’s great that Chan’s view is becoming more robust seemingly in the tradition of Calvin. I always get nervous though when guys who have been “big Eva” for lack of a better term start down this road with the sacrament. I get nervous that without proper guardrails they end up all the way in Rome which I would call an extreme over correction. (Sorry, my RC friends, but it’s true.)
I am not Calvinist, but I’ve been researching the Lord Supper and I find Calvin to be very compelling on this.
I love Francis Chan and have followed him for some time. He raises an important issue especially for those like me who were raised with a memorialist understanding of the Eucharist. Today I am an Anglo-Catholic of twenty years. Seeing Christ as fully present in the Eucharist has revolutionized my partaking in the Lord's Supper. It has become pregnant with meaning and a source of blessing and receiving of sanctifying, empowering grace, a hallowed experience. This is over simplistic, but I believe the Protestants of Dr. Bird's understanding have got it right when it comes to justification and the Catholics when it comes to sanctification.