As If by a Contract: John Calvins Understanding of the Communal Dimension

of the Lords Supper

Rubn Arjona1
It is my impression that in some church environments the Lords Supper has become a
rather mechanical and superficial practice. A worship culture that is inflexibly governed by
the tyranny of the clock leaves little or no room for spontaneity, for self-reflection, and for
embracing the communal identity of Christian worship. Furthermore, the pattern of food
consumption promoted by the most influential brands of fast-food seems to be impacting
the church in such a way that the Lords Supper is at risk of becoming just one more option
in the McDonalds menu. This process of automatization of the sacrament is a form
cancellation of the essence of the Eucharist. The sacrament is celebrated appropriately only
when we experience it in profound self-awareness, and when out of this sense of
awareness we embrace our responsibility for the well being of the other. Karl Barth
illustrates this point eloquently:
The lordship of Jesus Christ in His community takes place as the community, assembled for
public worship, goes to the Lord's Supper and therefore to the common nourishment which the
Lord provides on the way to eternal life In the Lord's Supper, when it is rightly administered,
there is no distinction of persons in the distribution of the bread and wine, but all eat the one
bread and drink from the one cup and are strengthened and preserved to eternal life by the
one Lord and Host. And this is something which has to be brought out in true Church law, and
safeguarded against the disruption of its spiritual life into the private spheres of individuals, or
of certain pious or more pious or wholly pious groups. Naturally, there can and should be all
kinds of active fellowships for the promotion of specific ends and in the discharge of specific
tasks which cannot be the particular concern of all but only of those specially called or
endowed for the purpose. But the idea of an ecclesiola in ecclesia of a special communio within
the one, always involves either openly or tacitly an abandonment or relativisation of the one.
No ecclesiola, however, can find any basis or authority in the Lord's Supper, to which all come
with the same hunger and thirst, and at which all are equally nourished with food and drink. It
may sometimes be the case that the living and true Church has to arise and is compelled and
empowered to take new shape in a dead Church or a false. But in an order of fellowship
derived from the Lord's Supper there can be no place for a true Church within the true Church.
1

Rubn Arjona
ruben.arjona@ptsem.edu
Princeton Theological Seminary, PO Box 821, Princeton, NJ 08542-0803, USA

And we have to remember especially that in the Lord's Supper it is distinctively a question of
outward and inward, visible and invisible, physical and spiritual nourishment at one and the
same time. Where the human mind normally separates these two spheres, in the action of the
Holy Spirit, and drastically in the action of the Lord's Supper, they are comprehended and
united. And the eternal life to which the community is strengthened and preserved in the
Lord's Supper is the glorification of the whole of human life. Thus the Church order to be
derived from the eucharistic action will necessarily embrace, protect and claim the life of the
community and its members as it is now lived in its totality and therefore at one and the same
time in its physical and spiritual nature. It will aim at the living fellowship of Christians in both
spheres. In each respect it will make the strong responsible for the weak, the healthy for the sick,
the rich for the poor. It will make Christians answerable for one another and for the continuance
of the community, outwardly no less than inwardly. 2

My purpose in this essay is to explore the profound theological richness of Calvins

understanding of the Lords Supper. I will specifically focus on Calvins understanding of
the communal dimension of the sacrament as expressed mainly in the Institutes of the
Christian Religion. I will then explore in what ways Calvin might have incorporated these
theological convictions into his ministry. Finally, I will reflect on how Calvins thought and
praxis on the social aspects of the Eucharist has a high prophetic and practical value in
responding to some of the challenges of the church in the twenty-first century.
The unity of the body of Christ
In the Institutes of the Christian Religion Calvin explains the communal nature of the Lords
Supper. He sees in the bread a symbol of the unity of the church: As it is made of many
grains so mixed together that one cannot be distinguished from another, so it is fitting that
in the same way we should be joined and bound together by such great agreement of minds
that no sort of disagreement or division may intrude.3 In his Short Treatise on the Lords
Supper Calvin speaks of the unity of believers in terms of an indissoluble friendship.4 This
2 Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, ed. G. Bromiley and T. Torrance, trans. G. Bromiley (Edinburgh: T & T
Clark, 1958), 4:2:708. [italics mine].
3 John Calvin, Institues of the Christian Religion, 2 vols., ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles
(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960), IV, xvii, 38.
4 John Calvin, Tracts and Treatises on the Doctrine and Worship of the Church, trans. Henry Beveridge
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958), 2:177.

condition of friendship among believers has practical implications. In fact, unity has a
double ethical component: on the one hand, it implies avoiding any kind of conduct that
would lead to injure, despise, abuse or offend a member of the body of Christ; on the other
hand, unity implies exercising compassion towards any brother or sister who was affected
by evil.5 It is important to stress that for Calvin the basis for unity is Christ. Thus, any kind
of disservice to a brother or sister implies disservice to Christ; likewise, loving Christ
necessarily implies loving the brethren.6 Furthermore, since the members of the church are
the members of Christs body, any kind of division between believers implies an attempt to
divide Christ. This attempt to break Christ into pieces deserves no other qualification but
that of a sacrilege.7
The sacrament as a bond of charity
The unity of the body of Christ is only possible through love; in this sense, love is a
precondition for partaking of the sacrament. Calvin follows Augustine in describing the
sacrament as a bond of charity.8 Later on in the Institutes Calvin comes back to stress the
close, non-negotiable relationship between the Lords Supper and love. In discussing the
necessity of frequent celebration of the sacrament, Calvin argues that one of the reasons for
this frequent celebration is precisely the nourishment of mutual love:
Finally, by it [the sacrament] to nourish mutual love, and among themselves give witness to
this love, and discern its bond in the unity of Christs body. For as often as we partake of the
symbol of the Lords body, as a token given and received, we reciprocally bind ourselves to all
duties of love in order that none of us may permit anything that can harm our brother, or
overlook anything that can help him, where necessity demands and ability suffices.9

Calvin, Institutes, IV, xvii, 38.

Ibid.
7 Calvin, Tracts, 2:177.
8 Calvin, Institutes, IV, xvii, 38.
9 Ibid., IV, xvii, 44.
5
6

Before exploring the implications of Calvins affirmations, it is significant to analyze

Calvins use of legal language in this text. This is the text in the 1559 Latin edition:
Et qua postremo mutuam charitatem alerent, et sibi etiam inter se testificarentur, cuius
copulam in unitate corporis Christi viderent. Quoties enim symbol corporis Domini
communicamus, velut data et accepta tessera, alter alteri nos vicissim obstringimus ad omnia
dilectionis officia, ut nequid admittat nostrum quispiam quo fratrem laedat, nequid
praetermitat quo eum iuvare possit, ubi necessitas postulat et facultas suppetit.10

One of the most significant terms in this section is the word tessera. Tessera was a ticket or
token that qualified the holder for some kind of benefit.11 If this is the exact definition that
Calvin had in mind is difficult to know. The context in which paragraph occurs does not,
however, seem to oppose this definition. Calvin thought that every time a believer came to
participate of Lords Supper he received and gave a tessera. Thomas Norton (1582) and
Ford Lewis Battles (1960) translated tessera as token. In the 1813 English edition John
Allen translated velut data et accepta tessera as: the interchange of a mutual pledge.12
Although both translations are acceptable, in terms of the contemporary reader neither of
them communicates Calvins idea with enough clarity and precision. Thus, it is convenient
to turn to the 1541 French edition to seek further clarification:
Par laquelle, finalement, feust nourrie et entretenue mutuelle charit entre eux, et aussi ilz se la
testiffiassent les uns aux autres; voyans la conjunction dicelle en lunit du corps de Jesus
Christ. Car toutesfois et quantes que nous communiquons du signe du corps du Seigneur, nous
nous obligeons mutuellement lun lautre, comme par scedulle, tous offices de charit, ce
que nul de nous ne face rien par quoy il blesse son frere, et ne obmette rien parquoy il le puisse
ayder et secourir, toutesfois et quantes que la necessit le requerra.13

In this edition Calvin uses the expression come par scedulle. A scedulle can be defined as
promesse de payer sous seing priv,14 that is, a promise of payment guaranteed by the
10

5:410.

Joannis Calvini, Opera Selecta, ed. Petrus Barth and Guilelmus Niesel (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1962),

P. Glare, ed., Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon, 1976), 2:1931.

John Calvin, Institues of the Christian Religion, 3 vols., trans. John Allen (London, 1813), IV, xvii, 38.
13Jean Calvin, Institution de la Religion Chrtienne 1541, ed. Olivier Millet (Genve: Droz, 2008), 2:1375.
14mile Littr, Dictionnaire de la Langue Francaise, (Paris: Gallimard, 1958), 2:19.
11
12

signing of a document. A similar understanding is present in the Spanish translation of

Cipriano de Valera in 1597; although Cipriano de Valera translated from the Latin it is very
possible that he was also informed by the French edition:
Porque siempre que comunicamos el signo del cuerpo del Seor, nos obligamos los unos a los
otros como por una cdula a ejercer todas las obligaciones de la caridad, para que ninguno de
nosotros haga cosa alguna con que perjudique a su hermano, ni deje pasar cosa alguna con que
pueda ayudarlo y socorrerlo, siempre que la necesidad lo requiera, y tenga posibilidad de
hacerlo.15

The use of the Spanish term cdula is practically an equivalent of the French scedulle. Both,
scedulle and cdula, are specific terms that imply a legal, even an economic responsibility.
Among the English translations of the Institutes, the translation that best transmits to
the contemporary reader the legal specificity of Calvins language in this section is the
recent first English version of the 1541 French edition of the Institutes by Elsie Anne
McKee:
Lastly by it mutual love/charity was nourished and maintained among them and they also
witnessed it to each other, seeing the joining together of love/charity in the unity of the body of
Jesus Christ. For whenever we communicate in the sign of the body of the Lord, we mutually
obligate ourselves to each other as if by contract, for all the duties of love/charity, so that none
of us may do anything by which he may wound his brother, or omit anything by which he can
help or assist him whenever necessity requires that.16

The translation of scedulle as contract reclaims the richness of Calvins original simile. For
the contemporary reader the term contract is clear and precise. Indeed, Calvin uses
precise legal language in this paragraph to emphasize the mutual, unavoidable
responsibility towards the brethren that believers endorse every time they participate of
the Lords Table. Again, this legal responsibility is not only a call to avoid harmful actions
but to be careful not to overlook any possible way of helping the brethren. For Calvin there
15 Juan Calvino, Institucin de la religin cristiana, 2 t., trad. Cipriando de Valera (Madrid: Visor, 1967), IV,
xvii, 44. [Italics mine].
16 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1541 French Edition, trad. Elsie Anne McKee (Grand
Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2009) 567-568.

is a close relationship between ability and responsibility; whoever is able to satisfy a need
is also responsible for satisfying it. In this way, it becomes clear that love is not an abstract,
intangible concept; love is performing duties, acting upon, responding to the needs of the
brethren.
Necessity and ability
In the text cited above from the 1559 Latin edition, Calvin speaks of necessity and ability as
the guiding criterion for performing the duties of love: ubi necessitas postulat et facultas
suppetit. How should necessitas and facultas be interpreted? How are necessitas and
facultas determined? In view of his constant disagreements with the Anabaptists, Calvin
was careful in avoiding expressions that could be interpreted as a radical call to a state of
common property that left no room for private owning. His interpretation of Acts 4:34 may
be helpful in clarifying the relation between necessitas and facultas:
Furthermore, he does not mean that the faithful sold all that they possessed, but only so far as
need required. It is by way of detail that he adds that the rich did not only relieve the poverty of
their brethren from the annual revenue of their lands, but in their liberality spared not even
the lands themselves. This could be achieved without their wholly impoverishing themselves,
and by incurring only a certain reduction of their revenue. This also may read into Lukes
words, that the object of their doing so was that no one should lack. He further shows that
prudence was used, in that distribution was made in accordance with the need of each. The
goods were not equally divided, but a reasonable distribution was made, to ensure that no one
was burdened with the extremes of poverty.17

In this text the need of the brethren is the ultimate criterion for making economic decisions
within the community of faith. In addition, the concept of need is associated with the
extremes of poverty. The implication is that anyone experiencing the extremes of poverty
should receive the aid of the community. For Calvin it is clear that the early community of
believers had the necessary resources to meet the needs of the brethren. Thus, the faithful

17

John Calvin, Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, trans. J. Fraser and W. McDonald, ed. D. and T.
Torrance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 1:129-130. [cursives mine].

were spiritually and technically able to assist those in need. In the particular context of Acts
4, the tension between necessitas and facultas does not seem to be a pressing issue. This,
however, wasnt the case of Calvins Geneva and is certainly not the case in our
contemporary world.
Later on in his commentary, Calvin speaks harshly of what he is witnessing in his own
world. The contrast that he establishes between the early church and his world is striking:
In those days the believers gave abundantly of what was their own; we in our day are content
not only jealously to retain what we possess, but callously to rob others. They set forth their
own possessions with simplicity and faithfulness; we devise a thousand cunning devices
whereby we may acquire everything for ourselves by hook or by crook. They laid down at the
apostles feet; we do not fear, with sacrilegious boldness, to convert to our own use what was
offered to God. They sold their own possessions in those days; in our day it is the lust to
purchase that reigns supreme. At that time love made each mans own possessions common
property for those in need; in our day such is the inhumanity of many, that they begrudge to
the poor a common dwelling upon earth, the common use of water, air, and sky.18

It sometimes occurs that Calvins descriptions of his world are so close, so surprisingly
close to contemporary reality that he seems to be writing from the streets of New York,
Tokio or Mexico City! Indeed, the eloquent description of his reality brings us back to the
tension between necessitas and facultas. In Calvins world, and perhaps more pressingly in
ours, necessitas is not being met by facultas. The worlds production could technically meet
the needs of all human beings; instead, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to
grow dramatically.
An alternative view
The 1541 French edition of the Institutes offers an alternative view of the tense relation
between necessitas and facultas. The 1559 Latin edition implies that necessities should be
met as long as the ability suffices; in other words, needs should be satisfied if there is the

18

Ibid., 130.

capability or the opportunity to do so. The 1541 French edition, however, omits the last
part of the phrase. The following table might be helpful to appreciate the differences:
Edition
1536 Latin
1541
French
1559 Latin

Text

English Translation

ubi necessitas postulet

where necessity demands (Battles, 1975)

toutesfois et quantes que la

necessit le requerra

whenever necessity requires that

(McKee, 2009)

ubi necessitas postulat et facultas

suppetit

where necessity demands and ability

suffices (Battles, 1960)

The differences between these versions are significant. The English version based on the
1536 Latin edition does not have the phrase and ability suffices. The English translation
based on the 1541 French edition is significantly direct and precise. There seem to be no
limits to the responsibility of satisfying the needs of the brethren whenever it is necessary.
There is no consideration of ability, capability, or opportunities. Necessity is the sole and
definitive criterion. Did Calvin modify his perspective over time? How can these differences
be explained? It is possible that these differences do not necessarily imply a change in
Calvins view; rather, they might be reflecting a tension inherent to his view of property.
The straightforwardness of the 1541 French edition could be read as a relativization of
private property. By contrast, in the 1559 it could seem that Calvin is promoting
benevolence within the context of private property. In any case, it is helpful to remember
the circumstances in which Calvin lived. As it has been suggested, Calvin was very careful,
perhaps too much, about avoiding any association of his teachings with those he called
fanatics. Thus, in his commentary on Second Corinthians, he writes: But this teaching is
needed to refute fanatics who think that you have done nothing unless you strip yourself

completely and put everything in a common fund.19 Calvin didnt believe that the
community of believers should be organized under the principle of common property. In
this context, it could be said that he was an advocate of private property.
Calvins view of private property, however, has very little to do with the contemporary
understanding of private property. In the present circumstances of free trade market, the
supreme criterion for determining property is affordability; an individual can have
whatever he or she can afford. By contrast, for Calvin the fundamental criterion was not
affordability, but the supreme and permanent principle of love, the kind of love that should
be made concrete in every new situation.20 Consequently, it can be said that Calvins view
of private property implied liberal sharing and communication with ones neighbors.21 To
enable this sharing believers should follow this rule: All the good we have has been given
to us by God in trust, on condition that it be distributed for the profit of others.22 This
process of distribution could require the diminution of ones patrimony: We are not to
spare the capital funds, if the interest available from these fails to meet the necessities [of
the poor]. In other words, your liberality has to go as far as the diminution of your
patrimony, and the disposal of your states.23 It can be said that Calvins view of private
property is somehow paradoxical: first, one receives what in strict terms belongs to God;
secondly, property is received to be distributed for the benefit of others. Ultimately, this
tension between owning and distributing, between necessity and ability, is a matter that
19 John Calvin, Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians and the Epistles to
Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, trans. T. A. Smail, ed. D. and T. Torrance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 112.
20 Elsie Anne McKee, The Character and Significance of John Calvins Teaching on Social and Economic
Issues, in John Calvin Rediscovered: the Impact of His Social and Economic Thought, eds. Edward Dommen and
James D. Bratt (Louisville/London: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007), 9.
21 Calvin, Institutes (1541), 689.
22 Ibid.
23 Calvin, Commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, trans. A. W. Morrison, ed.
D and T. Torrance (Edinburgh: St. Andrew, 1972), 216, cited by McKee, 9.

believers have to resolve in their daily pilgrimage of faith. Elsie Anne McKee explains this
tension in terms of freedom and responsibility: By the general rule of love, each Christian
has both considerable freedom and inescapable responsibility to decide the day-to-day
embodiment of earthly stewardship not in a legalistic way but according to the Holy Spirits
guidance.24
From reflection to praxis
A popular saying affirms: There is no better praxis than a good theory. This is certainly
true of John Calvin. For a number of reasons Calvin did not implement all his theological
convictions and insights. However, through his writings Calvin provided the basis for
further reflection and praxis. Thus, it can be said that Calvins thought was in itself his most
important practical contribution. For many generations Calvins writings have been a
source of inspiration, reflection, and debate for peoples across the world. As a result,
believers have found new ways to interpret and implement the Christian message.
When it comes to the communal dimension of the Lords Supper it is clear that Calvin
didnt implement all his theological insights. This is the case, for example, of liturgical
almsgiving. In a detailed study, Elsie McKee has given an explanation of this issue. While
she reveals that Geneva did not practice a collection of alms in worship until after Calvins
death, she also argues that the absence of this practice was a consequence of practical and
not theological reasons.25 As it has been suggested by the analysis of the contract
metaphor, Calvin believed that participation in the Lords Supper implied responsibilities
towards those in need. One concrete expression of this responsibility was liturgical

24
25

McKee, 9.
Elsie Anne McKee, John Calvin on the Diaconate and Liturgical Almsgiving (Genve : Droz, 1984), 64.

10

almsgiving. McKee presents a selection of Calvins La forme des prires in which there is a
specific mention of offerings for the poor in the context of the Lords Supper:
In order, then, that we may consider these things with greater diligence and that we may be
made more ardent and desirous of receiving this holy food and drink of life eternal, we very
appropriately add, with psalms and hymns of praise, the reading of the gospel, the confession
of faith, and the holy oblations and offerings. These things proclaim what is given to us in
Christ and what and how great are the good things which we receive by the communication of
His body and blood. Or rather, they admonish us worthily to prize these things and to praise
them with true praises and ardent thanksgiving, and also to render them praiseworthy and
precious to others. And it is not without good reason that we have added the oblations to what
we said before. For, aroused and moved by the reading and explanation of the gospel and the
confession of our faith, which is done just before, we ponder in memory that Jesus Christ is
given to us of the infinite goodness of the heavenly Father. With Him He has given all things:
the remission of sins, the covenant of eternal salvation, the life and righteousness of God, and
finally, all desirable things which are added unto the children of God, to those who seek His
kingdom and His righteousness. Then with good and just cause, we offer and submit ourselves
completely to God the Father and to our Lord Jesus Christ, in recognition of so many and so
great benefits. And (as Christian love [charit] requires) we testify this by holy offerings and
gifts which are administered to Jesus Christ in His least ones, to those who are hungry, thirsty,
naked, strangers, sick, or held in prison. For all who live in Christ, and have Him dwelling in
them, do voluntarily what the law commands them. And the latter commands that one not
appear before God without an offering.26

According to McKee the liturgical use of this essay in Strasbourg is probable but not
proved; it is also possible that the purpose of this essay was to provide instruction to new
believers on how they could worthily partake of the Supper.27 Even if Calvin did not use
this text for worship, its theological and practical significance are enormous. In this essay
Calvin explains that the service to the poor through the offerings is a testimony of our
submission to God and Christ and of our recognition of his blessings. Again, we find here a
term with a strong legal connotation and the connection of this term to the concept of
Christian love (charit).
While in the Institutes Calvin cites Acts 2:42 as a proof that almsgiving was one of the
elements of worship present without exception, the place of liturgical almsgiving was
26
27

Ibid., 50.
Ibid., 52.

11

explained more widely in his Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. McKee explains the
significance of the exegetical history of this verse for Reformed ecclesiology:
The exegetical history of this verse reveals the existence of a <definitive> Reformed
description of the necessary components of formal worship: Word, sacraments, prayers and
communicatio / alms. This final element, the expression of fraternal love [caritas], is elusive,
and the definition itself was after some years lost to Reformed ecclesiology. It remains,
however, a significant detail of the Reformed doctrine of worship, evidence that the classical
Reformed tradition did not cut off benevolence from worship.28

Even though during Calvins life almsgiving were not collected in Geneva, it is clear that he
did establish the theological basis for their implementation in Geneva after his death:
When the time came that the older resources were found inadequate, a regular churchdoor collection was instituted, in accordance with the latent implications of Calvins
thought.29 It is also important to point out that ultimately liturgical almsgiving was not the
only possible form that charity could take.30 What other practical possibilities did Genevans
have to respond to the call of charity? In what practical ways did the signing of the
contract was fulfilled? How did they respond to the necessities of their neighbors?
At one level Christian response to the needs to the brethren is by nature difficult to
document. Jesus spoke of giving without boasting about it (Matthew 6:3). Christian of all
times and places have learned to give in anonymous manner. Most likely Genevan believers
responded to the teachings of their preachers in ways that are and will remain unknown.
However, there is some historical evidence of how people responded when they were
called upon to provide for specific purposes. This is the case, for example, of the Bourse
francaise.
The Bourse francaise

Ibid., 266.
Ibid., 64.
30 Ibid., 65.
28
29

12

The Bourse francaise was a fundamental institution of the Genevan charity structure that
cared for the poor of Geneva (citizens).31 For Genevan believers this fund became a channel
through which they could respond to the needs of others in a way that would ensure
systematic, comprehensive, and compassionate distribution. 32 Even though the Bourse
francaise was a team effort, and not just the product of a persons work, it can be said that
this institution by and large honored the germinal ideas of John Calvin on charity and on
the role of deacons.33 Furthermore, Calvin himself was a frequent contributor and a
recommender of individual poor people.34 This was probably a consequence of Calvins
theological pragmatism. Certainly, he did not only have an acute ability to interpret the
Scriptures and construct theological arguments; perhaps most importantly, he had the Godgiven capacity of responding to the needs of the people through a compassionate and
creative pastoral ministry.
Challenges and opportunities for the contemporary church
What may we learn from Calvins integral understanding of caritas within the context of
worship? What are some challenges and opportunities that Calvins understanding of the
communal dimension of the Lords Supper pose for contemporary communities of faith?
Answers can be given at multiple levels and I will only sketch a few possibilities.
Within the context of worship itself, Calvins texts on the Lords Supper can be adapted
and incorporated to enrich the liturgies of the Lords Supper. Even though Calvin believed
the sacrament would always remain a mystery, he made a serious effort to find the right

31 Jeannine Olson, Calvin and Social Welfare: Deacons and the Bourse francaise (London and Toronto:
Associated UP, 1989), 11.
32 Ibid., 12.
33 Ibid., 27.
34 Ibid., 36.

13

language to make it somehow understandable to the people. Thus, it is quite appropriate to

reclaim the creativity and theological profoundness of his language. While he developed
several metaphors, in this paper I have focused on the simile of the sacrament as a
contract. Once I used this simile to explain to a group of children the sense of mutual
responsibility implied in the Eucharist. After explaining that the Lords Supper was like
signing a contract for the well-being of our brothers and sisters, a little girl spontaneously
answered: But thats too difficult! It is certainly difficult. This is, however, the challenging
and scandalizing nature of the Gospel of Christ. Furthermore, the simile of the contract
should not be understood in a legalistic sense. Rather, it is a call to follow Christ and,
through the action of the Spirit, learn to give ourselves profusely, not only when ability
suffices, but whenever there is a need.
In view of the perverse influences of a materialistic and consumerist culture the
depletes individuals and hinders the possibility of a true sense of community, reclaiming
the communal dimension of worship, and specifically of the Lords Supper, is also a call to
reclaim the prophetic message of the church. It is a call to question the churchs
accommodation to a system of fundamental injustice. It is a call to overturn a system that
privileges affordability as the maximum economic criterion to insist that love should be the
overriding principle in all human decisions.
The Lords Supper as a communal feast of love has also implications for the
understanding of fellowship within the church. The fellowship that comes from the Lords
Supper should be able to override any kind of cultural conventions that hinder true
compassionate and significant connections among the brethren. It is around the table,

14

around the Lords Table, but also around the other dining tables that community can be
built.
Finally, Calvins theological understanding of almsgiving in worship is also challenging
for the administrative practices of some contemporary ecclesiastical systems. It calls for a
complete revision of the financial priorities of the church. Reclaiming love as the
fundamental reason for the practice of almsgiving should lead the church to undertake its
full responsibility, as if by a contract, for the necessities of the poor.

Bibliography:
Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics. Vol. 4. Edited by G. Bromiley and T. Torrance. Translated by
G. Bromiley. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1958.
Calvin, Jean. Institutio Christianae Religionis. Translated by Thomas Norton. London: H.
Middleton, 1582.
Calvin, Jean. Institution de la Religion Chrtienne 1541. Vol. 2. Edited by Olivier Millet.
Genve: Droz, 2008.
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Vol. 1. Translated by J. Fraser and W.
McDonald. Edited by D. and T. Torrance. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965.
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians and the
Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Translated by T. A. Smail. Edited by D. and T.
Torrance. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.
Calvin, John. Institues of the Christian Religion. Vol. 3. Translated by John Allen. London,
1813.
Calvin, John. Institues of the Christian Religion. Vol. 2. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated
by Ford Lewis Battles.Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.
Calvin, John. Institues of the Christian Religion. 1541 French Edition. Translated by Elsie
Anne McKee. Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2009.
Calvini, Joannis. Opera Selecta. Vol. 5. Edited by Petrus Barth and Guilelmus Niesel. Munich:
Chr. Kaiser, 1962.
Calvin, John. Tracts and Treatises on the Doctrine and Worship of the Church. Translated by
Henry Beveridge Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958.
Calvino, Juan. Institucin de la religin cristiana. T. 2. Translated by Cipriando de Valera.
Madrid: Visor, 1967.
Glare, P. ed. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon, 1976.
Littr, mile. Dictionnaire de la Langue Francaise. Vol. 2. Paris: Gallimard, 1958.
McKee, Elsie Anne. The Character and Significance of John Calvins Teaching on Social and
Economic Issues, in John Calvin Rediscovered: the Impact of His Social and Economic

15

Thought, edited by Edward Dommen and James D. Bratt. Louisville/London:

Westminster John Knox Press, 2007.
McKee, Elsie Anne. John Calvin on the Diaconate and Liturgical Almsgiving. Genve : Droz,
1984.
Olson, Jeannine. Calvin and Social Welfare: Deacons and the Bourse francaise. London and
Toronto: Associated UP, 1989.
16