Skip to main content

Even the Italians aren’t Memorialists (Or even more evidence that Apostolics aren’t Zwinglians!)

My Italian isn’t brilliant, but I’ve been managing to work through part of the section on the Lord’s Supper in the Catechismo Apostolico (which is the Catechism of the Italian Apostolic Church). The Catechismo isn’t a small book in question and answer format like our old British Apostolic catechisms used to be (and yes, we had several over the years, some in Welsh and some in English), but a 230 page book which sets out ‘the doctrinal content of the Christian faith’. It isn’t anywhere nearly as detailed and exhaustive as the Catechism of the Catholic Church, but it’s quite impressive for Pentecostals. I suspect that it’s no coincidence that it was published the year before the text of the Catechism of the Catholic Church was promulgated – as one scholar has noted, there tends to be a ‘muted apologetic against ... Italian Catholicism’ in Italian Apostolic doctrinal works.

And that’s what makes the Catechismo so interesting when it comes to the Lord’s Supper. You see, if any national Apostolic Church was to state a Zwinglian Memorialist view, you’d expect it to be the Italians by way of reaction to Roman Catholic teaching (remember the ‘muted apologetic against ... Catholicism’). Yet even they don’t.

According to the Catechismo, ‘the Lord's Supper is much more important and complex than imagined by those who simply see it as a simple commemoration of past events.’ See that! It’s not just a commemoration. Instead the Supper ‘expresses in the present the communion of believers with their Saviour and therefore among themselves.’

The Catechismo explicitly excludes the sacramentalism of the Roman Catholic Church when it comes to the Supper (along with the sacrifice of the Mass), arguing that ‘it is absurd to think that participation in the Lord's Supper produces the communion with the Lord and among the participants.’ Instead, participation in the sacrament ‘expresses and reinforces’ the already existing communion ‘if the participants know how to discern the Lord's body.’

‘The Lord is truly present among believers who celebrate the Supper.’ This is not a physical presence in the sense of transubstantiation, but yet it is a real spiritual presence. There should be a great respect for the sacrament, and so ‘the remains of the bread and wine used for the Supper are destroyed, and so not put to a profane use.’ (By the way, that’s also supposed to be the case in the UK.)

The Catechismo does play the Italian Apostolic understanding of the sacrament off against the Roman Catholic teaching. But that doesn’t cause the Italian Apostolics to run for cover to the opposite extreme of Zwinglian Memorialism. Ultimately they appear to take a Calvinist spiritual presence view (in common with most early British Apostolics – those who weren’t Calvinists at the Table had an even higher view), and emphasise the Supper as a meal of loving communion, a covenant renewal, and a foretaste of the New Jerusalem and the perfect eternal communion of theosis. (NB The undestanding of salvation as theosis in the Catechismo – ‘ultimately, to be a Christian means to participate in the Trinitarian life of God.’)

Popular posts from this blog

These are the Bones of Elisha (Declaring the Word of the Lord)

One of the most curious events in all of Scripture is found in a single verse in 2 Kings 13. That chapter records the death of the prophet Elisha, and yet, there’s still one more story of Elisha here some time after his death. 2 Kings 13:21 tells us:
So it was, as they were burying a man, that suddenly they spied a band of raiders; and they put the man in the tomb of Elisha; and when the man was let down and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived and stood on his feet. Elisha was dead. And yet when a corpse was thrown into his tomb hastily in an attempt to hide from marauding bands of Moabites, the man came back to life simply by his corpse touching Elisha’s bones. Even as miracles go, that one’s quite impressive.

On the Church and On Sin: With a (former) Tory MP and a Catholic Priest

What with the Extraordinary Synod going on in Rome this week, the Roman Catholic Church has been in the news a bit of late. And as a result of all this pre-synod hype in the media, two Roman Catholics wrote two of the best articles I read last week. One was an article in the Catholic Herald by a priest. The other was an article in the Spectator by a former MP. You should read both of them. (But if you're not going to read both, then please at least read the second one!)

Now, maybe that seems a bit odd. I am, after all, both a Pentecostal pastor and an Ulster Protestant. And as such, I'm convinced that very significant aspects of Roman Catholic theology are seriously wrong. I still believe that justification by faith alone is the article on which the church stands or falls. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't read, and even learn from, Roman Catholics. Although we are justified by faith alone, it is by faith in Christ alone, not faith in the right formulation of the doc…

Money, Money, Money (Must Be Funny, in a Rich Man’s World!)

‘Not the Pentecostals! Watch out – they’ll be trying to get all your money.’
     – The reaction when a new Christian told her Muslim uncle that she’d got saved and           started attending a Pentecostal church. ‘Hello, I’m calling from [“Christian” TV channel]. We have some great deals on advertising during our broadcasts and wondered if the church would be interested.’
     – A phone call yesterday. ‘$11,150’
     – the amount one American church is appealing to raise to produce a worship album $750 plus expenses
     – an American amount recommended as a gift for visiting preachers ‘US pastors paid up to $300,000 - are Church of England vicars getting a raw deal?’
     – recent Headline in Christian Today

£5.75 million
     – the amount of money an evangelical church down south is trying to raise for               building improvements.$25,000
     – the amount two American pastors are raising to produce a six minute teaching video Money has been on my mind a bit of late. Not my …