The Church’s Witness to the Responsible Use of Wine
My last two posts dealt with Scripture’s testimony to the responsible use of wine, both socially and in the context of worship. Most nowadays would be satisfied to stop there and hear no more, but let us be reminded that Scripture does not speak to us in a vacuum. We receive its testimony through the teaching ministry of the church, and over the millennia, plenty has been said. Let’s consider that which Keith Mathison has brought together for us in this excerpt from his very informative book, Given For You: Reclaiming Calvin’s Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper.
The Testimony of the Church
We have already mentioned that wine was universally used by the entire church for the first 1,800 years of her existence. During those years, there was never any suggestion that another drink should be used. In the early church, for example, we find clear testimony to the use of wine by such men as Justin Martyr (The First Apology, 65) and Clement of Alexandria (The Instructor, 2.2). In the eighth century, the Synod of Constantinople bore witness to the continued use of wine in the Lord’s Super (See John H. Leith, ed., Creeds of the Churches, 3d ed. {Louisville: John Knox, 1982}, 55.).
At the time of the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation, there were disagreements over virtually every other issue related to the sacraments, but there was no disagreement over the use of wine. All of the churches continued to teach that bread and wine are the proper elements to be used in the Lord’s Supper. Martin Luther taught this in his Small Catechism of 1529, and the Lutheran church continued to teach it in the Augsburg Confession (art. 10). The Anglican Church taught the use of actual bread and wine in the Thirty-nine Articles (art. 28). Even the Anabaptists continued to teach this in the Dordrecht Confession of 1632 (art. 10).
In the Reformed branch of the church, the use of wine was taught and practiced by John Calvin (Calvin, Institutes, 4.17.1). It was also taught in the great sixteenth-century Reformed confessions, such as the Belgic Confession (art. 35), the Heidelberg Catechism (Q. 79), and the Second Helvetic Confession (chap. 19). The use of wine is also clearly taught in the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms. This Confession teaches that Jesus has appointed his ministers to “bless the elements of bread and wine” (29.3). The Larger Catechism repeatedly declares that the elements of the Lord’s Supper are bread and wine (Qq. 168-69, 177). Every Reformed theologian from the time of Calvin forward taught that bread and wine were the proper elements to be used in the Lord’s Supper. This teaching is found in the writings of
Robert Bruce (Robert Bruce, The Mystery of the Lord’s Supper, trans. Thomas F. Torrance {1590-91; reprint, London: James Clarke, 1958}, 43, 76.),
William Ames (William Ames, The Marrow of Theology, trans. John Dykstra Eusden {Durham, N. C.: Labyrinth Press, 1983}, 212),
Francis Turretin (Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James t. Dennison Jr., trans. George Musgrave Giger (Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R, 1992-97), 3:429),
Wilhelmus a Brakel (Wilhelmus a Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, trans. Bartel Elshout {Morgan, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1992-94}, 2:528),
Jonathan Edwards (Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards {Carlisle, Pa.: Banner of Truth, 1974}, 1:458),
Herman Witsius (Herman Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man {Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R, 1990}, 2:449-50),
Charles Hodge (Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology {Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989}, 3:616),
A. A. Hodge (A. A. Hodge, Outlines of Theology {1879; reprint, Carlisle, Pa.: Banner of Truth, 1972}, 633-34)
Robert L. Dabney (Robert L. Dabney, Systematic Theology {Carlisle, Pa.: Banner of Truth, 1985}, 801),
W. G. T. Shedd (W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology {Grand Rapids: Zondervan, n.d.}, 2:573),
B. B. Warfield (B. B. Warfield, “The Fundamental Significance of the Lord’s Supper,” in Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield–I, ed. John E. Meeter {Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1970}, 333),
John Murray (John Murray, The Collected Writings of John Murray, vol. 2 {Carlisle, Pa.: Banner of Truth, 1976}, 366, 369),
and Louis Berkhof (Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 4th ed. {Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996}, 617), among many others.
The use of wine in the Lord’s Supper not only is unanimously taught by all the Reformed theologians and confessions from the sixteenth century forward, but also is explicitly taught in modern Presbyterian directories of worship. The Book of Church Order of the Presbyterian Church in America, for example, is clear in its teaching that the proper elements to be used in the Lord’s Supper are bread and wine:
The table, on which the elements are placed, being decently covered,
and furnished with bread and wine, and the communicants
orderly and gravely sitting around it (or in their seats before it),
the elders in a convenient place together, the minister should
then set the elements apart by prayer and thanksgiving. (58-5 [emphasis added])
The Presbyterian Church in America’s directory of worship is in perfect agreement with her doctrinal standards. Both the Confessions and The Book of Church Order clearly declare that the proper elements to be used in the Lord’s Supper are bread and wine, not bread and grape juice.
It may come as a surprise to some, but even the great theologians and confessions of faith in the historic Baptist church taught that bread and wine were the proper elements to be used in the observance of the Lord’s Supper. Great Baptist theologians such as
John Gill (John Gill, A Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity {reprint, Paris, Ariz.: Baptist Standard Bearer, 1987}, 918),
John L. Dagg (John L. Dagg, Manual of Church Order {reprint, Bridgewater, Va.: Sprinkle Publications, 1998}, 208-9),
and James Petigru Boyce (James Petigru Boyce, Abstract of Systematic Theology {Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R, 1996}, xxiii),
all taught that wine was to be used in the Lord’s Supper. The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 closely follows the wording of the Westminster Confession of Faith when it says, “The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine” (30.3). The Southern Baptist Abstract of Principles of 1859 says, “The Lord’s Supper is an ordinance of Jesus Christ to be administered with the elements of bread and wine . . . ” (art. 16). Even the Baptist Faith and Message, written in 1925, long after the beginning of the temperance movement, declares that bread and wine are to be used in the Lord’s Supper (art. 13) (cf. Leith, Creeds of the Churches, 348).
Until the middle of the nineteenth century, the use of wine in the Lord’s supper was simply a nonissue for Christians. Agreement on the matter was so universal that most confessions and theologians in the history of the church mention the subject in passing, as if they are simply stating the obvious. They do not even bother to present arguments for the use of wine because no one had ever suggested that anything else be used. They consider the use of wine in the Lord’s Supper to be as biblically self-evident as the use of wate in baptism. The nineteenth-century theologians, such as the Presbyterian A. A. Hodge and the Baptist John L. Dagg, who were the first to be confronted with the question, were adamant in their refusal to change the elements of the Lord’s Supper in order to pacify the legalistice spirit of the age.
The Old Testament Witness to the Responsible Use of Wine
It’s amazing how far afield of important doctrines can human tradition carry us. The use of wine in the Lord’s Supper, and even the biblical definition of wine, is one such example.
There are many intertwined misconceptions surrounding the Christian’s liberty and responsibilities in the biblical use of wine, in personal use, as well as in the context of worship. I offer the following excerpt from Keith A. Mathison’s Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin’s Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper to clear up some of these misconceptions. Following is found in the last chapter, “Practical Issues and Debates,” pages 297-313
BREAD AND WINE
One of the most emotionally charged questions in the modern American evangelical church is whether it is a sin for a Christian to drink an alcoholic beverage such as wine. Most evangelicals and many Reformed Christians are convinced that the consumption of wine in any amount is a sin. As a result of this conviction, many American churches now use grape juice as one of the elements of the Lord’s Supper. This practice raises a number of important questions. Is the consumption of wine by a Christian a sin? Should the church use wine or grape juice (or both) in the Lord’s Supper? In order to answer these questions, we need to discuss several related issues.
By way of introduction to this question, we must first note that it was not a point of dispute in the church for the first 1,800 years of her existence. It is still not a pint of dispute for most of the church around the world today. This issue is primarily debated in the United Staes, and it has been a matter of disagreement in the U.S. only since the middle of the nineteenth century. For the first 1,800 years of the church, the use of wine in the Lord’s Supper was an undisputed and noncontroversial practice. It was the universal practice of Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants alike. It remained the universal practice for so long only because the use of wine in the New Testament descriptions of the Lord’s Supper is so unambiguously clear. The substitution of grape juice for wine had its origins, not in the study of Scripture, but in the capitulation of much of the American evangelical church to the demands of the nineteenth-century temperance movement (Horton, “At Least Weekly,” 168).
The Witness of Scripture
In order to demonstrate why wine was universally used in the Lord’s Supper for 1,800 years, we must first examine what the Bible says about wine in general and then examine what it says about the elements of the Lord’s Supper. When we examine Scripture, we see that wine is a good gift from God that is meant to be enjoyed in moderation and that the elements of the Lord’s Supper, as it was observed in the New Testament, were bread and wine–not bread and grape juice (For a good study of this subject, see Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., God Gave Wine: What the Bible Says About Alcohol {Lincoln, Calif.: Oakdown, 2001}. This book is an expanded version of The Christian and Alcoholic Beverage: A Biblical Perspective {Grand Rapids: Baker, 1986}.).
When we look at the Old Testament, we see that godly men gave wine as a gift (cf. Genesis 14:18-20). We also see that God himself commands that wine and strong drink be brought as an offering to him (cf. Exodus 29:38, 40; Leviticus 23:13; Numbers 15:5, 7, 10; 28:7). God always commands that only the best be offered to him as a sacrifice. Nothing unclean or unholy may ever be sacrificed to God. Yet God commands that he be offered wine as a sacrifice. It is impossible, therefore, that wine is inherently evil, unclean, or unholy.
There are numerous places in the Old Testament where wine is explicitly spoken of as a gracious blessing from God (see Genesis 27:28; Deuteronomy 7:12-13; 11:13-14; 14:22-26; Judges 9:13; Psalm 104:14-15; Proverbs 3:9-10; Amos 9:13-14). We see in these verses that an abundance of wine is considered to be one of the covenant blessings promised to those who are faithful. It is inconceivable that God would tell his people that wine is one of the blessings of the covenant if it is, in fact, a curse. In fact, Scripture refers to the removal of wine as part of the curse that falls on covenant breakers (cf. Deuteronomy 28:15, 39; Isaiah 62:8).
In 1 Chronicles 12:38-40, we read of David’s great coronation banquet. In the presence of at least one-third of a million people, an enormous coronation banquet was prepared for David. For three days, a huge assembly of people ate food and drank wine in the presence of God as they celebrated the enthronement of their king. Wine is also spoken of as part of the great eschatological feast (cf. Isaiah 25:6). Would God offer something sinful at a feast he himself prepares?
The Old Testament also uses wine to symbolize things that are unquestionably good. Isaiah, for example, uses wine to symbolize the gospel (Isaiah 55:1). The beauty of marital love is repeatedly compared to wine in the Song of Solomon (1:4; 4:10; 7:6-9; 8:2). God would not use something evil to symbolize the beauty of marital love, much less the gospel. The strict prohibitionist thesis is simply contradicted by Scripture.
Like all of God’s good gifts, wine can be abused. The good gift of food is abused by gluttons. The good gift of language is abused by liars and gossips. The good gift of sex is abused by fornicators, adulterers, and homosexuals. In the same way, the good gift of wine is abused by drunkards. The Old Testament pulls no punches in the condemnation of drunkenness (Job 12:25; Psalm 107:27; Proverbs 20:1; 23:20-21, 29-33; Isaiah 5:11, 22; 28:7-8). However, it is the abuse, not the use, of wine that is condemned by Scripture. The abuse of God’s good gifts is not solved by the ungrateful rejection of those gifts. The abuse of God’s good gifts is solved only by the proper use of them.
In my next posts, I’ll continue with the New Testament witness to the responsible use of wine, the testimony of the church, the rejection of wine, objections answered and summary.
The Misadventures of Captain Headknowledge 
The New Testament Witness to the Responsible Use of Wine
I have included the author’s extensive documentation in complete detail, for the purpose of urging the church leaders among my readers to examine the claims for yourself and see whether these things be so.
In the New Testament, we find a continuation of the same general line of thought that is found in the Old Testament. Wine itself is a good gift of God and is a sin. We see in Luke 7:33-34 that Jesus himself drank wine. In this passage, Jesus draws a parallel between himself and John the Baptist. John was condemned for not eating bread and drinking wine. Jesus was condemned for the exact opposite. he was even accused of being a drunkard. No one would have accused Jesus of being a drunkard if all he drank was grape juice.
In John 2:1-11, we read of Jesus’ first miracle at the wedding in Cana, the turning of water into wine. the Greek word used throughout this passage is oinos, which refers to the fermented juice of the grape, or wine (Cf. Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, ed. William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker, 2d ed. {Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979}, 562.) If the authors of the New Testament had wanted to refer to unfermented grape juice, they would have used the Greek word trux (Ibid.) Jesus turned water into wine, not grape juice, and it is impossible to believe that Jesus would have provided something inherently sinful to the guests at the wedding. But the fact that Jesus both drank wine and made wine does not mean that he condoned the abuse of wine. Like the old Testament, the New Testament repeatedly condemns drunkenness (Luke 21:34; Romans 13:13; 1 Corinthians 5:11; 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:18; 1 Timothy 3:2-3, 8; Titus 2:3; 1 Peter 4:3). The message of Scripture on the general use of wine is clear. Wine is a good gift from God to be used in moderation. The abuse of wine, like the abuse of any other good gift from God, is a sin.
Having examined what Scripture teaches about wine in general, we must next examine what it says about the use of wine in the Lord’s Supper. As we have already seen, the institution of the Lords’ Supper is recorded in all three of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 26:27-29; Mark 14:23-25; Luke 22:15-20). In each of these accounts, Jesus identifies the contents of the cup as the “fruit of the vine.” Because the Lord’s Supper was instituted during a Passover meal, it can hardly be denied that this “fruit of the vine” was the same wine that was used at the Passover
See, for example:
Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 660-62;
William Hendricksen, the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), 911;
D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 8 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 536;
Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew (Nashville: Broadman and Holmna, 1992), 390-91;
William L. Lane, The Gospel According to mark, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 507-9;
Norval Geldenhuys, Commnentary on the Gospel of Luke, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), 554;
R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Luke’s Gospel (Columbus: Wartburg Press, 1946), 1043-44;
Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus, trans. Norman Perrin (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977), 50-51.)
And, as Joachim Jeremias notes, “to genema tes ampelou (‘the fruit of the vine’) for ‘wine’ is in the Judaism of the time of Jesus a set liturgical formula at the blessing of the cup, both before and after the meal.” (Jeremias, Eucharistic Words of Jesus, 183);
and compare:
Philip Schaff, ed., A Religious Encyclopedia of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal and Practical Theology (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1887), 2537-38;
Heinrich Sessemann, “oinos,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 5, ed. Gerhard Friedrich, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967), 164;
T. K. Cheyne and J. Sutherland Black, eds., Encyclopaedia Biblica (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1903), 5309;
Blomberg, Matthew, 390-91;
Lenski, Interpretation of St. Luke’s Gospel, 1043-44.
In other words, when the historical and grammatical context is taken into account, there are simply no grounds to conclude that Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper with anything other than the same wine that was used in the Passover meal.
Tomorrow we’ll hear from the Testimony of the Church regarding the Responsible Use of Wine, especially as applied to the Lord’s Supper.
Share this: