What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lord's Supper: Eternal Word in Broken Bread
A call to a renewed hunger and thirst for the Lord's Supper, this book unfolds a historic Reformed understanding in contrast to other views. Building on careful biblical analysis, Robert Letham explains why we have the Supper, how we partake of Christ in it, who should take communion, and related matters.
84 pages, Paperback
First published July 1, 2001
1 person is currently reading
98 people want to read
About the author
Robert Letham
30 books24 followersRobert Letham (MAR, ThM, Westminster Theological Seminary; PhD, Aberdeen University) is professor of systematic and historical theology at Union School of Theology in Bridgend, Wales, and the author of a number of books, including The Lord's Supper and Union with Christ.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
April 27, 2020
Letham, Robert. The Lord’s Supper: Eternal Word in Broken Bread. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing, 2001.
The Reformers wrote more polemics on the Lord’s Supper than anything else, yet you wouldn’t know this from a survey of American Christianity today. This booklet should be on every Reformed church table.
He briefly surveys the New Testament data on the Lord’s Supper and then moves into a historical survey. He notes the problems with transubstantiation. I won’t spend too much time on transubstantiation, since refutations of it can be found in most good dogmatics texts. I do want to show some problems in memorialism, though. Let’s first start with a good Calvin quote:
“Accordingly, he shows that in his humanity there also dwells fullness of life, so that whoever has partaken of his flesh and blood may at the same time enjoy participation in life…
...in like manner the flesh of Christ is like a rich and inexhaustible fountain that pours into us the life springing from the Godhead into itself” (ICR 4.17.9).
Memorialism, by contrast, asserts that there is nothing “more in the Lord’s Supper than the action on the part of the recipients in focusing their minds on Christ” (Letham 25). Letham lists some problems:
1) If by the Holy Spirit Christ is present everywhere, it seems odd to stress his absence in the Lord’s Supper.
2) It can’t make sense of Jesus’s realism language in John 6.
3) It divorces sign from thing signified.
Letham, following Calvin probably, advocates “Real Spiritual Presence” (28ff). We do more than just think about Jesus. Rather, “Christ gives himself to be eaten and drunk in faith. This eating and drinking is not physical but is nonetheless real and true” (28). Christ is present to us by his Holy Spirit, yet he is also united to his flesh. This is the objective pole. The subjective pole is that we must receive him by faith.
More on the Reformed Doctrine
The supper signs and seals in our consciences the promises of the gospel. As Christ “is the sum of the Supper, the true communication of Christ is vital to understand” (33). Even though the bread and wine are signs, “the name and title of the body and blood are attributed to them since they are instruments by which Jesus Christ distributes them to us.”
Christ “pours his very life into us,” even if we don’t get his flesh (Calvin 4.17.32).
Reformed Practice
1) The Word creates the sacraments.
2) Single loaf (Letham 50). This is where Letham probably loses people. I get the argument for a single loaf. I just don’t know how that will work in a huge church. That said, we should do away with the “chiclets” approach to the Supper, which having no resemblance to bread (or even food), cannot function as a sign.
3) Single cup. Same thing.
4) Wine.
5) Leavened bread. If the Lord’s Supper is not the continuation of the passover, then there is no point in using unleavened bread. Rome, by contrast, needs unleavened bread because the bread, being Jesus’s body, would crumble if it were leavened. Further, the NT consistently uses artos, not azymos.
Letham ends this chapter by commending the frequency of the Lord’s Supper. I am not arguing for weekly communion. I am simply arguing against bad reasons opposing it. Please don’t say it sounds too Catholicky. If you do, give up your Reformed card. You don’t need it anymore.
The Reformers wrote more polemics on the Lord’s Supper than anything else, yet you wouldn’t know this from a survey of American Christianity today. This booklet should be on every Reformed church table.
He briefly surveys the New Testament data on the Lord’s Supper and then moves into a historical survey. He notes the problems with transubstantiation. I won’t spend too much time on transubstantiation, since refutations of it can be found in most good dogmatics texts. I do want to show some problems in memorialism, though. Let’s first start with a good Calvin quote:
“Accordingly, he shows that in his humanity there also dwells fullness of life, so that whoever has partaken of his flesh and blood may at the same time enjoy participation in life…
...in like manner the flesh of Christ is like a rich and inexhaustible fountain that pours into us the life springing from the Godhead into itself” (ICR 4.17.9).
Memorialism, by contrast, asserts that there is nothing “more in the Lord’s Supper than the action on the part of the recipients in focusing their minds on Christ” (Letham 25). Letham lists some problems:
1) If by the Holy Spirit Christ is present everywhere, it seems odd to stress his absence in the Lord’s Supper.
2) It can’t make sense of Jesus’s realism language in John 6.
3) It divorces sign from thing signified.
Letham, following Calvin probably, advocates “Real Spiritual Presence” (28ff). We do more than just think about Jesus. Rather, “Christ gives himself to be eaten and drunk in faith. This eating and drinking is not physical but is nonetheless real and true” (28). Christ is present to us by his Holy Spirit, yet he is also united to his flesh. This is the objective pole. The subjective pole is that we must receive him by faith.
More on the Reformed Doctrine
The supper signs and seals in our consciences the promises of the gospel. As Christ “is the sum of the Supper, the true communication of Christ is vital to understand” (33). Even though the bread and wine are signs, “the name and title of the body and blood are attributed to them since they are instruments by which Jesus Christ distributes them to us.”
Christ “pours his very life into us,” even if we don’t get his flesh (Calvin 4.17.32).
Reformed Practice
1) The Word creates the sacraments.
2) Single loaf (Letham 50). This is where Letham probably loses people. I get the argument for a single loaf. I just don’t know how that will work in a huge church. That said, we should do away with the “chiclets” approach to the Supper, which having no resemblance to bread (or even food), cannot function as a sign.
3) Single cup. Same thing.
4) Wine.
5) Leavened bread. If the Lord’s Supper is not the continuation of the passover, then there is no point in using unleavened bread. Rome, by contrast, needs unleavened bread because the bread, being Jesus’s body, would crumble if it were leavened. Further, the NT consistently uses artos, not azymos.
Letham ends this chapter by commending the frequency of the Lord’s Supper. I am not arguing for weekly communion. I am simply arguing against bad reasons opposing it. Please don’t say it sounds too Catholicky. If you do, give up your Reformed card. You don’t need it anymore.
December 31, 2015
It is a good, brief defence of a Calvinistic approach to communion. In general, I agreed with just about everything the author said, though I thought some of his comments concerning the bread not being pre-sliced were a tad extreme. Still, it is essential reading.
February 27, 2024
A very short treatment on the Lord's Supper from a reformed perspective. This is the second book I have read by Letham and he has quickly become one of my favorite Christian authors. He is generous and gracious when he can be, but firm and unmoving where his convictions don't match others.
I loved this short book. It addresses the different approaches to this church practice, practical advice for implementing, and tackles some of the more controversial issues still being fought over today. One interesting tidbit I learned from this book is that more ink was spilled about this sacrament than any other topic during the reformation, including justification by faith. Highly recommended.
I loved this short book. It addresses the different approaches to this church practice, practical advice for implementing, and tackles some of the more controversial issues still being fought over today. One interesting tidbit I learned from this book is that more ink was spilled about this sacrament than any other topic during the reformation, including justification by faith. Highly recommended.
February 20, 2020
Good exposition of John 6 and it’s relationship to the Lord’s Supper. Also really useful for understanding different perspectives on communion through church history and especially reformed history. As could be expected with a reformed perspective, the author sharply rebukes the Catholic view (sometimes a bit condescending, IMO), but doesn’t really think about the Orthodox perspective much. All in all, a useful read.
April 17, 2020
So far, Letham has been the best I've found when it comes to short, to-the-point presentations on the sacraments. I rated his book on Baptism 5 stars and I can do no less here. In 65 pages (the last 12 are end notes and references) he succinctly but foundationally lays out the reformed view of the Lord's Supper. I can't recommend this book enough.
August 22, 2017
Short little book that helped me think a little deeper about the Lord's Supper. Really learned alot re. the differences between Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Zwinglian, and Reformed views of Communion. His section on practical issues helped me think through some things I had not considered before. My only critique is that he was a bit too dogmatic on certain aspects (e.g. one loaf, one cup, wine only etc.)
May 15, 2024
A great quick intro. Personally, my shift from Baptistic memorialism to faith in the real spiritual presence of Christ as a sacrament to be received often--life changing and nourishing. I do think the critique of Lutheranism is a bit weak, but it's still good overall.
Read
July 6, 2023“Like signposts, which direct us to a destination other than themselves, the sacramental signs point elsewhere. They direct us away from themselves to Christ.”, p. 21
April 18, 2024
Once upon a time I had written a fairly favorable review of this book. But people change, and my opinions of this book have changed quite dramatically.
Letham is a very good Reformed scholar. And that is why I'm surprised to see him reaching some, frankly, bizarre conclusions about the Lord's Supper.
He takes a stance that John 6 is about the Lord's Supper. A disturbing stance, one that Reformed and Lutheran together have recognized to be more akin to a Roman Catholic reading of the passage. Based on what Jesus says in John 6:53 "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you," if this is the Lord's Supper, Letham's position, the Lord's Supper is necessary for salvation (a very problematic conclusion to reach).
He seems to suggest that anyone who adopts a 'spiritual' reading of John 6 is flirting with a neo-Platonic and Zwinglian memorialist view of the Lord's Supper. He says this despite the fact that Augustine, Luther, Calvin among many other non-neo-Platonic and non-Zwinglian memorialist theologians have held that position.
The worst chapter by far is the final one. In this chapter he argues that unless your church is using one single loaf of bread that the minister divides for the congregation during the Lord's Supper and unless it utilizes a common cup, then you are an Enlightenment era individualist who is polluting and violating the meaning of the Lord's Supper (those are all his terms).
These are all conclusions that are well outside the bounds of the Reformed tradition, which has historically seen the mode of the Lord's Supper as indifferent.
There is good in the book. Letham does a helpful job of outlining the different views of the Supper, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Zwinglian, and Calvinist. His discussion of the Calvinist view is helpful. I also appreciate some (though not all) of his textual engagement with Scripture.
However, on these other points, his views are sufficiently problematic that I cannot recommend this title, and I even fear it will introduce profound confusion to those unfamiliar with how Reformed and Presbyterian churches have historically worked through such issues.
Letham is a very good Reformed scholar. And that is why I'm surprised to see him reaching some, frankly, bizarre conclusions about the Lord's Supper.
He takes a stance that John 6 is about the Lord's Supper. A disturbing stance, one that Reformed and Lutheran together have recognized to be more akin to a Roman Catholic reading of the passage. Based on what Jesus says in John 6:53 "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you," if this is the Lord's Supper, Letham's position, the Lord's Supper is necessary for salvation (a very problematic conclusion to reach).
He seems to suggest that anyone who adopts a 'spiritual' reading of John 6 is flirting with a neo-Platonic and Zwinglian memorialist view of the Lord's Supper. He says this despite the fact that Augustine, Luther, Calvin among many other non-neo-Platonic and non-Zwinglian memorialist theologians have held that position.
The worst chapter by far is the final one. In this chapter he argues that unless your church is using one single loaf of bread that the minister divides for the congregation during the Lord's Supper and unless it utilizes a common cup, then you are an Enlightenment era individualist who is polluting and violating the meaning of the Lord's Supper (those are all his terms).
These are all conclusions that are well outside the bounds of the Reformed tradition, which has historically seen the mode of the Lord's Supper as indifferent.
There is good in the book. Letham does a helpful job of outlining the different views of the Supper, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Zwinglian, and Calvinist. His discussion of the Calvinist view is helpful. I also appreciate some (though not all) of his textual engagement with Scripture.
However, on these other points, his views are sufficiently problematic that I cannot recommend this title, and I even fear it will introduce profound confusion to those unfamiliar with how Reformed and Presbyterian churches have historically worked through such issues.
July 3, 2011
Letham, Robert: The Lord’s Supper: Eternal Word in Broken Bread
This is an excellent little primer on the Lord’s Supper and its significance. Letham defends the reformed view of the eucharist as a means of grace through the real spiritual presence view most associate with John Calvin. He spends a lot of time dealing with how Christ is present at the meal and then with what takes place at the supper. He also deals with other issues such as frequency, what is to be used type of bread type of wine and how it is to look in the worship service. I found this book helpful in understanding the reformed position against Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and various forms of Zwingli’s view. It just may have me convinced but still studying.
Year: 2001
Publisher: P&R Publishing
Pages: 75
Boards: Paperback
Binding: glue
Scripture Index: yes
This is an excellent little primer on the Lord’s Supper and its significance. Letham defends the reformed view of the eucharist as a means of grace through the real spiritual presence view most associate with John Calvin. He spends a lot of time dealing with how Christ is present at the meal and then with what takes place at the supper. He also deals with other issues such as frequency, what is to be used type of bread type of wine and how it is to look in the worship service. I found this book helpful in understanding the reformed position against Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and various forms of Zwingli’s view. It just may have me convinced but still studying.
Year: 2001
Publisher: P&R Publishing
Pages: 75
Boards: Paperback
Binding: glue
Scripture Index: yes
July 30, 2018
My eyes were opened to a controversy that I never knew existed. Using one loaf and one cup for communion. I can see how this would be an amazing visual as each member of the body takes a piece from the same loaf or a sip from the same cup showing how unified we are. I agreed with and loved his three reasons for the Lords supper. Memorial - a proclamation of the Gospel - and finally to be spiritually nourished in our union with Christ. I would recommend to read as many see communion solely as a way to remember. I believe as well as the author that it is much more than that and much richer.
April 2, 2016
Letham is one of my favorite authors and this little book only reinforces that position. If only it were available in Spanish.
April 28, 2025
Letham covers a lot of material very quickly in this book. It is not an exhaustive study on the topic but it does effectively articulate the Westminster Standards and historic Reformed doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. As a former Congregationalist now Presbyterian, I appreciated the careful explanation of why a lawfully ordained minister of the word (i.e. a TE in my denomination) rather than another ordained officer (such as an RE), must be the one to administer the Supper (I formerly struggled to see how this was anything less than inferring a priestly class and implying a real sacrifice to participants) but Letham really cleans that all up both scripturally and confessionally. I felt that his treatment of paedocommunion was too brief as this controversy continues to cause division in churches. He reduces the controversy to two streams of error (transubstantiation and memorialism) but the conversation just isn’t that simple.
January 28, 2017
Outstanding work to be prayerfully and thoughtfully wrestled with. The author supports his arguments well and writes clearly. Some may quibble about his applications, but even where I disagreed, I felt the need to revisit my own beliefs and practices! Highly recommended!
January 13, 2019
A solid (and short) book providing an overview of the four main historical views regarding the Lord’s Supper. Letham endorses—rather beautifully—the Real Spiritual Presence view espoused by Calvin and many others in the Reformed tradition.
July 13, 2020
I enjoyed this book. I can't say I am in total agreement, but it challenged me to rethink some things. It would be interesting to know whether the pandemic (COVID-19) might alter his stance on practice.
May 31, 2017
Good little introduction to the topic. Robert hits briefly on the supper in scripture, history, and in practice today.
July 25, 2019
This is a relatively short introduction to the Reformed doctrine of the Lord's Supper. Its strength is its clarity, as well as its conciseness, of thought.
March 23, 2022
Very short but helpful book! Interesting take on the administration of the bread.
May 26, 2022
Letham is succinct and challenging on some points regarding the Lord’s Supper. This is an excellent little book on the doctrine, well worth a read and thoughtful consideration.
November 29, 2015
I have read remarkably little on this subject so I don't have much for comparison. The sacraments are mostly misunderstood and misused in the Church which seems to me to be a very serious thing. This book is very short but contains a great deal of content. Letham discusses things like: the use of wine exclusively, that the Supper is not a Passover meal but better related to the meal in Exodus 24, the Supper as taught in the Confessions and more. This would be an excellent book to read and give to your pastor.
June 9, 2015
This is a very well written book about the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. It helped me understand more deeply how this sacrament uniquely unites us with Christ. Letham builds a strong argument for Christ's preaching on the Lord's Supper in John 6, which is very helpful and often lacking in most people's definition of the Supper.
May 2, 2016
Not sure I agreed with everything in terms of the precise (and very narrow) way to practice it.
But really helped by the biblical foundation chapter and the reminder that the Lord's Supper is not just a memorial and a proclamation but also a participation in Christ's body and blood that deepens our experience of union with him.
But really helped by the biblical foundation chapter and the reminder that the Lord's Supper is not just a memorial and a proclamation but also a participation in Christ's body and blood that deepens our experience of union with him.
September 11, 2011
Great primer on the protestant Eucharist.
December 16, 2012
As boring as it is thin.
March 19, 2015
Too brief, and I felt Letham substantiates his arguments too much from confessions instead of Scripture. Letham also, I believe wrongly discredits or minimizes the Supper's connection to Passover.
February 2, 2009
Quite good, mostly.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews