Dooyeweerd Against Nominalism and thoughts on the Eucharist

“An ordinance of creation is not to be viewed, as nominalism taught, as a divinely despotic command holding only for the lower area of “nature,” and to be obeyed merely externally, but as a wholly, wise, and perfectly good ordinance of the Highest Majesty, without whom the created cosmos would fall apart in utter chaos.” Herman Dooyeweerd, The Christian Idea of the State, 18-19.

I know very little about Nominalism as a system of thought. I think something about the system can be understood by the common phrase people say about people who are members of a church but don’t seem to have a lively faith in God. We call them nominal Christians. Christians in name only, but not in substance. Christians externally, but not inwardly (as if we could truly know that). I don’t think we are completely ignorant to what’s going on inside a persons heart, but of course, we can be deceived. We can even deceive ourselves. We can know something of the heart because the Word of God tells that out of the heart proceeds the issues of life. We are told that we would know them by their fruits. We can learn something about what’s going on inside a person by what they do on the outside. Scripture also says that out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. However, nominalism contributed to a dualistic way of thinking as Dooyeweerd expressed above. However, the Scriptures do not allow for nominalism. The invisible universals are just as much real as something material. An example could be that no one is able to have knowledge of an abstract concept completely disconnected from the senses. We learn of abstract concepts through listening to someone speak to us, through reading a book with our eyes, etc. Dualism doesn’t work.

What might this have to do with God’s using the Eucharist to transform us into the image of His Son. I believe it adds to the understanding that what we do on earth affects our inward man as well. If the Scriptures say that the bread and the cup of blessing in communion with the body and blood of Christ, then when we properly partake of the Eucharist in faith, we are changed, by the power of the Spirit, through union with Christ. The new heart principle of life in us is growing and changing from one degree of glory to another. The only it could not is if the Spirit is not working faith in the recipient. If I’m understanding correctly, nominalism would oppose any union with Christ in the bread and wine. Christ is a universal title of something that doesn’t have any real existence. Naming the bread and wine the body and blood is irrational. Yet, Scripture does. Christians who think the bread and wine can’t in any real sense be communion with the body and blood of Christ have succumbed to the tendancies of nominalism.

I have more to learn.

These thoughts are a sort of stream of consciousness. I welcome critique and constructive feedback. God bless.