union with Christ as the special fruit of the Lord's Supper

Godly souls can gather great assurance and delight from this Sacrament; in it they have a witness of our growth into one body with Christ such that whatever is his may be called ours. As a consequence, we may dare assure ourselves that eternal life, of which he is the heir, is ours; and that the Kingdom of Heaven, into which he has already entered, can no more be cut off from us than from him; again, that we cannot be condemned for our sins, from whose guilt he has absolved us, since he willed to take them upon himself as if they were his own. This is the wonderful exchange which, out of his measureless benevolence, he has made with us; that, becoming Son of man with us, he has made us sons of God with him; that, by his descent to earth, he has prepared an ascent to heaven for us; that, by taking on our mortality, he has conferred his immortality upon us; that, accepting our weakness, he has strengthened us by his power; that, receiving our poverty unto himself, he has transferred his wealth to us; that, taking the weight of our iniquity upon himself (which oppressed us), he has clothed us with his righteousness.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 2, ed. John T. McNeill (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 1361-1362. (4.17.2)

God's law is not oppressive

The modern charge, that Christians who follow God's law are "puritanical," shows the unbeliever's hatred of God's law in that he uses a term that's commendatory (pure) to be derogatory (oppressive). We should strive to be "puritans" (i.e., pure) in our moral values. The law is not a constraint upon those who would act righteously, but only upon those who do evil deeds: "Law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious" (1 Tim. 1:9)

The absolute principles of morality are designed to curb the evil desires of the sinner's heart. God's law condemns the "societal good" of those cultures that practiced genocide, cannibalism, human sacrifice, pederasty, widow immolation, or community suicides--and the more mundane evils in our own culture.

Greg L. Bahnsen, Pushing the Antithesis, (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2007) 181.

engaged in self-contradiction

Even those who deny moral absolutes have at least one moral absolute: "You should not believe there are moral absolutes. You should believe there is morality." In effect, they contradictorily have a morality about no morality They say you should ("should" entails moral obligation or duty) believe there are no moral absolutes. This is illustrated by the ethics professor committed to moral relativism and denying moral absolutes, who will absolutely demand that his students not cheat on his exams.

This is the moral point of view of fallen man. As you have learned from worldview analysis, worldviews necessarily involve metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical considerations. Therefore, the reason that those who demand no moral absolutes are engaged in self-contradiction is because moral absolutes are inescapable.

Greg L. Bahnsen, Pushing the Antithesis: the apologetic methodology of Greg L. Bahnsen, (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2007), 173.