This Do… September 15, 2007
Posted by Paul Edwards in Communion, Lord's Supper, Sacraments, Theology.trackback
Growing up in the independent Baptist tradition, and having served as a pastor in that tradition for nearly 25 years, I think qualifies me to suggest that Baptists - at least the variety I’m familiar with - have a less than serious attitude toward the Lord’s Supper. Most Baptist congregations - fearing the Sacrament will become a ritual and lose its meaning - observe the Table (or “Communion”) at least once per month, some once per quarter, and then in ways that appear more “tacked on” to the service rather than as an integral part of the worship.
At the church I pastor our own church leaders have begun taking a serious look at the why’s and wherefore’s of the Lord’s Table. We are examining what it means, both Scripturally and historically, and attempting to determine who should take the Lord’s Supper (young children who have made a profession of faith? visitors to the church who share faith in Christ but are not members of the church?), the significance of the elements as a means of grace and for the presence of Jesus, and whether or not the frequency of the Lord’s Table matters. I’m still working my way through this issue, but my heart tells me that the Lord’s Table should be observed at every main gathering of the church where the Word is also preached and expounded. The objections I hear to this have more to do with the trouble we would have to go to each week to prepare for the Table than they do with biblical reasoning. Rather than tack it on once a month in a way that seems more akin to punching a ticket than entering into genuine communion, the serious nature of the Lord’s Table requires a willingness to be inconvenienced by the preparations necessary to observe it on a weekly basis.
There are three views of the nature of the Table: the Roman Catholic view of transubtaniation which says the wafer and wine (juice) BECOME the body and blood of Jesus upon the blessing of the priest (Jesus IS the elements); the Lutheran view of constubstaniation which says that Jesus is present IN and THROUGH the elements, short of actually becoming the elements; and the view held by most Baptists, Assemblies of God, Presbyterians, and non-denominational churches that Jesus is present AT the Table, not in the elements or the elements themselves, but as the host who invites us to share WITH him at the Table. This last view is the one I would hold. John Piper gives four reasons why “This is My Body” does not mean that Jesus actual body and blood materializes in the elements.
Louis W. Accola, a former Lutheran pastor and now Pastor for Spiritual Formation and Pastoral Care at Prince of Peace Lutheran Church in Phoenix, AZ, has written a very pastoral approach to these questions in Given for You: Reflections on the Meaning of the Lord’s Supper
In his appendix he offers Eleven Reflections on The Lord’s Supper which I reproduce here not because I necessarily agree with all of them, but because they are catalysts for my own thinking. I’m including only the points and not Dr. Accola’s extended explanation of each:
- The Lord’s Supper is gospel, not law.
- The Lord’s Supper is a sign.
- The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of renewal.
- The Lord’s Supper is participation in the community of Jesus’ followers.
- The Lord’s Supper is a memorial feast.
- The Lord’s Supper is an act of confession.
- The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of repentance.
- The Lord’s Supper is a sacarament of joy.
- The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of the continued Christian life.
- The Lord’s Supper is the mode of Jesus’ body and blood.
- The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament of hope.
Paul,
I totally agree with how you are being led to do the Lord’s Supper at every church service. I think that is biblical, and what God intended. I think to often protestants are paranoid that if they serve communion to much they will become Catholics :). Keep up the good work.
God Bless,
Colin
I’ve been wrestling with these issues as well. One of my biggest questions currently swirls around the thought of the Lord’s Table being a full meal that highlights the elements of bread and wine and yet for us has been reduced to an undersized wafer and less than a shot glass of grape juice.
Where did all these things change. I’ve got a grasp on how it turned from wine to grape juice, but not so much how the practice of both hospitality and the common meal together has been all but eliminated from typical church life.
Paul,
Thank you for raising this issue. I dealt with one of the points you raised just a couple weeks ago with my 6 1/2 year old. When is a child “ready”? I spoke to my son in great length prior to last Sunday’s service about communion and about what he believes. I tried to be as open ended with my questions as possible during our discussion and was satisfied with his responses, and allowed him to partake in communion. The minister at church seemed suprised when he went to partake in communion, but I feel like I did the right thing here. How am I to know if the professed faith of a 6 year old, is any more genuine than that of an 8 or 10 year old??
I am certainly open to correction here if anyone thinks I’m out of line, but at what point are our children invited to take part?
-Anthony
john_5_24@yahoo.com
Hey Paul,
I’m not convinced that what we do with the thimbleful of grape juice (unfermented, of course) and the hunk of leavened bread (or shard of dry cracker) is necessarily what Jesus meant by “…do THIS in remembrance of me…” What exactly was the “THIS”?
Historically, they were a group of Jews celebrating a Passover meal - the God-given tradition that spoke in type of Christ our Passover lamb whose blood covers our sin. It could be argued (strongly, I think) that THIS is the “as oft as ye do it”… which would be annual in frequency.
Another angle is that they were a band of brothers sharing a meal together in which the food itself was a picture of the provision and sustenance of God, a reminder of Christ as the Bread of Life and as the new wine of the Gospel and/or the Living Water that quenches our thirst spiritually. From this angle, every meal shared with a brother is sacred. It would also explain Paul’s consternation at the wealthier brothers and sisters not sharing what they had with the poorer ones, which was an “unworthy” manner for a Christian.
To me, these are more compelling views of what Paul meant than what we practiced quarterly at TBC or what the church I attend practices each week in a special service. But I never hear anyone questioning what the THIS is, or wondering whether the tradition that has been passed down to “protesters” and “reformers” who cry “soli scriptura” is really what was going on in 1 Corinthians 11.
Instead, it seems to be a blindly-accepted navel-gazing time (”Is there some unconfessed sin that makes me unworthy? I best get it right unless I’m struck down with sickness or death!”), a time in which the church tends to use elements that fly in the face of their specific. deeply-meaningful anti-types (wine and unleavened bread) in favor of less offensive Welch’s grape juice and Wonder bread (as in “I welched on the real meaning and I wonder if it matters?”).
“Do THIS, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me…”
Hmm…
Your buddy as always (even though I never hear from you anymore and you didn’t show up at the Teen Ensemble reunion but you had a good excuse),
May I just put out a two points for consideration.
May I start with Bob Y saying “Do this…” The key to the Lord’s Supper is understanding that means and one other thing, which is “discerning the Lord’s body” (I Cor 11:29).
Two things for consideration:
1) What Paul was asking the Corinthians and us to do is not to remember in the way most of us were taught. Paul was asking us “to do” something “in remembrance” of Jesus. First, why did Paul write both letters to the Corinthians? They were acting like carnal babies (I Cor 3:1-3, II Cor 12:19-13:6) and not treating each other like Christ would (envy, strife, division, etc.). What Paul was saying was this, “You do not discern the Lord’s body (I Cor 11:29) because you treat others in the body of Christ in a carnal way. So the discernment Paul was calling for is stated in I Cor 10:17,
“For we though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.”
WE are the bread of the Lord’s Supper if indeed WE partake (assemble, associate, come together) with Christ in his body and not causing division.
2) So what is Paul asking us “to do?” Jesus’ words are,
“Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”
What Paul is asking them and us is to be broken as Jesus was. Broken of what? Broken of the way we bring division into HIS body (not participating in the re-membrace of His body) with our envy, jealousy, strife, contentions, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambition, backbiting, whispering (gossip), conceits and tumalts. Jesus was obviously not broken of sin. But he was broken in obedience to the Father and we also should be broken in obedience to Jesus, our Lord.
In other words the fullfilment of the Lord’s Supper is to die every day by being broken and taking up of my cross (die to the flesh or sinful nature) every day and walking in love (I Cor 13 & Romans 13:8-14) and to even love my enemies. To spiritually fulfill the Lord’s Supper is to live Christ-like every day. This type of life is Not for physical or spiritual babies but for those who diligently seek to be conformed to the image of Christ and not merely be saved.
In “Rememberence” of me!
For A Thousand Tongues
John and Charles Wesley, while students at Oxford University, formed a religious Holy Club because of their dissatisfaction with the spiritual lethargy at the school.
As a result of their methodical habits of living and studying, they were jokingly called methodists by their fellow students. Upon graduation these young brothers were sent to America by the Anglican Church to help stabilize the religious climate of the Georgia colonies and to evangelize the Indians.
Following a short and unsuccessful ministry in America, the disillusioned Wesleys returned to England, where once again they came under the influence of a group of devout Moravian believers meeting in Aldersgate, London.
In May, 1738, both of these brothers had a spiritual heart-warming experience, realizing that though they had been zealous in the Church’s ministry, neither had ever personally accepted Christ as Savior nor had known the joy of their religious faith as did their Moravian friends.
From that time the Wesleys’ ministry took on a new dimension and power.
Both John and Charles were endued with an indefatigable spirit, usually working fifteen to eighteen hours each day. It is estimated that they traveled a quarter of a million miles throughout Great Britain, mostly on horseback, while conducting more than 40,000 public services.
Charles alone wrote no less than 6,500 hymn texts, with hardly a day or an experience passing without its crystallization into verse.
“O For a Thousand Tongues” was written in 1749 on the occasion of Charles’s eleventh anniversary of his own Aldergate conversion experience. It is thought to have been inspired by a chance remark by Peter Bohler, an influential Moravian leader, who exclaimed:
“Had I a thousand tongues, I would praise Christ Jesus with all of them.”
The hymn originally had nineteen stanzas and when published was entitled, “For the Anniversary Day of One’s Conversion.”
—Kenneth Osbeck
++++++++++
O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing
(1) O for a thousand tongues to sing
My great Redeemer’s praise,
The glories of my God and King,
The triumphs of His grace!
(2) My gracious Master and my God,
Assist me to proclaim,
To spreads through all the earth abroad
The honors of Thy name.
(3) Jesus! the name that charms our fears,
That bids our sorrows cease,
‘Tis music in the sinner’s ears,
‘Tis life and health and peace.
(4) He breaks the power of cancelled sin,
He sets the prisoner free;
His blood can make the foulest clean,
His blood availed for me.
(5) Hear Him, ye deaf; His praise, ye dumb.
Your loosened tongues employ;
Ye blind, behold Your Savior come;
And leap, ye lame, for joy!
Bob
Alberto’s B.Y.?
Don,
Quite.
Miss ya.
B.
Mutual!
Remember, no dinner is complete without some “post dinner favors”.
TTFN
1 Corinthians 11
17Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.
18For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
19For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
20When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper.
21For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.
22What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
23For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.
30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
31For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
32But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
33Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
34And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.
What the text does say.
1: When we do “this” it is to be in remembrance of Him
2: The “this” in vr 24 is the drinking of the cup
3: The “this” in vr 25 is the eating of the bread
4: The eating and drinking shows the Lords death till he comes back
And finally, note the similar terminology in Matthew 26:39
“…..Father, if it be possible, let this ‘cup’ pass from me;….”
Brethren, when ever we do “this”, it is sacred!
Please consider this concerning the bread:
Bread:
When Jesus said, “This is my body…” he was looking forward to the revealing that “we” are his body. This is how we properly “discern the Lord’s body” from I Corinthians 11:29 and partake worthily. This is very clear with what Paul says in I Corinthians 10:17, “For WE though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of the one bread.” The bread of communion is US.
Cup:
You say in 2: above that this is the “cup” that we drink. I agree, and if I drink that cup we will be broken. So what is that cup? Just wine? You say the cup refers to Jesus death on the cross.
Consider first Communion comes from the Greek “koinonia” which also means to participate (NIV) or partnership. This partnership or my participation is clear from Matthew 20:20-28. Jesus asked Zebedee’s two sons, concerning sitting on Jesus’ right and left hand, in his kingdom, if they could drink of the same “cup” he would drink of and be “baptized” with the same baptism. They both answered, “We are able.” Jesus said, “You will indeed drink my cup and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with…”
The cup of participation is being crucified with him and is what Jesus referred to as taking up our cross daily in Luke 9:23-26.
Paul said this in the opening statement: “The Lord’s Supper is participation in the community of Jesus’ followers.” This is properly “discerning the Lord’s body” and the bread of which we partake.
May we broaden our vision (ability to see) of the Lord’s Supper that Paul is really addressing how they treat one another (I Corinthians 3:1-3 and II Corinthians 12:19 - 13). This same ill-treatment and division of Jesus’ body is still present today. Paul’s “better way” was to walk in agape love (I Corinthians 13 & 14) which requires the death (crucifixion) of the sinful nature (Romans 6 thru 7).
This daily living for Jesus to fulfill the Lord’s Supper will never become boring or common-place. True participation and covenant partnership in the Lord’s Supper is the only way to accomplish God’s plan and purpose on this earth.
Love and peace in Christ,
Glenn
Glen
I recall an old country preacher describing the Word of God and he likened it to a corn field. He said that a properly planted corn crop would have hundreds of symmetrically planted rows and no matter what angle you would stand at, the rows all appeared to be lined up. Such is the sacred page of our discussion. No matter where we stand there is always a fresh view, yet still in line with the purposes of the Almighty. I suppose this is because, His ways are not our ways. Who can know the mind of God? I have seen through the years, many texts preached on and plowed through from different perspectives, yet I always receive something new. His ways are to marvelous and wonderful for ‘this’ sinner to grasp all there is, in their entirety. I am grateful, as the dog was, just to sit at the foot of the table and glean some scraps from my Master. I believe this also is a picture of what is meant by Hebrews 4:12
” For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”
Good input.
God bless you.
Don
Blessings in Jesus name
Paul and Bob Y (post #4)
I presented some different thoughts on “this do” but haven’t heard anything on my post 5 (9/20) and 11 (10/1).
Any thoughts ?