The Lord’s Supper: The Experts Weigh In

John Mark Hicks recently posted some material on the Lord’s Supper that’s very pertinent to this series, which I thought I’d wrapped up a few weeks ago. The post summarizes a scholarly paper he presented at the 2010 Stone-Campbell Conference.

He writes in the post,

Given the following assumptions, some time during the early to mid second century the Eucharist was separated from the Agape. My assumptions are:

1. There is a consensus among New Testament scholars that the Eucharist was originally conducted in the context of an Agape

Communion Meditation/Election: John 6:44 and the Passover, Part 4

Epilogue — The Watch

(Mark 14:33-34)  He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled. 34 “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death,” he said to them. “Stay here and keep watch.”

(Mark 14:37)  Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Simon,” he said to Peter, “are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour?

The Jews celebrated Passover by not only taking a meal, but by staying up all night afterwards to “watch” in obedience to —

(Exo 12:42)  Because the LORD kept vigil that night to bring them out of Egypt, on this night all the Israelites are to keep vigil to honor the LORD for the generations to come.

After the Israelites ate the Passover meal, they stayed up all night in imitation of God. Those who ate the lamb and painted its blood on the doorposts were passed over by the death angel.

The Lord’s Supper: Reaching Some Conclusions, Part 2

“Cup” and “loaf” are parts of a meal

It helps, I think, to realize that a cup of wine and loaf of bread was standard for First Century meals, especially meals shared with guests. To us, “cup of wine” or “loaf of bread” sounds like something added to the meal or taken separately from the meal, whereas to First Century ears, these words sounded like courses of the meal — rather as “salad” and “dessert” would sound to us.

Imagine reading this —

The Lord’s Supper: Reaching Some Conclusions, Part 1

The Churches of Christ have defined themselves by their insistence on weekly communion. Our members will come late and leave early, but they’ll be certain to take the Lord’s Supper. And we have members who’ll sit at home, taking communion by themselves, rather than condone the sins of the only church in town. We are so big on communion that we offer it twice on Sundays and take it into the homes of the shut ins.

But we treat the communion as the least important part of our service — lavishing funds on paid preachers and song leaders and focusing the service on the sermon and invitation. Rarely do we focus a service on the communion.

We’ve sucked the fellowship — the love — out of an event that’s supposed to draw us closer to each other and break down social, racial, and economic barriers. We’ve found so many rules about how not to do it that all we can do is sit there silently.

The Lord’s Supper: The First Day

Closely tied to the Eucharist is the weekly meeting on Sundays. Of course, we see in Acts 2 that the early church met daily. There’s no mention of a weekly gathering in Acts until much later. Indeed, we only see a reference to a meeting on the first day in Acts 20. Clearly, the church in Troas met on Sundays, in the evening, although it’s less than clear whether this was according to the Jewish reckoning (our Saturday night) or the Roman (our Sunday night).

John also mentions a couple of Sunday gatherings.

(John 20:19)  On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”

(John 20:26)  A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”

While the synoptics note that Jesus was raised on the first day, John makes a point to note that these two post-resurrection appearances of Jesus took place on the first day. However, John makes no mention of a meal, breaking of bread, or planned worship either day. But the disciples appear to have been meeting on Sundays.

The Lord’s Supper: Further from the Early Church

An excellent source book on early church practice is Everett Ferguson’s Early Christians Speak, vol. 1. (The original appears to be out of print, although Early Christians Speak – Vol. 2 can still be had. Most Church of Christ libraries have a copy.) Ferguson is a world-class expert in the Patristic literature, a professor at Abilene Christian, and a strong advocate for a cappella worship. He writes,

Jesus instituted the memorial of himself at the last supper in the context of a meal. It seems that a meal provided the most convenient context in which the Lord’s supper was observed by early Christians. … The Didache [late First Century] also sets the eucharist in the context of a common religious meal. The Roman governor Pliny [ca. AD 110-115] places the Christian gathering for a common meal at a separate time from the “stated” religious assembly.

Early Christians Speak, p. 130.

The Lord’s Supper: The Early Church

I offer some material from the uninspired writings of early Christians to prove that I’m not crazy — not to establish a theology of the Lord’s Supper. In fact, we in the Churches of Christ are bad to reach into the Patristics to lock down a point we can’t prove from the scriptures themselves. We — quite literally — fill scriptural silences from the Patristics, which I find wrong. No commandment or prohibition can be built on uninspired sources.

The Lord’s Supper as described in the Didache (about 100 AD) is summarized in H J DeJonge, The Early History of the Lord’s Supper.

The Lord’s Supper: John Mark Hicks on the Communion

John Mark Hicks has posted a series of articles on the scriptural roots of communion, and he’s provided some very helpful observations. We begin with his article Breaking Bread in Luke-Acts VI: General Observations.

The church continues the ministry of Jesus. … Jesus sat at table with saint and sinner, insider and outsider. … [They] continued this practice–they broke bread as a community and with outsiders. The church continues to break bread on the ground of what Jesus did, not on the ground of what the church did.

It’s a mistake to view the bread-breaking passage as being all about a Sunday morning ceremony. We best remember Jesus by living as Jesus lived, which includes sharing table fellowship with saints and sinners. This is love.

The Lord’s Supper: 1 Corinthians

Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians assume communion to be normative for that congregation.

(1 Cor 10:16-17)  Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.

(1 Cor 11:20-34)  When you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, 21 for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. 22 Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!

The Lord’s Supper: Acts

Luke records that the disciples broke bread together daily.

(Acts 2:46-47)  Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

E. M. Blaiklock writes in the Tyndale commentary on Acts,

Thirdly, fellowship is the keynote. The ‘love-feast’ (breaking of bread, 42) includes the Lord’s Supper, but was later separated from it. Eating together, especially in the East, has always been a prime sign of fellowship. There is perhaps room for the revival of ‘the common meal’.

The Lord’s Supper: The Bread of Life

Oddly enough, John’s Gospel does not record the institution of the Lord’s Supper, but it does contain an extended speech by Jesus that evokes the Lord’s Supper —

(John 6:53-56)  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.”

Most believe Jesus is speaking of the Lord’s Supper. Leon Morris, in the New International Commentary on John, argues that Jesus is telling us what the Lord’s Supper communicates. It’s not that eating the bread and drinking the wine gives eternal life. Rather, the Lord’s Supper symbolizes that which gives eternal life —

The Lord’s Supper: The Passover

The Synoptics teach that the Lord’s Supper was instituted as part of a Passover meal. Jesus ate hundreds of meals with his apostles. Why was the Passover the meal he used?

Well, there are several reasons, all steeped in the purposes of the Passover meal. In particular, though, the Biblical commandments concerning the Passover stress the importance of remembering.

(Exo 12:24-27a)  “Obey these instructions as a lasting ordinance for you and your descendants. 25 When you enter the land that the LORD will give you as he promised, observe this ceremony. 26 And when your children ask you, ‘What does this ceremony mean to you?’ 27 then tell them, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the LORD, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt and spared our homes when he struck down the Egyptians.'”

(Exo 13:3)  Then Moses said to the people, “Commemorate this day, the day you came out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery, because the LORD brought you out of it with a mighty hand. Eat nothing containing yeast.”

Of course, what was remembered is two things — the fact the Israelites were spared the wrath of God by the sacrifice of a lamb — and the fact that they were freed from slavery. You see, the Passover is the source of much of the imagery about our salvation in the New Testament.

The Lord’s Supper: The Daily Sacrifice

(Exo 29:38-46)  “This is what you are to offer on the altar regularly each day: two lambs a year old. 39 Offer one in the morning and the other at twilight. 40 With the first lamb offer a tenth of an ephah of fine flour mixed with a quarter of a hin of oil from pressed olives, and a quarter of a hin of wine as a drink offering. 41 Sacrifice the other lamb at twilight with the same grain offering and its drink offering as in the morning–a pleasing aroma, an offering made to the LORD by fire.

42 “For the generations to come this burnt offering is to be made regularly at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting before the LORD. There I will meet you and speak to you; 43 there also I will meet with the Israelites, and the place will be consecrated by my glory.

44 “So I will consecrate the Tent of Meeting and the altar and will consecrate Aaron and his sons to serve me as priests. 45 Then I will dwell among the Israelites and be their God. 46 They will know that I am the LORD their God, who brought them out of Egypt so that I might dwell among them. I am the LORD their God.

The daily sacrifice of wine, blood, and flour mixed with oil, was given to assure the Israelites that God was present among them and that he had chosen them to be his people so that he could be their God.

The Lord’s Supper: The Blood of the Covenant

Let’s go back and look a little more deeply into what Jesus actually said when he instituted the Lord’s Supper.

(Mat 26:26-29)  While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

The Lord’s Supper: Introduction and the Synoptic Accounts

I was typing away on this series on moral and positive law and figured I needed to say something more specific about the Lord’s Supper. After all, if there’s any positive command that can be defended, surely it’s the Lord’s Supper. I mean, Jesus told us to have a weekly ceremony on each Sunday to eat a crumb of unleavened bread and drink a sip of grape juice, didn’t he?

So anyway, the post got just way out of hand. I mean as I got into the scriptures, it just got longer and longer … and now it’s its own series.

I’ve always had a special place in my heart for the communion. I probably enjoy writing the occasional communion meditation as much as anything I do here.

Faith Lessons by Ray Vander Laan: The Fifth Cup

The Lord’s Supper was instituted as part of a Passover meal. The Passover, of course, celebrates God’s deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage.

By the time of Jesus, the meal was celebrated with four cups of wine, each reflecting a promise of God made to Moses and Israel at the beginning of their delverance —

(Exo 6:5-8)  “Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians are enslaving, and I have remembered my covenant.

6 “Therefore, say to the Israelites: ‘I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment. 7 I will take you as my own people, and I will be your God. Then you will know that I am the LORD your God, who brought you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. 8 And I will bring you to the land I swore with uplifted hand to give to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob. I will give it to you as a possession. I am the LORD.'”

RVL finds that at least three of the cups were recorded in the Gospels’ account of the Last Supper.

Reruns: Adding Fried Chicken to the Lord’s Supper

Posted on March 8, 2007

It’s often been said that if we could add instruments to our singing, then we could add fried chicken to the Lord’s Supper. But I’ve been doing some reading, and it seems that the early church did, in fact, add fried chicken the Lord’s supper (well, lamb was more likely, but you get the point). In fact, they added an entire meal, the equivalent of fried chicken, mashed potatoes, and banana pudding.

They had a great example to follow. Jesus added, at least, lamb and bitter herbs. We know this because he instituted communion as part of the Passover celebration, which is a full meal (Num. 9:11).

Luke describes the Last Supper in more detail than the other Gospels. In chapter 22, Luke describes Jesus blessing the cup, first, and then the bread. Luke then records,

(Luke 22:20) In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.”

Hence, the second cup, which is the cup we emulate in our services, was separated from the bread by a supper — a full meal. Jesus could have done this in any order he wished (he was Jesus, after all), and Luke could have edited the account to omit the meal, as the other Gospel writers did. But I think Luke wanted us to read about the meal, because the common meal was also an important institution to the early church.

Jude 12 talks about “love feasts” celebrated by the early Christians. We know from history that many early Christian churches had weekly or even daily common meals called the love feast. Many took the Lord’s Supper as part of the common meal. The meal served multiple purposes. It allowed Christians to share with those in need, it allowed a profound sense of community to form, and it made the Lord’s Supper truly a supper.

Everett Ferguson writes,

Jesus instituted the memorial of himself at the last supper in the context of a meal. It seems that a meal provided the most convenient context in which the Lord’s supper was observed by early Christians. … The Didache [late First Century] also sets the eucharist in the context of a common religious meal. The Roman governor Pliny [ca. AD 110-115] places the Christian gathering for a common meal at a separate time from the “stated” religious assembly.

Early Christians Speak, p. 130. The love feast was an important part of the early church. We know from 1 Cor. 11 that it’s not essential, but we know from Jude that it was permitted, even honored. And the historical evidence is nearly as old as the New Testament.

This fact destroys a number of false assumptions about the Lord’s Supper. First, it’s nowhere required to be in an auditorium. The early church usually met in private homes — with full kitchens and dining room tables ready for serving food. May we worship with kitchens and dining halls? How could we not and honor the teachings of Jude? Indeed, the Lord’s Supper was, in fact, very often a supper. I’m confident the early church would have upset had there been no kitchens available!

Second, communion is not required to be quiet, somber, and ritualistic. The Jewish Passover is often a lively celebration. Neither is communion required to be part of a formal worship event, between an opening prayer and a closing prayer. Rather, the early church often conducted the love feast, including communion, as an event separate from the formal assembly. The social element was considered among the dearest features of the event. People talked and enjoyed one another’s company.

Third, obviously, our theology prohibiting additions is just wrong. Yes, we may add a full meal to the Lord’s Supper. Of course, we can’t add evil things to the assembly. Neither may we add things that frustrate the God-given purpose of the assembly. But plainly permission was given to do the expedient thing. Therefore, we need to seriously reconsider those arguments that assume that additions are always wrong. They’re not.

Finally, the whole “five acts of worship” idea clearly contradicts both Biblical and early Christian teaching. The love feast was an act of worship but an optional one. Therefore, there was no set number of “acts.” We made the rule up out of whole cloth.

Reruns: On Communion Meditations

On Communion Meditations

Posted on February 18, 2007

I’m planning on posting some thoughts on the Lord’s Supper, suitable for use as communion meditations. But first, a few thoughts on how to do the communion better.

The Lord’s Supper has always been important to the Churches of Christ. We take communion weekly. It’s so important to us that we often offer communion on Sunday nights for those unable to take it that morning, and we often take communion to our shut in members so they can share in it despite being unable to come to church.

Weekly communion was unquestionably the practice of the early church. Quarterly communion did not begin until the Reformation. I think it’s the proper practice, as well. But a weekly communion makes it difficult to keep the ceremony fresh and vital.

Communion Meditation: The Blood of the Covenant, Part 2

(Exo 29:38-46)  “This is what you are to offer on the altar regularly each day: two lambs a year old. 39 Offer one in the morning and the other at twilight. 40 With the first lamb offer a tenth of an ephah of fine flour mixed with a quarter of a hin of oil from pressed olives, and a quarter of a hin of wine as a drink offering. 41 Sacrifice the other lamb at twilight with the same grain offering and its drink offering as in the morning–a pleasing aroma, an offering made to the LORD by fire.

42 “For the generations to come this burnt offering is to be made regularly at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting before the LORD. There I will meet you and speak to you; 43 there also I will meet with the Israelites, and the place will be consecrated by my glory.

44 “So I will consecrate the Tent of Meeting and the altar and will consecrate Aaron and his sons to serve me as priests. 45 Then I will dwell among the Israelites and be their God. 46 They will know that I am the LORD their God, who brought them out of Egypt so that I might dwell among them. I am the LORD their God.

The daily sacrifice of wine, blood, and flour mixed with oil, was given to assure the Israelites that God was present among them and that he had chosen them to be his people so that he could be their God.

The daily sacrifice was blood, flour mixed with oil (bread), and wine. At communion, we provide the bread and the wine. God has already provided the blood. But because it’s God who provides the blood, it’s not our sacrifice to make. Rather, God has already made the sacrifice “once for all.” We bring the rest of the offering, no longer for atonement, but as a thanks offering.

(Heb 7:27)  Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

For Christians, forgiveness is not an event repeated day after day. It’s “once for all.” We no longer need to be forgiven over and over. But we do need to be reminded.

(Heb 9:19-22)  When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

The “blood of the covenant” is God taking a blood oath, promising to keep his word to his people — to be their God and to honor his promises to them.

(Mat 26:26-28)  While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

When we take this bread and drink this fruit of the vine, we aren’t buying another week’s worth of salvation. That’s not the point.

Nor is this an ordinance — a command — to be obeyed on penalty of damnation.

No, this is God’s reminder to us. God says, in effect, I promised to forgive your sins. I took a blood oath. I meant it. And every week, I want to remind you of my promise and the awful price I paid to honor it. Don’t ever forget that I have promised to forgive your sins, to dwell among you, and to make you holy.

The Lord’s Supper is not about our earning salvation by keeping a command. It’s about God assuring us that he’s already taken care of that for us — and promising, once again, that he’ll be true to his word at the end of all things.

We aren’t here because to skip church damns. We’re here to receive a gift from the hand of God himself. We are here to be reminded that God is our God and we are God’s people — and that he will keep his promises.

[prayer for bread, thanking God for his generosity and this reminder of his faithfulness]

[prayer for cup, thanking God for the blood he shed to make it all possible and pledging to alway remember]

I don’t know why we sometimes introduce the offering by saying it’s “separate and apart” from the Lord’s Supper. It’s not. It’s more of a “now, therefore.”

Because God has been so unspeakably generous to us, now, therefore, we strive to be generous to others, too — just like God. Generous with our time, our hearts, and even our money. Not so that we’ll somehow buy our way out of heaven, but because giving as God gives is to be like God, indeed, to be whom he created us to be.

[prayer for the offering, asking that God accept our thanks for all he has done for us.]

Communion Meditations: Discerning the Body

In a minute, I’m going to read two brief excerpts from 1 Cor 11.

The church at Corinth was abusing the Lord’s Supper. Members were being thoughtless toward one another, particularly treating the poorer members badly. Paul responded by saying,

(1 Cor 11:26, 29)  For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. … 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.

The commentators like to argue over what “body of the Lord” refers to. What are we told to recognize? I think that there are multiple meanings here.

Traditionally, we’ve been told to reflect on the death of Jesus, which is true, of course. Thus, we were taught that “body” is the literal, physical body of Christ hung on the cross for our sins. And I think that’s true.

But others argue that “body” refers to the congregation — the body of Christ. After all, the problem Paul was trying to resolve was the congregation’s rudeness to each other and divisiveness. He wanted them to recognize that they are each part of the same body — a body that should be united in love. And I think that’s certainly true as well.

And there’s another important thought here we get to through the phrase “proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” What is it about the Lord’s Supper that says “Jesus is dead”? And why the emphasis on Jesus’ death rather than his resurrection — when Paul later says in 1 Cor 15 that the resurrection is what gives us our hope.

(1 Cor 15:14)  And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.

At first (and second) glance, it seems strange to focus on the death of Jesus here. It’s his death AND resurrection that saves us, isn’t it?

But we are taught that when we were baptized, we died to sin.

(Rom 6:2-3)  By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

Here’s the point. We declare the death of Jesus not just by meeting in a building away from most other people — we proclaim his death by dying to sin. Our lives declare the death of Jesus — not just the eating of this crust and sipping of this juice. Indeed, if we do those things and yet don’t give up sin, we make a mockery of his death.

The way we proclaim Jesus’ death is by being the body. We discern the body by recognizing that we are the body. We are Jesus incarnate on the earth. We are his body, called to do what Jesus did while his first body was on earth — the mission of God: declaring the good news of the kingdom, doing works of compassion, and making disciples for our rabbi.

Therefore, the church — this community, this temple of the Holy Spirit — does not truly recognize the body until we see that we are not just united into the church, but we have been joined into the body to do the mission of God on earth, to continue what Jesus began. That’s recognizing the body. You see, “the body” is both the body of Christ and the church — today, they are the same — but “body of Christ” isn’t just a metaphor. It’s a job description.

Therefore, when we take this spiritual meal together, we are strengthening out connection to the body. We are re-committing to the mission Jesus gave us. And we’re recommitting to do that mission as a body — with each part doing its work as part of the work of the body. And by becoming more and more what we were called to be — and showing it our assemblies and throughout the rest of the week, too — we proclaim the death of Jesus. We show that we have died because he has died.

And this is why take this meal together — because being together shows the world how Jesus changes lives creating a holy community that shows the world who Jesus is and what he did.

Bow with me —