The Lord’s Supper, or Communion as it is often called, is the second religious rite which churches would be wise to give up.
Not that we would actually get rid of it, but just as with baptism, we can look at the symbolism it had in the days of Jesus and the early church, and then find ways to resurrect and maintain that same symbolism today. So just as with the discussion about baptism, this section will progress in a similar fashion.
First, passages about the Lord’s Supper will be considered, followed by some brief suggestions for how the symbolism behind the Lord’s Supper might better be accomplished today. In this way, we are not doing away with the Lord’s Supper, but are allowing the way it is performed today to die a natural death so that it can be raised to new life and new meaning in the church today.
The Magic of Communion
Just as with baptism, the typical communion service today borders on the mystical and magical. This is especially true in some Catholic and Lutheran circles where the bread and wine inherit the actual (or spiritual) attributes of the body and blood of Jesus. I am not about to get into the complex history and debate surrounding consubstantiation (the Lutheran view) and transubstantiation (the Catholic view), except to say that both, in one way or another, see the bread and wine as becoming something more than just bread and wine, and in this way, the elements become holy and impart grace to the believer.
But let me just say this: If it is true that something mystical does in fact happen to the bread and wine during communion, then the rest of this discussion on the Lord’s Supper is pointless, and things should continue in church as they are. If however, the bread and wine (or juice) are merely symbolic (as held by most other churches), then it is valid to change or modify the symbol so that it better fits our particular time and culture.
No Real Difference among Churches
The primary problem with the way communion is practiced in churches today that believe the Lord’s Supper is a symbolic memorial is that we have adopted the practices of churches which think it is much more than a symbol but have stripped away most of the mystical significance of the elements.
In other words, if you took an outsider and asked them to observe the communion practices of a Baptist church and those of a Lutheran church, they would be hard pressed to discern any real outward difference. Sure, there might be a few minor differences on where and how people get the bread and wine, but other than that, the practices are pretty similar. This is because although most “Protestants” stripped the mystical substance out of their Communion observance, they left pretty much everything else exactly as it was.
In most churches, no matter what kind, the observance of Communion, the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist, are pretty similar. A pastor or a priest reads a few Scriptures and says a few prayers over a bit of bread and wine, and then distributes these bits of bread and wine to those who have gathered. The whole ceremony is usually quite somber and reflective.
So maybe despite all our theological differences, the practical differences are really not that far apart. Yet maybe, in actual practice, we are light years away from what the Lord’s Supper is really all about.
In discussing both baptism and the Lord’s Supper (Communion) with church attenders, I get the feeling that many/most feel that they are required to DO these things to please God or at the very least to avoid displeasing God.
Somehow grace gets lost in the equation and we end up once again with DOING things to please God, which to me smells a lot like works-based salvation, or perhaps somewhat like some of the non-Christian religions wherein one must Do certain things to please the gods and avoid trouble (bad crops, etc.)
We have somewhat different ways of celebrating the Lord’s Supper. I may mention those later, so as not to possibly jump ahead of you here.
I believe your feeling is correct that most people think these things are required to please God and be “true” Christians.
This series on the Lord’s supper is going to be much shorter than my series on baptism, mainly because I have fewer ideas about it. So as we near the end, I would love to hear more about how you celebrate the Lord’s Supper.
How about a guest post?
I always received “flak” from other believers when I raised the issue of using red wine during communion. Some of the comments I received I won’t use here but I was just trying to say that it is what should be used if you wanted to “foolow the rules.” 🙂
Besides, most of the objections came from the weaker brethren in the assembly…the self-righteous types.
Peace,
Mike
You are right. If we really wanted to do what Jesus did, wine would be required. There is a whole history of how we ended up using Grape Juice. And interestingly, this is why Thomas Welch started making his grape juice back in the late nineteenth century!
It has far more meaning when the Jewish passover is taken into account i.e the cup Jesus drank at was the 3rd Cup out of 4: The Cup of Redemption. The 4th Cup is the one he will drink with us at the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. In the passover everything has symbolic meaning, as I’m sure you know, even the stripes on the bread. For me, what I think is more lacking, is the fact that this was Jesus sharing a meal with his disciples. There was wine and a rack of lamb. It was a feast. The bits of bread and thimbles of grape juice was not what Jesus envisaged, I’m sure. In fact, I reckon Jesus was saying everytime you do this (eat and drink with your friends) remember me, that I am there with you.