Communion

I am by no means a expert on communion. However, I have mulled over the concept, as I mull over many Scriptural concepts. It could be said that I am an expert muller. When someone says to me, "mull it over", I think, "ha! Done and doing!" Anyway, I have come to a conclusion about the Lord's Supper.

I think we're doing it wrong.

It seems to me like the small bit of cracker/bread, or the teeny cup of juice/wine, is kind of a diminishing of the concept of communion. I believe communion should be a full meal, where believers gather together to eat together, pray together, cry and laugh together, talk to one another about Jesus, remember all that He has done for us. Here are a few reasons for my belief:

When Jesus implemented communion, He did so over a meal.
And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, "Take; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. (Mark 14:22-24)

Jesus and the disciples were eating the Passover meal together. They did not stop off and partake of little bits. It was within the context of the meal, and the symbolism had (and has) greater meaning than this post can cover.

However, this is the first thing that made me think that communion ought to be a full meal together: Jesus did it that way.

The gathered believers in the Corinthian church were becoming "drunk" off of the wine, and eating their fill.
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? (1 Corinthians 10:16a)

When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. What! Do you not have houses 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 commend you in this? No, I will not. (1 Corinthians 11:20-22)

The Corinthians were perverting and abusing the Lord's table, which, according to the passage above, seems more like a full potluck meal than anything. Those who had food, ate it, while the poorer believers among them went without. Paul says here, according to John MacArthur, "if they intended to selfishly indulge themselves, they might as well have stayed at home."

Communion was meant for partaking together in remembering Christ. How could the richer church members deny the poorer members their right to partake in the remembrance of their Saviour?

But I am more intent upon highlighting what I mentioned earlier: when you read 1 Corinthians 11:20-22, does it not look to you like a meal? How could people become drunk if they had nothing more than a sip of wine? How could "going ahead with his own meal" equate to "eating a piece of bread". I don't know about you, but I'd still be hungry.

Question: what about "let him eat at home"? 
It seems to me that the question involves the idea of discipline and discernment, which Paul talks about from verse 23-32 of 1 Corinthians 11. Here is what it says:

So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another -if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home-so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. (1 Corinthians 11:33-34)

This, to me, does not negate the idea that communion ought to be a shared meal. Rather, it seems to be pointing out the importance of focusing on Christ while gathering together. If someone is ravenous, they will not be dwelling upon the sacrifice of Christ Jesus. They will be dwelling upon how hungry they are, and how delicious the food smells, and how much of it they can get at the expense of others, profaning the name of God as it says in Proverbs 30:


Two things I ask of you;
deny them not to me before I die:
Remove far from me falsehood and lying;
give me neither poverty nor riches;
feed me with the food that is needful for me,
lest I be full and deny you
and say, “Who is the LORD?”
or lest I be poor and steal
and profane the name of my God.
(Proverbs 30:7-9)

Whether hunger or gluttony, when we head to extremes we forget the Lord and profane His name. Better to eat at home, so that when you gather with fellow believers, you can remember what Jesus has done for you.


Practically, remembrance of Christ and what He has accomplished for us ought to be dwelt upon every time we gather for a meal, because we ought to be remembering what He has done for us at all times.
After all, what is communion but a fellowshipping, an exchange of intimate thoughts and feelings, a relationship of discourse? What better place to do that than over an actual meal? Some of the best discussions I have had with family and friends have been over the dinner table. There is an automatic communion involved with eating together. Such a communion is only heightened by the fact that it is believers eating together, reminding one another of the grace and love of Jesus Christ.

"How odd would it seem to have been one of the members of the early church, shepherded by Paul or Peter, and to come forward a thousand years to see people standing in line or sitting quietly in a large building that looked like a schoolroom or movie theater to take Communion.  How different it would seem from the way they did it, sitting around somebody's living room table, grabbing a hunk of bread and holding their own glass of wine, exchanging stories about Christ, perhaps laughing, perhaps crying, consoling each other, telling one another that the Person who had exploded into their hearts was indeed the Son of God, their Bridegroom, come to tell them who they were, come to mend the broken relationship, come to marry them in a spiritual union more beautiful, more intimate than anything they could know on earth."

~ Donald Miller