"The Lord's Supper is the world in miniature;
it has cosmic significance. Within it we find clues
to the meaning of all creation and all history,
to the nature of God and the nature of man,
to the mystery of the world, which is Christ.
It is not confined to the first day,
for its power fills seven. Though the table
stands at the center, its effects stretch out
to the four corners of the earth."-Peter Leithart
At the present time, my church is looking into the issue of how frequently we should observe the Lord's Table. The current practice of my church is once a month, on the second Sunday. The reason I raised the issue is because I favor a weekly observance of the Lord's supper. What I want to do briefly in this article is to give a couple of reasons supporting weekly communion. First, the Lord's supper is more than a simple memorial reminding us of what the Messiah has done for us. It includes that, but it is more. It belongs solely to the church because it is who we are. In it, we celebrate and we mourn. It is worship reiterated. It is the invisible made visible. It is our faith made tangible. For all these things and more, the supper is for us. Secondly, the Lord's table is a means of grace whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of His mediation. If this be the case that the Lord, through the supper, communicates to us His saving benefits, then wouldn't it make sense to observe the Lord's supper often? If the Lord, through the supper, strengthens our faith, confirms our election, and nurishes our souls, then wouldn't wisdom lead us to conclude that a more regular observance of such a meal is beneficial to the body of Christ?
Some may object by stating that a weekly observance will make the supper "ritualistic", become less special of an occasion, and dull. This is a valid and common objection to weekly communion. But to this point, my reply is that all good things lose its wonder after much exposure, not because those things aren't good enough but because we, the observer, are fallen and we live in a fallen world. Is it not the case that prayer and the word, which are also means of grace, often become dull and ritualistic because we engage it regularly? And yet, we wouldn't think twice about relegating them to a monthly practice.
3 comments:
Let me clarify a couple of things. First, my purpose in writing is not to disturb the unity of the church or impose my preference on others. What I hope to achieve is simply generate conversation among ourselves concerning this topic in order that we may gain a greater appreciation and understanding for the Lord's supper. If all we did was switch to weekly communion without having the understanding of why we did so, then my purpose is not served. If we decided to continue with our normal practice as more beneficial, having worked through the issues and come to a better understanding, then my purpose is served. Second, the Bible is silent concerning the frequency of observance. I am not arguing that the Bible teaches weekly communion. It is not wrong to have the Lord's supper once a month, it is not wrong to have it once a year. What I am arguing for is why not have it once a week?
Even as I write this, I am reminded of something I read recently in John 6. Jesus has just declared to the crowds that there is a bread from heaven which gives life to the world, and the crowds asked him, "give us this bread ALWAYS". Jesus responded, "I am the bread of life". And this is my question: why not observe the Lord's table often?
I appreciate the spirit of your post, Tom. Thanks for sharing your heart. I do need to clarify one thing. When you say that your church 'is considering' the issue, that implies that we are formally in the process of such a consideration. If I gave the impression that we are, I'm sorry. We have informally discussed it, and we individually have studied the question, and occasionally we share some thoughts on the matter. However, to say that 'we are considering' this implies that there is a motion on the table of some sort. We are not yet at that point. I'm sorry if I have given the impression that we are. I may be making too big of a issue between informal discussion and formal consideration. But I would not anyone at this point to get the wrong idea. Thanks!
People should read this.
Post a Comment