Exploring Christian Symbols / Part 5

Exploring Christian Symbols
Part 5

PRACTICING THE LORD’S SUPPER
Can the fruit of the vine contain alcohol? Can the bread contain leaven? How often should we celebrate it? Who can take part? Can various cups and loaves be used? Although there are some differences among Christians, there is virtually universal agreement that this symbol should not be ignored.

The Emblems: The New Testament has two Greek words for bread: azumos for unleavened bread and artos for leavened bread. The descriptions of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11 and in the synoptic gospels – Matthew, Mark and Luke – all use the term for normal (leavened) bread. The expression “Breaking of Bread” (Acts 2:42; 20:7) also uses the term for leavened bread. Considering the historic connection between the Passover – in which no leaven was to be present – and the Lord’s Supper, a congregation may decide to exclude leaven from the bread it uses in the Lord’s Supper. But it will exceed Scripture if it insists on this practice. The “fruit of the vine” probably refers to grape wine, but grape juice also fits the description. Either will do. In some parts of this planet, bread and grapes may not be available. If this is the case, we recommend that Christians find two elements which come as close as possible to bread and fruit of the vine. To arbitrarily choose alternative elements when the prescribed ones are available would be a distortion of the symbol.

When Jesus instituted this symbolic supper, He took the bread and said, “This is My body.” These words should not be taken literally. The Lord Jesus was not suggesting that He had two bodies, His incarnate body and another body held in His hands. Then, taking the cup He added, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is poured out for you” (Lk. 22:19-20). It would be more natural to understand these words figuratively, in the same way as when Jesus said, “I am the light” and “I am the door” (Jn. 8:12; 10:7). The bread and the cup are used in this meal in a symbolic way.

When And How Often: When Jesus instituted this symbol, Luke recalls that He said, “Do this in remembrance of Me” (Lk. 22:20). In Matthew and Mark, there is no mention of repeating the event. But in 1 Corinthians 11 twice we find, “Do this in remembrance of Me” (11:24-25), and twice the relative adverb hosakis translated “as often as” or “whenever” (11:25-26). The other occurrence of this word is in Revelation 11:6, where the Lord’s two witnesses will have power to do some miracles “as often as they want.” From this we can safely conclude that the Lord’s intent was that this symbolic supper should be repeated periodically, but the Lord chose not to specify how often. There is liberty.

The Lord Jesus and His disciples celebrated the Breaking of Bread for the first time on that Thursday evening before He was later betrayed. Initially, after Christ’s resurrection, believers participated in this memorial meal frequently, perhaps even daily. Today many congregations celebrate the Lord’s Supper every month, every three months, and some only once a year. On his way to Jerusalem, Paul stayed seven days in Troas. “On the first day of the week (Paul’s last day at Troas), when we met to break bread, Paul was holding a discussion with them ... until dawn; then he left” (Acts 20:6-11 nrsv). On that Sunday at Troas, the usual event was to break bread; the special event was Paul’s long discourse. This does suggest a weekly celebration: literally “on the first day after the Sabbath,” that is, Sunday. The fact that Paul continued preaching throughout the night suggests that the Lord’s Supper was still being celebrated in the evening. Could this weekly pattern at Troas be taken as representing general practice in the early church? Probably yes, since historic non-biblical records also support this weekly pattern.

In Acts 2:42 we learn that the early Christians “devoted themselves,” “persevered” or “continued steadfastly” in the Breaking of Bread, giving it as much emphasis as teaching, fellowship and prayer. If a congregation today views the celebration of the Lord’s Supper as a mechanical ritual which they must perform because it’s in the Bible, they will be inclined to lessen its emphasis. If a congregation discovers – as did many in the early Church – the joy, strength and renewed desire to set apart a time to celebrate the symbolic meal that makes Christ the center of its attention, I think it will settle happily for a weekly pattern.

Have you thought of the Breaking of Bread from the Lord’s perspective? Can you sense His joy and satisfaction as some of those He died to redeem gather to remember and worship Him? Have you seen the spark of joy in the eyes of some elderly grandparents when their children and grandchildren gather together in their house for an anniversary meal? Happiness is shared by all! I sometimes think of those deep feelings expressed by Jesus while looking over Jerusalem: “How often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing” (Mt. 23:37).

Are we willing to be gathered close to Him? Shall we give Him that pleasure regularly? Is the celebration of the Lord’s Supper a time of happiness and internal renewal or simply a Christian duty? True communion with Christ revives, restores and lightens the heart. The fact that we know He is happy, makes us happy. The joy of the Lord is our strength.

But should the pattern at Troas be taken as binding on all congregations everywhere? Probably not. A Biblical example should not be lightly dismissed, yet it is incorrect and dangerous to turn examples into commandments. There may be good local reasons to change things somewhat. For example, in most Western countries, for centuries it has been more practical to celebrate the Lord’s Supper on Sunday morning than at the evening supper time.

The assemblies we work with here in Colombia follow this weekly pattern. But sometimes an assembly may celebrate the Lord’s Supper at an additional time, such as midnight at the beginning of the New Year. The desire is to give Christ pre-eminence at the beginning of a new year. This day may or may not be a Sunday. Occasionally, when a saint has been sick and housebound for many weeks, the assembly would coordinate to visit the home and celebrate the Lord’s Supper in the afternoon or the evening. On such a Sunday, some of us might celebrate the Lord’s Supper twice. These scriptural freedoms must be exercised carefully. The setting must lend itself to a worthy act of remembrance. If it is celebrated in a hall or in a home, the local church is still responsible for what goes on. These special events should be agreed upon and coordinated. Church order should still be maintained.

Who Can Participate? The Lord’s invitation to every born-again believer is, “Do this in remembrance of Me.” Each local church should develop some practical means to ensure that only true Christians participate in the Lord’s Supper. The local church should not allow a believer who lives in immorality or who “does not continue in the teaching of Christ” to partake of the symbol (1 Cor. 5:1-13; 2 Jn. 9-10). Furthermore, to ensure that we participate in a worthy manner, we should encourage every believer to “examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup” (1 Cor. 11:27-28). In our fellowship we refer to these three as the moral, doctrinal and the conscience filters. The first two filters are the responsibility of the local church, the third is personal. Does your local church practice these filters? Is there dependence on the Lord for guidance as to whom He would have participate? Let’s never forget that it is the Lord’s Supper.

CONCLUSION
It is very evident from Scripture that our Lord God has chosen to use symbols and symbolic acts to teach us spiritual realities, help us visualize concepts and remember instructions as well as important events. We have explored two significant symbols designed for Christians: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

If the Lord Jesus, as head of His Church, has chosen to give us such symbols, it would not be correct to despise them or simply set them aside. We notice that Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs and people of other faiths feel comfortable using their symbols or engaging in their symbolic acts. Why shouldn’t Christians? If it is wrong to ignore Christian symbols, it is also wrong to over-emphasize them, ascribing special powers or giving them a degree of importance which is not supported in Scripture. The essence of Christianity does not rest on its symbols. We use them out of obedience, not because they are indispensable. As Christians, “we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code” (Rom. 7:6).

In closing, it may be helpful to quote two verses for the principles they represent: “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind,” and “Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves” (Rom. 14:5,22). Try to work through these issues with your local church leadership. Use Biblical insights to influence, not to cause conflict (Heb. 13:17). I have worked with many new Christians who do not want to be baptized or do not feel attracted to the Lord’s Supper. With time people change. Where Scripture is clear, the Lord desires child-like obedience. But convictions take time and can’t be imposed. To pressure change in spiritual matters may cause short-term results at the price of long-term shallowness or bitterness.

The force of our teaching should focus primarily on the practical reality of living in communion with Christ. This will safeguard us against a legalistic, inflexible, ritualistic approach to Christian symbolism. The purpose of Christian symbolism is to complement, illustrate, reinforce and help remember – not enslave. Christianity belongs to a new dispensation; it rests on a new covenant. In the Christian faith, the internal reality of communion with Christ is infinitely more important than any outward form or symbolism.

By Philip Nunn

Look for a new Series to begin next month.