Three Resources on Weekly Communion
Here
are three papers on this topic written by evangelical scholars from the
Reformed and Presbyterian tradition, Michael Horton, Kim Riddlebarger, and
David Gordon:
Michael
S Horton , “At least Weekly: The Reformed Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper and its
Frequent Celebration “
Kim
Riddlebarger, “The Reformation of the Supper”
T
David Gordon, “Weekly Communion”
I
found that Horton raised a number of interesting questions that stimulated my
thinking. Firstly, the question of
preparation for receiving the Lord’s Supper.
In both the Scottish and Dutch traditions we have had preparatory
services before our infrequently celebrated communion services. Often these have encouraged a kind of
inquisitorial frenzy of self-doubt where Christians have been berated for their
lack of true spirituality and progress in sanctification. Are they really holy enough to come to the Table?
Horton
quotes Calvin in opposition to this:
“Certain
ones, when they would prepare men to eat worthily, have tortured and harassed
pitiable consciences in dire ways; yet they have not brought forth a particle of
what would be to the purpose. They said that those who were in the state of
grace ate worthily. They interpreted ‘in the state of grace’ to mean to be pure
and purged from all sin. Such dogma would debar all the men who ever were or
are on earth from the use of this Sacrament [of the Supper]. For if it is a
question of our seeking our worthiness in ourselves, we are undone; only ruin
and confusion remain to us”
The
duty of self-examination, suggests Horton, is more to do with the reality of
our faith than the maturity of that faith – do we truly know Christ as Saviour? He
declares, “It is inspection, not introspection, for which the Apostle calls in
1 Corinthians 11:27-34.”
Furthermore,
“Once more, Holy Communion (like baptism and the preaching) is chiefly an
objective affair and it is something that God does for us, not something that
we do for God. He does not need our resolution or our memorializing of his
Son’s death, but we need to hear again and not only hear but see his resolve
and his remembering of his own promise to us individually as his covenant
children.”
What
is the sin condemned by Paul in 1 Corinthians, and to what does the
self-examination refer? Is
self-examination specific, regarding a particular fault found in the
celebration of the Supper in Corinth (division and social separation), or is it
general, an introspective inquiry regarding our own personal worthiness to come
to the Table? By taking it as the latter
“the table of grace became more a table of self-condemnation which has been an
obstacle for many to come and experience the fullness of the Lord’s Supper” (Lanuwabang
Jamir, “Exclusion and Judgment in Fellowship Meals: The Socio-historical Background
of 1 Corinthians 11:17-34, 2016)
Jamir,
in his book length in depth study of the context of the call to self examination,
forcefully states:
“In
the passage "anazios" (unworthy) beyond all doubt refers to the attitudes and
actions of some of the members that has created a party spirit and division .”
The
self-examination, therefore, was primarily of “one’s attitude and motive at the
Supper, and then one’s actions towards fellow members in the community.”
(Jamir)
Spiritual
self-examination is a Christian duty, and no doubt coming to the Lord’s Table
does focus that examination, but the context of 1 Corinthians does not suggest
that it is a major part of our preparation that we judge of our worthiness and
sanctification. We come to the Table
because we need grace; we do not stay away because we are deficient in our
Christian growth.
Weekly
communion, therefore, does not need to be preceded by a service of preparation
and introspective self-examination. We always
need the grace signed and sealed by Christ at the Table and therefore we need
to come to enjoy the rich provision Christ makes for us at his table.
A
second practical point that Horton makes is “Care should be taken here, as
throughout the service, not to be overly didactic and wordy. This is a time for
God to act according to his promise, not primarily an opportunity for us to teach.”
Although
he makes this point with reference to the call to self-examination it has a
wider application. It is sometimes
objected that we cannot have regular or weekly communion because it takes too
long. I generally use the excellent
introduction found in the OPC directory of worship which gives a clear
explanation of the meaning and purpose of the Lord’s Supper. However, is it always necessary to give such
a protracted explanation?
We
do not precede our preaching with a lengthy explanatory statement concerning
the meaning and purpose of preaching – we just preach and let the Word do its
work. There is an argument to be made
for a shorter form of Communion, without the full explanatory preface. Perhaps the longer form could be used occasionally
to make sure that we know what we are doing and why, but a shorter form be used
more often – just administer the sacrament and let grace do its work.
An
alternative suggestion is to include a regular explanatory word in the bulletin
– quotations from our confessional documents, (the Larger Catechism!), and the
confessional statements of Reformed orthodoxy throughout the ages, and the
writings of Reformed theologians. A
steady flow of such didactic material would do much to educate our
congregations on the true biblical and Reformed understanding of the Lord’s
Supper, while enabling the service to flow naturally from Word to Sacrament.
I do
encourage a thoughtful and prayerful reading of these three papers and welcome
any suggestions stimulated by them.
