Just a Meal or Sacred and Mysterious Fellowship?
Jesus’ Desire for Fellowship
Jesus’ Presence with Us
What happens when we eat the Lord’s Supper
What is it then to eat the crucified body, and drink the shed blood of Christ?
Answer. It is not only to embrace with a believing heart, all the sufferings and death of Christ, and thereby to obtain the pardon of sin and life eternal; but also, besides that, to become more and more united to his sacred body, by the Holy Ghost, who dwells both in Christ and in us; so that we, although Christ is in heaven, and we on earth, are, notwithstanding, “flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone;” and that we live and are governed for ever by one Spirit, as members of the same body are by one soul.
What is the purpose of the Lord’s Supper?
The Lord’s supper was instituted:
1. That it might be a confirmation of our faith, or a most sure proof of our union, and communion with Christ, who feeds us with his body and blood unto everlasting life, as truly as we receive these signs from the hands of the minister. This object is attained by all those who receive these signs in true faith: for we so receive these signs from the hands of the minister, as if the Lord himself gave them unto us with his own hand. It is in this way that Christ is said to have baptized more disciples than John, when he, nevertheless, did it through his disciples. (John 4:1.)
2. That we may by the observance of it make a public confession of our faith, acknowledge our gratitude, and bind ourselves to constant thankfulness, and to the celebration of this benefit. Hence it is said: “This do in remembrance of me.” “For as often as ye eat of this bread, and drink of this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.” (Luke 22:19. 1 Cor. 11:26.) This remembrance, or commemoration of Christ precedes and is taken for faith in the heart; after which we make public confession, and acknowledgements of our thankfulness.
3. That it might be a public distinction, or badge, by which the true church may be known, and recognized from the world. The Lord has instituted this supper for none, but those who are his disciples.
4. That it might be a bond of love, declaring that all who partake of it aright, are made members of one body whose head is Christ. “For we being many are one bread, and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread.” (1 Cor. 10:17.) Those now who are members of the same body have a mutual love one for another.
5. That the people of God who assemble in a public manner might be united together in the closest fellowship; for it was instituted to be observed in the congregation, whether there be many or few present. Hence Christ says, “Drink ye all of it,” and Paul says, “When ye come together to eat tarry one for another.” (Matt. 26:27. 1 Cor. 11:33.)
What should we remember when we have the Lord’s Supper?
Christ intends his disciples to understand that his sacrifice, his body and blood offered upon the cross, is simultaneously a recapitulation and summation of the depth of meaning of the Passover meal, and a deliverance from a deeper slavery shared not just by Israel but by all of humanity to the powers of sin and death (Rom 6:1–14). His suffering on the cross is the cataclysmic confrontation with these powers, and his resurrection is his triumph and vindication over them. When Christ ascends into heaven, Paul describes it as a victory march by a conquering general, a general who leads not defeated nations but captivity itself captive (Eph 4:8).
When Christ leads slavery to fear and death captive in the victory of his ascension (Heb 2:14–15), Paul also says he “gave gifts to men” (Eph 4:8). This gift giving is central to the New Testament theology of the Eucharist. The Greek word from which it derives means “to give thanks,” understanding the sacrifice of Christ as the cosmos-altering gift of the Triune God given to rescue humanity from wicked powers. Paul’s understanding of this meal as a communion, fellowship, or participation with the risen and ascended Christ is the corollary to the gift character of this meal.
In this meal, Christ feeds us with his own presence and sacrifice, which is why he is described as “Christ our Passover Lamb” (1 Cor 5:7). Although the bread and the wine of the Passover meal is mentioned in the institution narrative, the lamb is not. The book of Hebrews develops this point in order to highlight the priesthood of Jesus. He possesses a priesthood more perfect than the Levitical priesthood. He has a priesthood with no beginning or end, the priesthood of Melchizedek, the priest-king of Salem who brought out gifts of bread and wine and blessed Abraham and to whom Abraham gave a tithe of a tenth of all his possessions (Heb 7; Gen 14:18–20). The institution narratives, read in the overarching context of the New Testament, suggest that Christ is both priest and sacrifice, offering the sacrifice of himself (Ps 50:14–15; Heb 13:15). One image used to understand the Eucharist in the New Testament, then, is the continual making present of the Passover and sacrifice of Christ to his people.
This sacrifice does not only remove the guilt of sin but also liberates the church from its power. In the christological debates of the fourth century, this dimension of Christ’s sacrifice was a critical rationale adduced for the affirmation of Christ’s divinity and for the profession of the hypostatic union between the divine and human natures of Christ. The union between these natures had to be not only moral or volitional but ontological, because through the Eucharist he makes us “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet 1:4), which he could not do if he were not simultaneously both God and human. The Eucharist was food which enabled the people of God to become what they professed to be. “Be what you see; receive what you are,” proclaimed Augustine of Hippo in a sermon on the Eucharist.
Another central image for the Eucharist in the New Testament is the idea of the Eucharist as food for the difficult and perilous journey that we must make in this life. Typological reflection upon the institution of the Passover meal draws this dimension out. The Israelites were to eat the meal “with your cloak tucked into your belt, your sandals on your feet and your staff in your hand. Eat it in haste; it is the Lord’s Passover” (Exod 12:11 NIV), for they were to begin the journey from Egypt to the promised land immediately upon eating this meal.
Several images in Scripture extend this sense of the Eucharist, most importantly the image of the Eucharist as spiritual manna. The Israelites were given the “bread of angels” (Ps 78:25 NIV) to eat in the wilderness on their journey: the manna and the quail were their food for the journey. Christ says in John 6 that he is “the bread that came down from heaven” and the “bread of life.” This “bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world” (6:48, 51 NIV).
A third image for the Eucharist in the New Testament narratives is the sense of this meal as a foretaste of the eschatological banquet (Isa 25:6–8; Matt 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:16, 18; Luke 14:12–14; 1 Cor 11:26; Rev 19:6–9; John 14). This point accentuates not only the nourishment of this meal but the lavishness of the gift. In this foretaste of the heavenly banquet, as the Anglican Kenyan Eucharistic liturgy says, “Christ is the host, and we are his guests.”
The term “Lord’s Supper” highlights this crucial image of the Lord as our host. He not only serves us the lavish spiritual food by communing with us with his own presence (1 Cor 10:16–17), he humbles himself to cleanse us in body and soul as we approach this feast (John 13:1–17). In a number of Reformation-era churches, the desire to highlight the banquet character of this meal led to dramatic changes in the symbolism and organization of the meal. In many churches, stone altars on the eastern end of the church were removed and tables with four visible legs were placed among the people, and the Lord’s Supper was celebrated with communicants sitting down at the table.
Because the Lord himself communes with us in this bread and wine, we too are to commune with one another (Acts 2:42–46; 1 Cor 10:17; 11:17–34). There is therefore a deep irony in the fact that the symbol of the church’s communion with God and of the members with each other has become a major source of division within Christendom. Churches have been rent over whether the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Christ, or whether the Eucharist is an “unbloody sacrifice,” or whether it is a pure memorial of Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice upon the cross.
Both Paul and John seem to have “realistic” understandings of the Eucharist, but the imagistic quality of what happens in the Eucharist means that certainty cannot be had about the mode of Christ’s presence in it. The Anglican Lancelot Andrewes offers a characteristically judicious statement on the meal: “Christ said, ‘this is my body.’ He did not say, ‘this is my body in this way.’“