Communion Questions
In this article, we make a brief examination of the second of the church ordinances which is the Lord’s Supper. The name of the ordinance is derived from the last Passover supper Christ ate with His disciples just before His arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane followed by mock trials and His horrible crucifixion. This was the Passover meal that since the time of Moses and Israel’s deliverance from Egypt represented the sacrifice of Christ for our sins and His deliverance of us from our bondage of corruption. Paul affirmed this connection in 1 Corinthians 5:7.
Throughout church history, the Supper has been variously referred to as the Communion (1 Cor. 10:16), the Lord’s Table (1 Cor. 10:21), and the Eucharist. The last of these refers to the consecration of bread and wine in the observance of the ceremony. Eucharist means “thanksgiving.” It is celebrated in thanksgiving for God’s gift of His Son to die for our sins. As Baptists, we generally do not refer to the Supper as the Eucharist because of its connections with Catholicism and High Protestantism in which priestly intercessions are necessary attendants to making the elements themselves a means of grace or for changing them into the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. We regard this practice as blasphemy as this supposed consecration is rehashed crucifixion each time the communion is observed. This Roman Catholic perversion of the Supper is called the Mass, one of the most heretical doctrines in false Christianity. The practice of changing the elements is called “transubstantiation.” It is the transformation of them into the flesh and blood of Christ with only the appearance of bread and wine remaining. With these connotations, I think you can understand the reason we stay away from the term “Eucharist.”
In Protestant theology, there are various opinions largely differentiated by the Lutheran/High Anglican and Presbyterian Reformed positions. The Lutheran and High Anglicans support consubstantiation in which the body and blood of Christ coexist with the substance of the consecrated elements. The substance is not literally transformed but the bread and wine remain naturally bread and wine with Christ present in them. The Presbyterians and other Reformed churches favor a sacramental view in which the sacraments are termed “the means of grace.” This view says the sacraments are God’s appointed instruments by which the Holy Spirit enables the believer to receive Christ and the benefits of His redemption. In our understanding of the Supper, this requires difficult distinctions between the signification of the communion and the realities they signify. We deny God uses human activity to dispense His grace. Human actions such as observance of the communion, baptism, prayer, etc. are outgrowths of grace already bestowed. Admittedly, these distinctions are muddled and difficult to understand. In all my years of study on this subject, I am not sure I state their position correctly. It seems the give and take of grace and works gives grace but takes it back. I have yet to see the clear distinction between grace and works in this view. It is best to stop here on this point and leave it to some other time and better investigation.
This brings us to our view of the Supper. We believe the Supper is a remembrance or a memorial. You often hear me read the scriptures in which Christ commanded the apostles to partake. He said, “This do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24). Indeed, these very words are engraved in the Communion table in front of the pulpit. Further, this symbolic representation is seen in Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 11. He told the church that in the Supper they showed (remembered, symbolized) the Lord’s death until He comes. This supports the memorial view. While these verses to do not categorically refute the other opinions, the absence of scripture to tell us otherwise does. We cannot go beyond scripture to firmly establish our practices.
These are just a small part of the controversies. Among Baptists and baptistic groups, other questions such as permission to the Supper and the proper elements also divide. One article does not suffice to answer all questions. This is not my intent in this article. Further investigation which I must mention reveals the church as the appointed administrator of the ordinances and is the only place authorized to dispense them. We stand firmly on the belief that only true New Testament churches may administer the ordinances. Take time to investigate which church is authorized.
Pastor V. Mark Smith