The Lord’s Supper

Berean Baptist on July 15, 2019

The Lord’s Supper is a solemn occasion which we labor to maintain through its observance as a sanctified, holy remembrance of our Lord. The Lord’s Supper was given as a memorial ordinance to remind the church of Christ’s death. It is to be observed until He returns to receive the church to Himself. The Bible does not tell us how often we should observe the Supper, only that we should do it. The timing is left for individual churches to decide.

            From my fifty-eight years of experience as a Christian, I have reached the conclusion the Supper should not be observed too often to the point it begins to lose its special sense of significance. Though we may claim it is always special, we note that members’ frequent absences to attend its observance obviates their claims. We must confess that reducing the frequency will do as the adage says, “absence makes the heart grow fonder.”

            For years, our church celebrated the Supper at the begging of each month and was usually little more than an extra function tacked on at the end of the service. I believed we should change this and reduce the frequency to the beginning of each quarter. This enabled us to separate it from the other services and to concentrate on the Supper as our main theme. Does this mean there are no other times we speak of the Lord’s death? Certainly not, for every sermon in every service will find its way to the cross, and all preaching is tied to Christ’s sacrifice for our sins.

            Some years ago, I had an encounter with a Christian couple who claimed their church was very disappointing in its celebration of this blessed memorial. Their complaint was that in their two-year membership in the church, the Supper had not been observed. The excuse according to the pastor was the church was not ready for it. He did not believe the church was spiritual enough to satisfy the Lord that they were worthy to take of His body and blood. This is very unfortunate for every child of God has been made worthy by the blood of the Lamb. Our sins are forgiven, and we stand in the righteousness of Christ, not in the merits of our supposed earned holiness. This is not to say there are no restrictions. We are clearly told not to tempt the Lord, and we should not come to His table with unconfessed sins.

            Confession of sin does not require penance as taught by Catholicism. Therefore, there is no time lapse between repentance and forgiveness. As soon as we repent, we are ready for fellowship. This interdicts the pastor’s objection. It is removed with a singular encouragement—a plea for the people to repent. When this is done, the Supper may proceed. The faithful are blessed, and if some will not repent, they are judged by God and not by man.

            After observing our night of the Supper, after the prayers and the singing of hymns; after the message preached from the word; after the visuals of breaking bread and pouring cups; after witnessing the members united and partaking of the elements, the visiting couple were saddened for the blessings they had missed.

            I encourage all members of Berean to be here and not miss our few opportunities each year when we place our focus entirely on this ordinance. Our practice is not intended to be critical of churches and their frequency of observing the ordinance.  We do what is best for this body to solidify the solemnity of the occasion.

                                                            Pastor V. Mark Smith

Closed Communion

Berean Baptist on May 21, 2018

In thinking of the Lord’s Supper, I am prompted to regard the great privilege we have of being a part of the Lord’s church. The Supper is one of two ordinances Christ gave the church and both are observed only by those who are born again believers. The first ordinance is baptism which is a response of the believer’s obedience to show publicly he has committed his life to Christ. Baptism is an outward expression of an inward change. It occurs before church membership but is closely connected to it as it is the door of admittance into church relationship. As such, it is prerequisite to both membership and participation in the Supper. Most Christians have no problems with this order since it is clearly shown to be apostolic in Acts chapter 2.

However, when it comes to the privilege of taking the Supper, many churches stray from the biblical precedent by allowing unconverted, unbaptized people to partake of the precious symbolic elements of Christ’s body and blood. This is a more modern practice among evangelicals that is one of the most egregious violations of church order that is observed today. Although it is becoming more common, there are still good churches that are careful to avoid this as best they can.

We believe the Bible provides a better solution to the problem and one that is more doctrinally correct. The scriptures teach a more restricted communion than to limit it to baptized believers. The scriptural precedent is to drill down further to restrict the communion to members of the local body. In addition to salvation, baptism, and church membership, the further requirement is for the participant to be a member of the particular New Testament church body that is observing the Supper. Due to space and time, let me only briefly explain why this is true using only one argument.

The argument comes from Paul’s instructions to the Corinthian church regarding church discipline. The apostle enjoined the church that no one should take the Supper unworthily, meaning the church should do its best to ensure there were no open sins and as much as possible no hidden sins that would hinder fellowship with the Lord. In the case of the Corinthian church, there was open sin described in 1 Corinthians 5, a sin bad enough that Paul said even heathen idolaters knew better. Paul commanded the church to withdraw fellowship from the man who sinned until he was brought to repentance. Specifically, the church was commanded not to permit him or others that were guilty of offenses to come to the Supper (1 Cor. 5:11).

The withdrawal of fellowship in church discipline indicates that all who are permitted to partake of the Supper must be under the jurisdiction of the church. If a person is not a member of the church, there is no enforcement mechanism against him for his sin. We cannot withdraw fellowship from someone who is not in the body and neither are we apprised of their particular lifestyle and qualifications as we are those who are regular participants in our fellowship and activities (1 Cor. 5:12-13). The purpose of church discipline is first of all formative rather than punitive to help a person realize the need of repentance.

The practice of restricted communion, also known as closed communion, is not a judgment of the spiritual condition of any person who is not a member of this church. We have many friends that are good Christians from other churches and some who are denominationally different. We do not doubt their salvation. We simply believe in New Testament church order. The Supper is the Lord’s table not ours, so we only invite those in the same intimate fellowship that Christ and the apostles practiced. We have no more right to change the scriptural precedent in the Supper than we do to change the ordinance of baptism.

Our position is not meant to be offensive to anyone and does not make us better than any others. We are all sinners saved by God’s grace. We desire to honor Him in the best ways we know how.

 

Pastor V. Mark Smith

Who Is Worst of All?

Berean Baptist on August 29, 2016

Psalm 55

Does it seem incredibly unlikely that the most beloved person in the history of mankind and the most hated person in history lived at the same time, knew each other, and were friends? With the billions that have lived on planet earth, how could such a thing be possible? As unlikely as it seems, it is true and none of us has any trouble guessing who these polar opposites are. The first is Jesus Christ. He was the exemplary human, perfect in every detail, kind, compassionate, filled with love, and as John said, “Full of grace and truth.” Nothing honestly disparaging could ever be written about Him.

On the other hand, there is Judas. He is described in Psalm 55 as an acquaintance who took sweet counsel with Christ. And yet, he is the universally despised, the universally hated, and the one who disgusts us all. So extreme is the hatred of Judas that his name is never given to any of our children. None of us wants to be identified with him in any way. He is the antithesis of the holiness and righteousness of Jesus Christ. As high as the exaltation of Christ can go, so is the measurement of how low the denunciation of Judas can go.

Is it really such a mystery that in all the annals of time the most despicable should be in contact with the most delightful? It should not seem strange because the worst crime committed must be against the one who least deserves it. The worst offense is against the one who least deserves to be offended.

The extreme disappointment in Judas is reflected in David’s words of Psalms 55:11-14: “Wickedness is in the midst thereof: deceit and guile depart not from her streets. For it was not an enemy that reproached me; then I could have borne it: neither was it he that hated me that did magnify himself against me; then I would have hid myself from him: But it was thou, a man mine equal, my guide, and mine acquaintance. We took sweet counsel together, and walked unto the house of God in company.” David was thinking of Ahithophel, but the Holy Spirit had Judas in mind.

Judas walked in communion with Jesus. He was treated as a brother even though Jesus knew from the beginning what He would do. There was nothing in Jesus that could possibly draw out such hatred as Judas had for Him in the betrayal. We agonize over his treacherous actions because Judas did his worst against the best. He is the model none of us wants to emulate, and each of us sits in judgment thinking we would never do what he did.

Would you consider this scripture for just a moment? “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?” (Romans 2:1-3) In the following verse, Rom. 2:4, the restraint, the patience, and the goodness of God is still there despite the hatred of Him. “Or despiseth thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?” Who is the most despicable character of all? Who is the person that none should name his child after? Are you ready for a confession? The answer is ME. I have done the worst to the one who is the best. I hated Him; I betrayed Him; I drove nails into His hands and feet. I compete with Paul who said, “I am the chief of sinners.”

Is it a mystery the most beloved person of all time should live at the same time as the most hated? Not at all. Christ came in contact with humanity and that says it all.

Pastor V. Mark Smith