14_RETHINK MONTHLY

RETHINKMONTHLY.COM_15

“before the feast of the Passover” (John 13:1,2, 21-30) whereas the synoptic gospel writersclaim it grew out of the Passover Meal.However, the appropriate focus should beupon the meal itself and not discrepanciesregarding the timing of the meal. As an exam-ple, a family will tend to eat supper around the“dinner hour” –which could be from 5 pm to 7pm, or perhaps later depending upon circum-stances. Yet, it is still supper. The Passover,regardless of when it was commemorated, was a meal of remembrance and celebrationfor the handiwork of the Lord in taking the chil-dren of Israel out of bondage in Egypt.Whether or not the template for the Passovermeal was carried over into what would beknown as The Lord’s Supper (or Communion,or Eucharist) is unclear. What is apparent is

that the words and actions of Jesus at that 

-nal meal with his disciples (regardless of whatday it happened on) seems to follow the liturgyof the Passover to some degree. Bread wasbroken, drink was shared, and a commemo-ration ensued, notably for that of the Passoverlamb that was slain so that mankind might liveeternally. This remembrance and celebrationrevolved around a common meal – a happymeal that clearly marked the early church.

Breaking Of Bread

The two men that walked with Jesus on theroad to Emmaus certainly got an eye full.Luke 24:30 writes that “[Jesus] was at thetable with them, he took bread, gave thanks,broke it, and began to give it to them. Thentheir eyes were opened and they recognizedhim.” This post-resurrection encounter un-

doubtedly reminded them of their nal meal

with the Messiah. This relational model of eat-ing and sharing together carried over to the

rst church in the Book of Acts. The burgeon

-ing church was committed to learning fromthe apostles, to fellowship, to praying, and tothe breaking of bread. As the church moved

beyond Jerusalem, and the Jewish inuence

was less of a dominant role in its develop-ment, it is possible that a combination of sortstook place with the annual Passover celebra-tion and the regular “breaking of bread.” Cor-porate worship would happen not only in thetemple but also in homes, therefore an exten-sion of ordinary early Jewish worship context would be the Jewish meal, also known as theLove Feast (Jude 12). Within this framework,the gathered congregation would often com-memorate the communal Lord’s Supper. Acongregation, incidentally, that was increas-ingly growing in number with those that werebeing saved. New Christians, then and now, will often bring with them many of their formerhabits, dysfunctions, and immoral behaviors.Thus was the case at the Love Feasts inCorinth.

Cleaning Up After Dinner

Throughout the rst letter to the Corinthi

-ans, the Apostle Paul dealt aggressively withabuses, excess, and divisions. He was ona corrective warpath in an effort to bring thechurch back to the truth of the Gospel, andaway from their Greco-Roman leanings. Inno uncertain terms, he forbid them from par-taking in their drinking parties at the pagantemples. He argued, “You cannot drink thecup of the Lord and the cup of demons too;you cannot have part in both the Lord’s tableand the table of demons” (1 Cor. 10:21). The

Corinthian Christians were denitely a work in

progress, and understanding this reality helpsone grasp the nature of the abuses at theirLove Feasts that were “do[ing] more harmthan good.”The term “Lord’s Supper” only occurs oncein Scripture: 1 Corinthians 11:20. Notably,the reference is sandwiched within a strongrebuke from Paul. Thankfully, had there notbeen a mess to clean up in Corinth, there would be considerably less to draw from forour understanding of the Lord’s Supper. It ispossible that had there been no “disorder,”then there might have never been a needfor Paul’s rebuke and teaching. The primaryabuse at the Corinthian Love Feast involvedneglect of the poor, the slaves, the less for-tunate, and those on the fringe of the com-munity. Simply put, the “haves” had forgottenthe “have-nots.” It is in this context that oneof the most widely recognized passages ofScripture is introduced. 1 Corinthians 11:23begins with “For I received from the Lord what I also passed onto you….” Many withinChristianity would have some point of rec-ognition with this passage. The Corinthianchurch had been eating and drinking “with-out recognizing the body of the Lord” (1 Cor.11:29). The “body” in this verse is the church.Paul’s strong challenge to Corinth was tohonor the Body – Jesus’ church. The Lord’sSupper was originally intended to be a mealthat would de-stratify the hierarchy and inviteequality among its participants. Remarkably,the Last Supper had a man named Judasseated at the table with Jesus (not to mentionPeter who denied the Master and all the otherdisciples that ran after his arrest!). The LoveFeast was intentioned as a gathering point forall that would … “go out into the highways andhedges…come in so that my house may be

lled” such as referenced in Jesus’ parable

in Luke 14:23. Over time, the Lord’s Supperhad gotten to be a mess that was character-ized by exclusion and a pecking order. Couldthis be what Paul was imploring the Corinthi-ans to “examine” before eating and drinking?Had they stopped “recognizing the body ofNothing can make a morsel taste more bland

and cause fellowship to fall atter than ani

-mosity and general disdain for one another.Unresolved issues, bitterness, neglect, andthe like will often steal the joy from a gather-ing and leave the attendees with a gapingvoid even though food was consumed. Thesituation was similar when the Apostle Paulstuck his theological and pastoral nose intothe church of Corinth. What he found was agroup of people that were “coming together”but not truly “being together.” That conditionstill largely exists within the church of today.Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:20, “When thechurch come[s] together, it is not the Lord’sSupper you eat, for as you eat, each of yougoes ahead without waiting for anybody else.”The words of Ben Witherington capture thescenario perfectly: “the meal had become amess.”When there is a mess in the church, the ten-dency is to eradicate the potential of futureunsightliness, whereby avoiding subsequentmesses altogether. This has been the casein many sectors of the church in regards tothe gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the same pos-sibility exists in regards to the Lord’s Supper.From a denominational standpoint, the sac-rament is open for such a wide variety of in-terpretation, and unfortunately it would seemsimpler (less messy) for the Lord’s Supperto be done away with as a whole. But that was not the intention of Paul in his writingsfound in 1 Corinthians – he wanted to inspirereform and renewal to communion and fos-ter greater and deeper community within thechurch of Jesus Christ. He was contendingthat the mess become a meal again. Thiscan be accomplished by exploring the con-nection between the Lord’s Supper and theancient Love Feast. Over time, even the bestof traditions, habits, or rituals can get staleand lifeless, desperately in need of an infu-sion of new passion and purpose. Often thebest source of renewal can be discovered inthat which gave the tradition life and vitality in

the rst place. In the ordinance of the Lord’s

Supper, it is the conviction that vitality can befound in the Love Feast.

History Of The Happy Meal

At the center of the debate regarding theLord’s Supper is the relationship it may havehad to the Passover. There is absolutely noconsensus on this matter. Much of the confu-sion involves differences in the synoptic gos-pel accounts to that of the Fourth Gospel. TheJohannine account placed the Last Supper

The dinner table is set. The food is hot and plentiful. Fam-ily and friends have gathered to enjoy not only the food

but also the warmth of fellowship, whereby afrming love

and admiration for one another around the backdrop of a common meal. The setting is glorious and poised with possibility, and yet unforeseen to the naked eye, lurks theenemy to both food and fellowship:division.

the Lord” and thereby grown weak and sick within their fellowship?Paul wanted to bring correction to their meal-time, not eradication. He implored them to wait for others and share with others. Theentire context of the familiar 1 Corinthians 11passage is clearly about others. Communionand Community.

Paul nished the rebuke in chapter 11 the

same way he began it, by asking the churchto wait for one another and share the mealtogether. The Love Feast and the corre-sponding Lord’s Supper were to be a point ofrejoicing for all and by all. Yes, it was messy.But rather than do away with the meal entire-ly because of the mess, Paul restored order,direction, passion, and purpose. The samecannot be said across the landscape of orga-nized religion in the years to follow.

This Is My Body Packaged For You

In the years that followed Paul’s admonish-ing words to Corinth, a progressive shift wentinto motion. The meal became somethingexclusive in which only the baptized could beallowed to partake. Rules that simply do notexist within Scripture would soon regulatethe meal. Soon the meal would not functionin its original form whatsoever. The Didache(Teaching of the Twelve Apostles), datedat the end of the 1st Century, declared thatthe Lord’s Supper was for baptized Chris-tians, particularly those who repented of theirsins. This document also regulated whenthe Lord’s Supper should take place and by

whom, specically that it should be governed

by and prayed over by the cleric. By A.D. 110Ignatius wrote, “It is not permitted either tobaptize or to hold a Love Feast without thebishop, but whatever he approves is accept-able to God, so that everything you do shouldbe secure and valid.” As the years elapsed,so did the value and validity of the LoveFeast. By the 4th Century, at the Council ofLaodicea, the Love Feast was banned by the

church. This was reafrmed at the Council

of Trullian in A.D. 692. In conjunction withthe abolition of the Love Feast, there wasa move towards reductionism in regards tothe Lord’s Supper. The elements (bread anddrink) would become more regulated, dis-posable, and self-contained to the point thatBishop Will Willimon humorously (yet per-haps appropriately) asserts: “this is my body

packaged for you.” Certainly it is not difcult

to hear the tone of sarcasm in these com-ments, and yet in Protestant circles there is apropensity for the Lord’s Supper to becomestale, lifeless, and void of community – nolonger a meal – now a mess of another kind.Perhaps the Apostle Paul’s words to Corinthcarry weight for the church yet today. Canthe meal be recovered? Can communionand community be reconnected again?

What’s For Supper?

There was a time when Christianity was new,and the relatively few Christians on the planet

could t into a few homes and share every

-thing in common. Those days are gone. Thetiny upstart rag-tag band in the Book of Acts

is now a full-edged movement with 60-min

-ute services on multi-site campuses. How do we reclaim the Love Feast in the McChurchera? How does community become a centralpart of communion again?For some churches, that adjustment may beminor. Perhaps they could give more focus tothe Lord’s Supper within the service insteadof it being an afterthought or addendum. Per-haps small groups could become the epicen-ter of community life in which there is “break-ing of bread” in homes, and true fellowshipis shared within the context of communion.For other congregations, the shift may needto be more radical. If the worship has beenconsistently lifeless and cold, and commu-nity life is non-existent, then true reform maybe appropriate.Could reform be paramount in today’schurch? Have we made a mess out of what was supposed to be a meal? There are somany practical implications to consider. Doesthe church move back into homes? Shoulda full meal be offered during every worshipservice? Should smaller sanctuaries be builtto make room for larger fellowship halls?The answers are not immediate, but whatremains is a desire for koinonia – that thechurch may truly celebrate “until He comes.”And when He does come again, all meals will be superseded by the great messianicbanquet! Yet another Meal awaits us!