Unfortunately, context is quite often neglected when it comes to Paul’s treatment of communion in the letter to Corinth. So often, when we hear the passage referenced or quoted, the reference picks up at the twenty-third verse. There, Paul writes, “For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which He was betrayed took bread, and after He had given thanks He broke it and said, ‘This is My body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of Me.’ In the same way, He also took the cup after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, every time you drink it, in remembrance of Me.’ For every time you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” (11:23-26). These are the words that are regularly spoken to create the familiar setting in which we partake of the elements of the table.
When this happens, we treat the words of the Apostle as if they were some type of instruction manual on how to engage in this practice. In a sense, that is true, but that is only a part of the story. Do we take the time to look at what precedes the “instructions”? Sadly, no. Like we do in so many other situations, we have a tendency to simply pull things out of context and use them for our own purposes, reading into the text that which we want to see there. Making reference to the “instruction” portion of chapter eleven, without making reference to what comes before or after, forces our analysis into the the category of being ahistorical and subjective, thereby causing us to miss out on the aspects of the kingdom of heaven and on the reference to Jesus’ meal practice that was so instructive and important for the early community of believers.
Now, it must be said that what comes after is regularly incorporated into the practice of communion. The “words of warning,” as they are generally viewed, are usually included, so as to induce introspection among potential participants. We read “For this reason, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself first, and in this way let him eat the bread and drink of the cup. For the one who eats and drinks without careful regard for the body eats and drinks judgment against himself. That is why many of you are weak and sick, and quite a few are dead. But if we examined ourselves, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned with the world” (11:27-32).
These “words of warning” have been appended to the “instructions” for good reason. However, the way in which they are presented, and in which they are urged to be taken, removes them from their practical and objective context, as participants are usually asked to apply this warning individually, as related to their personal salvation, with considerations of personal and individual judgment falling if one doesn’t have the right mindset in one’s taking of the elements or the right understanding of what the bread and the cup represent. Pretending that Paul has such things in mind is unsatisfactory, and it ignores the corrective action that Paul is taking, first and foremost, with this church, as it fails to follow the example of Jesus and fails to understand that Paul is criticizing this church for their failure to embody the kingdom of heaven. In addition, the encouragement to come to these words individually and personally, as if the recipients of this letter were silently reading their Bible for themselves, in their studies, rather than hearing the letter read out loud to the entire congregation, has had a hand in creating an unreasonable and Scripturally unsupportable expectation of some type of Christian perfectionism, and a need for confession of personal “sins” after a personal examination of the condition of one’s heart before taking communion.
If we continue on from the words of warning that Paul has delivered, we are able to encounter some corrective language from Paul. He writes, “So then, my brothers and sisters, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that when you assemble it does not lead to judgment” (11:33-34a). When we allow ourselves to jump right into the communion at the twenty-third verse, then the addition of these words from Paul don’t make a great deal of sense. Along with that, if we fail to take common first century meal practice into consideration when we read these words, they are not going to make a lot of sense. Finally, if we don’t bear in mind the vision of the messianic banquet and the personal example of Jesus at communion, that goes beyond the “Last Supper” and takes in the whole of the tradition of His meal practice that has the messianic banquet standing in its background and informs the understanding of the early church as to why they are even engaging in this practice in this way, then we are going to have difficulty making sense of what Paul is getting at it with these final corrective instructions; and we are, more than likely, going to approach and utilize the words of Paul incorrectly, missing out on the depth of the problem that is being addressed.
Obviously, Paul has more than what we generally think of as the communion in mind. Most of us, for better or for worse, only experience the communion as a part of a church service. Rarely, if ever, do we experience the communion as part of a meal, which was the common experience of the early church. This, of course, kept the meal practice traditions of Jesus, while serving as a reminder that said practice was firmly ensconced within the Isaianic messianic banquet and its associated expectations and demands of the people of God. Naturally, this more accurate duplication of the “Lord’s Supper,” as it took place within a world that had very certain and defined parameters and social constructs around its meals, while standing against those same constructs, would have created a dynamic that is all too unfamiliar for us.
So yes, we tend to forget, or perhaps we never even truly realize that Jesus and His disciples did not simply go through a communion celebration in the way with which we are so familiar. It must be reiterated that they were at a meal. Paul even reminds us of this, writing “In the same way, He also took the cup after supper” (11:25a). So we have a reminder that the basis for Christian communion sprung from an event that took place at a meal. Not only that, but it becomes clear from Paul’s writing that the specific practice of communion in the early church was also taking place at a meal; but because the communion itself is so often referred to as the “Lord’s Supper,” the meal aspect (and therefore the messianic banquet aspect) is unfortunately screened from view. This is a loss of understanding, with an extraordinary depth for conceptions concerning church practice and the kingdom of heaven that deserves to be recovered.
No comments:
Post a Comment