Corinth's Communion (part 1)

Now when you come together at the same place, you are not really eating the Lord’s Supper. – 1 Corinthians 11:20  (NET)

When we grasp the importance of meals in the first century and for the early church, as they were an effective means by which to communicate concepts concerning the kingdom of heaven, we can vest mentions of meals with the proper amount of weight and meaning, and do so even if there does not appear to be any controversy or angst in the situation. 

One such place in which there does appear to be much controversy is the church at Corinth.  This angst is expressed by the Apostle Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians, which is the place where we find the most detailed treatment of the communion table, outside of the Gospels, in the whole of the New Testament.  The words used in Paul’s presentation of the communion in the eleventh chapter has been, for centuries, the basis for the celebration of communion, shedding clear light on the practice of the early church, as Paul helpfully elaborates on the goings-on that we see in the “Last Supper” of Jesus and His disciples.  At the same time, while extraordinarily helpful, those same words have been the source of much controversy, as words like “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” (11:27-31), have been applied in a number of ways. 

Usually, there is an encouragement to apply these words in an individual and personal manner, which fits well within a notion of salvation that is predominantly individualistic and focused on an other-worldly escapism.  However, this type of application presents us with a bit of a problem, as such notions would not have been the thrust of Paul’s understanding, nor that of the early church, and certainly would not reflect the worldview in which Jesus Himself was ensconced, and in which He re-oriented the Passover celebration towards Himself.  While there is certainly a sense of individual salvation, Jewish thoughts of salvation, especially as connected with the Passover celebration, as was the communion, were oriented towards the deliverance of the people of God from exile and oppression, with the deliverance from out of Egypt as the model.  While there is an individualistic component here, that individual benefit cannot be disconnected from the community. 

Also, the escapism that is prevalent in the popular interpretation of the communion passages of chapter eleven would not have been a part of Paul’s worldview.  The guilt and judgment reference in the passage previously quoted would not be connected with the eternal destination of one’s soul, and should certainly not be used as a means of limiting participation at the communion table or of generating fear and trepidation at partaking of the elements.  As Jesus invited tax collectors and sinners, and those that would have been rightly identified by observers as being outside of the covenant to join Him at His tables, as He did so with the messianic banquet clearly in the background, and as we, along with the early church, view the communion table in that light, it would seem ridiculous to put such onerous limitations and boundaries, productive of fearfulness and ultimately exclusion, around that which allows us to mimic Jesus’ table practice and show forth the kingdom of heaven. 

When we read these words from the Apostle Paul, and as we consider the communion table, the thoughts that must be dancing at the forefront of our mind cannot be wrapped up in a concern for a personal salvation.  Rather, those thoughts must be the kingdom of heaven, and its manifestation and advancement.  If we are going to rightly approach the communion table, we cannot be focused on ourselves, but on what the table says about the kingdom of heaven.  Based on everything that has been said to this point, it seems that this approach may be the right one, and that it is in approaching the table in this way that we can find a better interpretation and understanding of Paul’s treatment of the subject.  Not only that, but bearing in mind the kingdom of heaven, in the context of the meal practice of the early church, rather than one’s personal salvation, allows us to understand why it is that Paul even brings up the subject in the first place.