My brother Travis has got a lot of gears cranking with
a recent Revelife post on the subject of the Lord's Supper. His issue is basically that in addition to the presence of Christ, we need to bear in mind the presence of other believers to hold us to ethical and theological account.
Stanley Grenz, in his imminently readable
Theology for the Community of God, describes the Lord's Supper as a reaffirmation of our identity as a community gathered around Christ. The Supper binds together believes past, present and future, and its significance lies "in its relationship to the future as grounded in the past." How so? Grenz lays it out like this.
Past - The Lord's Supper is a memorial meal. It is a reenactment of the Last Supper, when we fulfill Jesus' command to "Do this in remembrance of me."
In this way, according to Grenz, we symbolically enter into the Jesus story:
We vividly remember Jesus' significant life. We sit with the disciples in the upper room and recall Jesus' teaching about the pathway to life and about his death as the provision for spiritual vitality. We call to mind the table fellowship he shared with [national traitors] and sinners, which stood as a sign of the kingdom and of the new community he was inaugurating. We remember as well his sacrificial death, recalling this climax to our Lord's great example of humble service to others and complete obedience to the Father.
Present - Through our eating and drinking, as well as our sharing, we are "proclaiming the Lord's death until he comes," as Paul puts it in 1 Corinthians. The bread, of course, represents the body of Christ, broken, while the blood represents the new covenant forged in his blood. Communion, then, becomes a symbolically charged act of defiance against the very same rulers who do not understand the wisdom of God, "for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." What is more, Grenz observes that consuming the elements becomes "an enactment of our participation in Christ himself." It is a reception of provision and an acceptance of the way of Christ. Finally, in the act of Eucharist we declare Christ's lordship, and for this reason it "carries grave ethical implications: it is a reminder that we can serve no other gods, that no loyalty dare usurp the place of Christ."
Future - Unique to Matthew, Jesus issues a promise during the institution of the Lord's Supper. He says, "I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom." To Grenz this means that we do not look only to what happened in the past, but are "drawn into the future... There we meet the risen Jesus who has gone before us into God's eschatalogical kingdom through his resurrection, which we will one day share in." But the future isn't only anticipation, but also an experience we share in the present. "Through the Holy Spirit," Grenz writes, "Jesus' promise becomes a present reality. Our Lord comes among us and communes with us... The celebration is an experience of present community."
What do you think of Grenz' trifold view of communion? What is the most important aspect of communion to you? When you take communion, do you think of being gathered with all believers, past and future, distant and near?
True
Comments (8)
Copying my response from the original post.
Grenz almost always meets my approval. I think he gives a fantastic evaluation of the Lord's Supper here. To be honest, every time I approach the Table I visit all 3 aspects of time. I remember the past, I think of how it affects the present and where I need to be unified with Christ more faithfully, and I think about how that continues into the future and how it thrusts me forward into a stricter obedience to the Word. I don't always think about how communion joins to me other believers. That truth use to be more present. I suppose I have become more self-focused in recent years but as of late I have been trying to meditate upon how the Eucharist binds me to the Body of Christ and what that means for me as a member of the Body (to be unified with the other members).
very good explanation.. :)
I think this "three-fold" view misses the point. The Eucharist doesn't just "reenact" or "remember" the Lord's passion; it is the very flesh and blood of Christ. That, like the Trinity, is a non-negotiable.
1. Jesus told his disciples, not other believers, to take the bread and wine every year in order to remember him. This seems more a memorial for people who were close to him in person than anything else.
2. Paul was just a normal man who never even met Jesus. While he has good advice on how to deal with specific church problems, I don't think we should be taking every word out of his mouth as holy doctrine.
3. If people need a ritual-in this case Communion-to feel close to God and the the body of believers, your faith is probably not as strong as it should be. No ritual is going to magically change that.
the root or past of the Lord's supper is in the Passover. the meal they were eating was the Passover Seder. the Lord's supper is the ultimate fulfillment of the Seder, because instead of a lamb and matza and wine, He Himself will be the lamb that will shed blood to cover His people so that judgement passes over them (see the Exodus story and the angel of death), and in this sacrament/celebrating ritual the matza and lamb and wine symbolize Him. this brings new meaning to how God delivered His people from slavery. it is the new Seder
The bread and wine 'represent'? Where is that in the Bible? The Greek word is not "represent" or "symbolize", but "is". Let us take God at His word.
@canicus@xanga - "The Eucharist doesn't just "reenact" or "remember" the Lord's passion; it is the very flesh and blood of Christ."
Good point. We are allowed to participate in this unique event of The Last Supper. We don't just remember, and it is not in our power to really re-enact it.
Grenz is right in seeing communion as bringing all peoples in all times together.
This is an excellent piece!!!! Yayyyy!