Follow us on Twitter | Report Error | + Larger Font | + Smaller Font | Print This Page
Vital Church Truths
by R.J. Anderson
Chapter Four-The Lord's Supper
There seems to be a great deal of misunderstanding on this very important subject. I believe that most of this misunderstanding has been brought about by taking men's opinions rather than a thorough study of God's Word. I think that the first thing we need to fix clearly in our minds is that it is the Lord's Supper, therefore, He alone has the right to fix the requirements for partaking and say who are fit subjects to partake. If anyone of us should prepare a supper we would certainly claim the right to say who should be invited to partake of it and if someone we considered a friend should be so presumptuous as to tell us what to serve, how to serve and then insist on the right to invite whomever he pleased, we would certainly think his actions exceedingly unfair. Is it not evident that for any professed Christian or group of Christians, to change by adding to or taking from the clear teaching of our Lord, on the proper observance of His Supper, must be exceedingly grievous to film who instituted it?
I believe it is the duty of every church to observe the Lord's Supper in accord with the divine pattern and mandates. We shall not endeavor to answer any of the man made arguments on this subject, but we shall endeavor to set forth the clear teachings of the Scripture on this subject. All must agree, that when we see what God's Word teaches on any subject we need no man made arguments, for God's Word speaks with absolute authority and finality on all subjects it presents.
A careful study of when and how "The Lord's Supper" was instituted reveals a number of very important and interesting facts. It was in the evening and while I do not insist it should always be in the evening, I do confess that I prefer to have the church come together in the evening for just the purpose of observing "The Lord's Supper" and after they have done so to quietly pass out. Our experience in observing it in this manner has lead us to much prefer this instead of either having it at the close of a morning or evening service. There is something about coming together for just that purpose that gives a different atmosphere to the service. There is one thought and purpose in hearts and minds of all, which helps all to grasp more fully the meaning and sacredness of the Supper.
The original pattern certainly teaches close communion, for Christ took only the twelve Apostles with Him when He instituted the Supper and it is our understanding that even Judas departed before "The Lord's Supper" was instituted. I believe the open or close communion question will be settled, in a large measure, by the proper answer to the question, "Whom did Christ make custodian of The Lord's Supper?"
I believe the Scripture clearly teaches "The Lord's Supper" is a church ordinance and therefore the church is responsible to see that it is Scripturally observed. There may be those who believe it is not a church ordinance, but was promiscuously given to every individual Christian to be observed individually or in groups without any church supervision or oversight. As I see it, to believe in open communion, it would be necessary to insist it is not a church ordinance, for if we agree that it is a church ordinance then the only logical conclusion is, that the first requirement for partaking of the Supper is membership in a Scriptural church.
I do not accept the universal church idea, which teaches the church consists of all the saved, but even if I did, reason would tell me such a thing could not function and could not be custodian of the ordinances. I believe the word "church" is used in two ways in the Scripture. One use refers to the church as an institution and the other as local bodies.
Many scholars and Bible students, other than Baptist, agree "The Lord's Supper" is a church ordinance, but our principal reason for believing it is a church ordinance is, God's Word teaches us it is. Every place in God's Word where we are told any thing about the observing of "The Lord's Supper" it is a local church (and there is no other kind) that meets together to observe it. There is not a case in the Scripture, I have ever been able to discover, where messenger bodies or groups of Christians other than a local church ever observed "The Lord's Supper." In as much as "The Lord's Supper" is a church ordinance we must agree that all who are not members of a Scriptural church are Scripturally barred from the Lord's table.
How do we define a Scriptural church? The most widely accepted definition among Baptists is the definition given in the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, from which I quote the first phrase, "We believe the Scriptures teach that a visible church of Christ is a company of baptized believers." To save space we omit the rest of the definition and I think the part quoted would be a better definition if the word visible were omitted, for when we use the word visible it implies there might be some other kinds of a church besides a visible one. Every church and individual that believes a church is a company of baptized believers, certainly could not believe a church is a company of unbaptized believers, or a company of people baptized to make them believers or a company of people baptized before they are believers. Therefore, unbaptized people could not constitute a Scriptural church and do not meet the Scriptural requirements to partake of "The Lord's Supper."
If someone should ask what constitutes Scriptural baptism I reply: Scriptural baptism is the immersion in water of one who has accepted Christ as his Savior. This immersion having been authorized by a proper authority (a proper authority is a church that believes and practices only Scriptural baptism) and administered by a proper administrator (a proper administrator is one who has been Scripturally baptized, that believes, teaches and practices Scriptural baptism and has been authorized by a Scriptural church to administer baptism to the candidate). It is administered in the name of The Father, Son and Holy Ghost. I need not argue that to be received into the membership of a Scriptural church one must have received Scriptural baptism, for that is evident.
My conclusion on this part of the discussion is that the Lord placed His Supper in Scriptural churches to be kept, guarded and administered by them and that only members of Scriptural churches are qualified to partake of this Supper.
I believe two other conditions for partaking are clearly taught in God's Word namely: We must be in fellowship with both God and the church that administers "The Supper" to meet the Scriptural requirement to partake. Many things seen and unseen to the eye of our fellowmen may break our fellowship with God. I believe that is the reason the Scripture urges each individual to carefully examine his own heart before God before partaking. There may be sins hidden in our lives the church cannot discipline because it doesn't know they are there. There may be covetousness, hate, hidden immorality, dishonesty, desire for self-exaltation or planned sin we are just waiting for an opportunity to give expression to. Many times the sins of omission break our fellowship with Him. Oh, how many of us refuse to do many of the things we know we should do, shun every possible responsibility, refuse to make any sacrifice for His cause always putting selfish interests before His interests. Yes, many things can break our fellowship with Him. That is why we need to examine our hearts so thoroughly before partaking. There are those who refuse to partake because they know they are not in fellowship with God, apparently they prefer to remain in a state of broken fellowship rather than confess their sin as they are told to in 1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness," and have that fellowship restored.
It certainly is not right to take the position that one has a right to remain out of fellowship with God providing he refrains from partaking of the "Lord's Supper." God expects everyone of His children to be in fellowship with Him and restore broken fellowship by confessing and forsaking his sin, then he will be a fit subject to partake of "The Lord's Supper."
No doubt, some actually refrain from partaking of "The Lord's Supper" because of a conviction they are unworthy and they think 1 Corinthians 11:29 which says, "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body," means that those who are unworthy should not partake. They say they are not worthy to partake and certainly none of us are worthy of salvation or any of the wonderful manifestations of God's mercy and on that interpretation of the verse everyone would be barred from "The Lord's Table." The very belief that we partake of the Supper because we think ourselves worthy to do so would prove us unworthy. On this verse we would like to quote the comment of J. R. Graves. "It does not say that if unworthy, and we eat and drink we are guilty of the body and blood of Christ, but if we eat and drink "unworthily"—an adverb, and not an adjective—and we should rejoice that it is so, for we are all unworthy to be accounted the friends, much less the brethren and sisters of Christ and children of God. No man such an honor. The fearful drink in an improper manner, the ordinance—in a word, body."
Now let us consider the other part of the statement affirming fellowship with the church where one partakes of "The Lord's Supper" is essential to Scripturally partaking. There are a number of offenses that members may commit making it mandatory on the church to withdraw fellowship from them. Certainly when God commands the church to withdraw fellowship from a member, He is not going to invite the member out of fellowship with His church to partake of "The Supper" which would indicate he is in fellowship with God. One can not be out of fellowship with the church and be in fellowship with God, unless it be a case where the church has acted contrary to the teachings of God's word. In such a case an individual would be duty bound to oppose such church action. Such a church would not have a Scriptural right to serve the Lord's Supper until it repented and returned to the teachings of God's word.
There are a number of things specifically mentioned in the Scripture for which a church should withdraw fellowship. One reason is stated in Matthew 18:15-17 "Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of' two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." These verses teach that those who will not accept the decisions of the church and settle their differences on that basis should be dismissed from fellowship."
The following verse states a number of' reasons why that ever lived was worthy of threat is to those who eat and in violation of the laws of "not discerning the Lord's fellowship should be severed. 1 Corinthians 5:11: "But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat." It is possible that the command not to cat here may mean we are forbidden to even eat a common meal with them, but certainly if that be true the Lord is not going to invite them to His table, after forbidding us to eat with them.
I need not comment upon fornicators for all agree such are not fit to fellowship. The same is true of the idolater and drunkard, but we cannot escape the fact that it is just as contrary to God's will to have fellowship with the covetous, railers, and extortioners. Many people are so covetous they will steal what actually belongs to God. The tenth is the least we have a Scriptural right to give Him, but many are too covetous to give Him even that. I will discuss this more fully in the chapter on church finances.
Railers are those who use abusive language, this is also a reason for terminating fellowship. Extortioner is one who has a greedy, grabbing, disposition. God put them right in the same class with fornicators, idolaters and drunkards and also tells the church to refuse them fellowship. Church bosses are hated of God, therefore they are out of fellowship with Him and the church, Revelation 2:6: "But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. Also 3 John 9, 10: "I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church."
Worldliness is a cause for non-fellowship: Ephesians 5:11 "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." Disorderly walk severs fellowship: II Thessalonians 3:6 "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." Disorderly walk in this case seems to refer primarily to those who were too lazy to work and help support the church but wanted the church to support them, verses 7 through 12 indicates this.
A heretic is to be rejected: Titus 3:10 "A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject." This means one who causes factions or we might say divisions caused by self-willed or doing and teaching what he pleases independently of the teachings and practices of the church.
All of these things axe Scriptural causes for the church withdrawing fellowship and hence they bar those who practice them from the "Lord's Table." Might I call attention to the fact that the church discipline should keep those mentioned above from "The Lord's Table" and in as much as the church has no power to discipline others than its own members, it certainly is not in a position to administer "The Lord's Supper" to those it cannot discipline hence it can only Scripturally administer "The Supper" to its own members.
In as much as I desire to keep this article brief I will not discuss the many un-Scriptural teachings regarding this ordinance. We are not at liberty to choose if we will partake of the "Lord's Supper" or not. Jesus told all of His apostles to drink of it in Matthew 26:27 and if He commanded all of them to, surely He must expect all of His followers to do the same. Just imagine some of them walking out or just sitting there and refusing to partake and saying they were not fit to partake. True they were far from perfect and in that respect were like all other Christians but they were in fellowship with their Lord and they were assembled together.
This ordinance has a very significant meaning. It is not a sacrament and its observance has no effect upon the Salvation of the soul. Transubstantiation and consubstantiatian are both unscriptural. It is a sacred ordinance. It shows us how Christ sacrificed His very life for us (Matthew 26:28; 1 Cor. 11:24-25). The fruit of the vine representing the blood of Christ which was shed for our sin. The broken bread represents the body of Christ broken for us. Surely He was beaten, smitten, spit upon, crowned with thorns, pierced by the cruel nails and the Roman spear all for us.
Our partaking of this Supper symbolizes the fact that our Spiritual lives must be sustained by feeding upon Christ.
Last let us note that this ordinance also has a forward look pointing to the time of the glorious return of our Lord for He said "Till I come again." Surely all Christians should deem it a great privilege to partake of this Supper and they should see to it that they meet the Scriptural requirements to partake. The church should see that its membership is properly instructed regarding the Lord's Supper and certainly the church, whom Christ has made custodian of the ordinances, should be very careful to see that it is Scripturally observed. It is certainly a serious offense for a church to attach unscriptural teaching to the "Lord's Supper" and observe it in ways contrary to Divine revelation.
© Copyright 2004-2012 Providence Baptist Ministries
http://www.pbministries.org. All rights reserved.