Directives for Ordering The Lord's Supper

Introduction to Special Gatherings and the Lord's Supper

0:04 Now, as you brethren know, in following your outline or abstract of the pastoral theology course, we are presently concerned to address those matters which pertain to the work of pastoral oversight as that work finds expression in the ordering of the corporate worship of God's people. In our previous time together, we focused our concern upon the general directives for conducting what I term the ordinary or regular services of worship. Now, today we shift the focus of our concern to the special gatherings of the people of God for biblically mandated activities.

0:48 We will cover at least the Supper of Remembrance or the Lord's Table and hopefully services for the baptism of professed disciples. Now, when we've completed our service, our consideration of these matters, God willing, next week we shall then proceed to take up those gatherings not mandated by Scripture but by cultural expectations such as weddings and funerals. Now, as we address ourselves to those special gatherings of the people of God clearly mandated by the Scriptures, we shall take up the first in order of importance as a gathering of the people of God, namely,

1:31 the Supper of Remembrance or the Communion Service. Now, in handling the subject, we shall do so under two major headings. Number one, the crucial questions concerning the Supper of Remembrance and secondly, some miscellaneous counsels concerning the Supper of Remembrance. Now, by way of introduction to the first heading, the crucial questions concerning the Supper of Remembrance, let me say, just a couple of things.

Biblical Warrant for the Lord's Supper as a Corporate Ordinance

2:02 First of all, the exposition of the biblical warrant for the Supper of Remembrance falls properly under ecclesiology in your systematics course and I have no intention of intruding upon that department or repeating the matters you have already or will receive when you take up that subject in your systematic theology course. Suffice it to say that the plain sense, of the language which refers to the Supper of Remembrance, establishes the fact that this Supper is to be an activity of the gathered church

2:44 and therefore must be regulated in its details by those responsible for the oversight of the church. The two passages to which I make reference are 1 Corinthians 10, 16 and 17, and 1 Corinthians 11, 17 to 34. 1 Corinthians 10, 16 and 17. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ?

3:17 The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ? Seeing that we who are many are one bread, one body, four, we all partake of, one, bread. Here the corporate nature of the Supper of Remembrance is stamped upon the face of the text, we all partake of the one bread. And what is there in condensed form in 1 Corinthians 10 is both expanded and repeated in 1 Corinthians 11, 17 to 34.

3:58 In taking up the whole subject of the, the abuses of the Lord's Supper, notice the repeated use of the term, come together. Verse 17, I praise you not that you come together, not for the better but for the worse. Verse 18, first of all, when you come together. Verse 20, when therefore you assemble yourselves together.

4:26 Verse 33, wherefore my brethren, when you come together, gather to eat, wait one for another. So these references, I say, clearly establish that the Supper of Remembrance or the Communion service is regarded by apostolic instruction as a corporate activity of the gathered church and therefore properly comes within the scope of the task of the overseers of the church. And now what I wish to do is take up, what I have called, the crucial questions concerning the Supper of Remembrance. And there are three.

Crucial Question 1: Frequency of the Lord's Supper

5:10 Number one, how frequently should the Supper be held? Number two, in what context should the Supper be held? And three, what perspectives should predominate our planning and administration of the Supper of Remembrance?

5:28 First crucial question then, how frequently should the Supper, of remembrance be held. In keeping with the glory of new covenant worship, its specific prescription as to frequency is not anywhere clearly mandated. The Lord Jesus said, This do in remembrance of me. But he did not say how often we are to do it. In 1 Corinthians 11,

6:01 26, the apostle says, As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till he come. And that word, hosakis, means whenever, as often as, and a good illustration of its usage in another context is found in Revelation 11 and verse 6. These have power to shut the heaven that it reign not. During the days of their prophecy, they have power over the waters to turn them into blood

6:37 and to smite the earth with every plague as often as they shall desire. But there is nothing in the word itself, hosakis, which indicates the frequency as to the interval of time. So the general principle should be, in my understanding, as follows.

7:02 It should be often enough to derive regularly its God-intended benefits without leaving it unnecessarily vulnerable to becoming commonplace on the water.

7:37 It should be often enough to derive regularly its God-intended benefits without leaving it unnecessarily vulnerable to becoming commonplace on the one hand, or superstitiously venerated on the other. Now, among those who seek to live and worship by the Holy Spirit,

8:14 by the regulative principle, there exist the extremes of a quarterly, that is, every three months or even less, supper, less frequency in the supper of remembrance, to those who observe the supper weekly, and to some who would even advocate a more frequent supper of remembrance. Now, you see, there is a bad tendency in each of these that, I would regard as extremes. If the supper is only held quarterly, or twice a year, or once a year,

8:57 then the people of God are not given ample opportunity regularly to derive its God-intended benefits. And there is a tendency, if it is held that infrequently, to surround it with such pomp and special services and ceremony as to push it in the direction of the Lord. In the direction of superstitious veneration. So the too infrequent coming to the supper of remembrance does indeed, on the one hand, rob the people of the benefits that would come from a more

9:38 regular and frequent participation, and leaves it vulnerable to superstitious veneration. On the other hand, the weekly supper of remembrance does indeed, on the one hand, rob the people of the benefits that would come from a more regular and frequent participation, and leaves it vulnerable to superstitious veneration. On the other hand, the weekly supper of remembrance does indeed, on the one hand, have a tendency to make it something commonplace. And I have been in churches where they practice weekly communion, and I have yet to be in one where I did not discern, if I have any accuracy of discernment, a widespread tendency for the supper to become very commonplace. Now, of course,

10:21 Spurgeon would argue, as one who believed in weekly communion, that it only becomes commonplace to the heart that is not attuned to the Savior. If the supper of remembrance can become commonplace, cannot the preaching of the Word and all of the other ordained institutions of God. And so I am very conscious that my argument that a weekly communion service leaves the people of God unnecessarily vulnerable to regarding it is commonplace would be challenged by some very able proponents of weekly communion, and I am not

11:02 ignorant of their challenge. Nonetheless, I am entitled to my own opinion on the matter.

11:09 Now, one would be hard-pressed to prove that the gathering for the supper holds as prominent a place as the preaching of the Word of God in the edification of the people of God. If we struck the theology of the means ordained of God for the edification of the Church from the proportionate emphases of the Word of God, I believe it would be difficult to find evidence that the supper of remembrance is put on an equal plane with the preaching of the Word of God

11:51 as a God-ordained means of the sanctification of the people of God and of the world. This is a problem, and it is worth understanding. I think, for instance, that the word of God is required in the edification of the church. If we would be able to find the exact boldness of the teaching of the church in a single order for the so-called edification of the people of God, the salvation of the lost. Our Lord prays in John 17, 17, sanctify them in thy truth, thy word is

12:08 truth. But he does not say sanctify them in thy truth and in the supper of remembrance. There is no indication that it is put upon an equal plane. Ephesians 4, 15, speaking the truth in love may grow up into him in all things. And a pivotal passage such as 2 Timothy 4 in verse 2, where

12:31 Paul is charging Timothy and he charges him, preach the word, be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and teaching, for the time will come when they will not endure the sound teaching. But one looks in vain for these kinds of exhortations with reference to the gospel. The administration of the Lord's supper. And therefore, arguing by inference or by deduction, it is my own conviction that God has given to the preaching of the word a prominence with regard to the edification of the people that ought to be reflected in the relative frequency with which

Rationale for Monthly Evening Communion at Trinity Baptist Church

13:15 this means of grace impinges upon the people of God and this means of grace impinges upon the people of God. The people of God. So, so much then with regard to the question, how frequently should the supper be held? Let me now, in, as it were, bringing this to a practical conclusion, give you a rationale for our practice of one supper of remembrance per month, a position we did not come to quickly, nor did we come to immediately, but by trial and adjustment, we've settled the supper of remembrance.

13:54 We've settled the supper of remembrance. We've settled the supper of remembrance. We've settled the supper of remembrance. We've settled upon the practice. And since none of you was here to be aware of that trial and

14:00 adjustment, I'll give you a little bit of the history of Trinity Church and its communion practices. When we first began as a church, breaking with the denomination and starting from scratch over 21 years ago, we said, let's begin with a quarterly communion service. And if we find that God so meets us in that quarterly communion service that there, there is a groundswell of desire to benefit from its God-ordained and God-intended grace more frequently, then we'll seek to respond to it. We felt it would be wiser to hold back and to respond

14:40 with more than to start with too much and try to retrench. And as we found God meeting us in that quarterly supper of remembrance, we then moved to a monthly supper of remembrance. However, at the time, because people carried with them the baggage of thinking of the communion service as something tacked on and something to which anyone who believed himself to be a Christian had a right to, and we were seeking to ground the people in the concept that identification with the church was a prerequisite for the privilege of coming to the table, we had it as a separate service one hour or one hour and a half before our evening service once again.

15:25 So you had to want to come bad enough to make that extra effort. And people who simply came unconverted and half-committed people who would come to the regular services were in that way excluded. And generally speaking, we had a much higher level of expectation that only those who were serious about coming to the table as members of Christ's visible church would be present. And then as we came to the regular service, we had a much higher level of expectation that only those we wrestled with the whole matter of should we settle into the concept of once per month and then have it as the climactic expression of our worship on a Lord's Day evening service, we felt

16:08 comfortable with that practice, began to frame ourselves by that practice probably about seven years ago. And here were some of the reasons, and I just lay them out before you and you can think them through at the appropriate time in your own ministry. Number one, we found that it necessitated that at least one in every eight expositions,

16:33 or if we regard the adult class as a formal gathering of the church, one in every twelve expositions would bring us back to the very nerve centers of the gospel. And we judged that that was good to have those of us committed to public ministry forced to come back to the very nerve centers of the gospel at least once in a while. And we found that it necessitated that at least one in every twelve expositions, so that no matter what series are being carried on in the adult class Sunday morning, Sunday night, once every twelve public ministries, we as the servants of God and with us the people of God who sit under our ministry would be brought into a focused

17:18 confrontation with the nerve centers of the gospel. Secondly, this pattern was not so frequent as to militate against the public ministry. And we found that it necessitated that at least one in every twelve expositions, so that no matter what series are being carried on in the adult class Sunday morning, Sunday night, once every twelve expositions, we as the servants of God and with us the benefits of consecutive sustained exposition and instruction in the ordinary services of public worship. Frequent enough to call us back to the central issues, but not so frequent as to disrupt the continuity of consecutive exposition and instruction. Thirdly, we found that by devoting

17:54 one service to the supper of remembrance, not only did we have precedent from Acts chapter 20, which is probably the only text that I know of in the New Testament that speaks with such explicit language of a gathering intended to have the supper of remembrance as its central concern. And upon the first day of the week, Acts 20 verse 7, when we were gathered together to break bread, gathered to break bread. Now, preaching was not excluded, and Paul obviously did not bring a half-hour

18:37 communion meditation because old Eutychus fell asleep and had to be raised from the dead. But it's the principle that here was a gathering that seemed to have as its unique focus the breaking of bread. And therefore, we felt that by having one evening service per month designated as our communion service, we could say on that evening, we could have one evening service per month. We gathered primarily to break bread. And therefore, we did not have the tacked-on syndrome

19:09 of communion that so often exists, where the primary focus of the communion service is the edification that comes from the preaching of the word, and the supper of remembrance simply gets tacked on. We felt, no, let's have it frequently enough that we derive its benefit, but not so frequently that we derive its benefit. And so, we decided to have it frequently enough that we derive that we have to give it a lesser place of importance than it deserves. Let us have one service per month when we can say our primary focus in gathering is to break bread, and have everything in that service leading up to the supper of remembrance. And then the reason we do it in

19:51 the p.m. and not the a.m. is a very pragmatic one. It takes off the pressure of time that is present

19:59 with little ones, especially who have sat through the day, and it takes off the pressure of time through Sunday school and Sunday morning service. They're hungry, their diapers are wet, they're grouchy. You have people who have borderline hypoglycemia, or more than borderline, who, after the two morning services, if they don't get some food in their tummy, they can get very irritable. And we just felt that the circumstances of our church at this particular time, that it was expedient to have the supper of remembrance in the evening. And the children have had their naps in

20:30 the afternoon. And they've only sat through the one service. So that's our rationale. We've come to it by trial and adjustment. And it's not the law of the Medes and the Persians. There may be factors that develop in

20:43 our understanding of the word of God or in our congregational life. If the Lord spares us, you might come back five years from now and find that we've changed some of those circumstances. So, the first vital question, how frequently should the supper of remembrance be held? I answer, The word of God nowhere gives us explicit directions. My counsel to you is, have it often

Crucial Question 2: Context of the Lord's Supper (Gathered Church Ordinance)

21:10 enough to derive regularly its God-intended benefits without leaving it unnecessarily vulnerable to becoming commonplace on the one hand or superstitiously venerated on the other. Now, the second crucial question is this. In what context should the supper be held? Now, I've already alluded to the answer earlier, but now I wish to affirm that it is clearly a gathered

21:46 church ordinance. In the light of the teaching of 1 Corinthians 10, 16, and 17, and 1 Corinthians 11, 17 and following, particularly the references of verse 20, 33, and 34, you must refuse, the superstitious notions or unwise zeal that would foster a practice of private communion or selective communion or non-church gatherings for communion. You'd be amazed at how many places a

22:27 few Christians get together in a home and they feel they're perfectly warranted to engage in the supper of remembrance. If anything is clear from the passages, quoted and also from the Acts 2, 42 passage, these all continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine, fellowship, breaking of bread, and the prayers, the breaking of bread is referred to as part of the corporate activity of the entire church. Now, I am not saying that if there is someone who is afflicted with a long-term illness that it might not be appropriate to take a representative of the church. I am not saying that if there is someone who is afflicted with a

23:09 group of the church, and in that context, under the direction of the elders, to have, as it were, an extension of the church brought into someone's home and there to remember the Lord in his appointed way. I would be hard-pressed to say that that was sin. On the other hand, on the other hand, I find it much easier to say to a person cut off from the gathering of the whole church, and therefore cut off from this special means of grace, that God does not hold them culpable, his providence has cut them off, and therefore he will not rob them of the benefits that would

23:52 ordinarily come to them were they with the gathered church, and to assure them that whatever grace is normally conveyed by means of the supper of remembrance, God will convey to his child who is isolated from it the same way. God ministers the grace that ordinarily comes from the communion of the saints in their general interaction to that soul who is cut off from that general interaction by divine providence. And rather than open the door to any superstitious notion leading to private communion and all of the evils that attend it, I would rather err on the side of encouraging the isolated believer

24:35 to trust God in this instance, even as we would encourage them to trust God in this instance. Trust God when cut off from other means of grace. But now having established that it is a gathered church ordinance, this must regulate who is invited to participate in that supper of remembrance. And because of the breakdown of biblical churchmanship in our day, you have church floaters who have never, never committed themselves to any church and any text. And so, I would like to say to you, I would like to say to

25:10 you, I would like to say to you, I would like to say to you, I would like to say to you, tangible oversight who feel that because they judge themselves to be Christians, they have an uninhibited right to come to the Lord's table wherever they happen to be church hopping at any given point in their nomadic history. And you need graciously but firmly to lay upon their consciences that the Bible nowhere envisions a person coming to the table who has not, first of all, identified himself. With a visible communion of God's people. If the table is set within the church, it is a church

25:49 ordinance and only members of the church have biblical warrant to be present at that table. That's why you may go into a situation, if the other practice has obtained for a long time, where you may want to have a separate service in order to break the back of this idea that any old church hopper is welcome to the table. All right? Now, question number three. How frequently? What context? Now, the third question,

Crucial Question 3: Predominant Perspectives - Primary Purpose (Remembrance)

26:23 what perspectives should predominate in our planning and our administration of the Supper of Remembrance? What perspectives should predominate? And I have four. I'm sorry, one, well, really, I've broken them down into two subheadings, yes, and it's under the second one. I've reworked the

27:01 lecture and I've gone from three to four. But it is two major perspectives, all right? And then we'll have the various subheadings. Number one, the primary purpose of the Supper ought to dominate all facets of the service. That's the first major perspective. The primary purpose of the Supper

27:26 ought to dominate all facets. of the service. And what is the primary purpose? Well, it's bound up in the language of 1 Corinthians 11, 24, and 25. 1 Corinthians chapter 11, verses 24 and 25. The apostle, recounting what he had

27:51 received from the Lord, said that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, This is my body which is for you. This do. Engage in this activity in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood. This do as

28:19 oft as you drink it in remembrance of me. Anamnesis is remembrance, and it comes from the verb anamnesis, and it comes from the verb anamnesis, and it comes from the verb anamnesis, and it comes also to remember. Now let's just look at two instances of the usage of these words. The word remembrance, Luke 22 and verse 19. Luke 22 and verse 19. And he took bread, when he had given

28:56 thanks, he broke it and gave to them, saying, This is my body which is given for you. This do in remembrance of me. Indicating that Paul's use of the word remembrance is to remember. And he of that phrase in 1 Corinthians 11 is what we can call for all intents and purposes a direct quotation of the words of our Lord. Now what is that concept of remembrance? Well, Hebrews 10.3

29:23 illustrates it very clearly. With reference to the old covenant sacrifices, we read, but in those sacrifices, Hebrews 10.3, there is a remembrance, a conscience, deliberate calling to mind, a remembrance made of sins year by year. So remembrance, then, is a conscious act of mental reflection, a concentration of the mind upon an object, fact, or person. And likewise with the verb anamnesis, in Mark 14.72, you have a very

30:07 vivid illustration of its usage in conjunction with Peter's betrayal and what happened when the cock crew, or the cock crowed. I guess a cock doesn't crew, does it? If it crows today, it crowed yesterday. All right. Mark 14 and verse 72. And straightway, that's why I said crew. I was

30:33 remembering the old English of the 1901. And straightway, the second time, the cock crew, I think we would say in modern English, the cock crowed, or we'd say probably the rooster cackled. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, before the cock crowed twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept. Now our verb is, and Peter

30:59 called to mind anamnesis, the word. The word that Jesus had spoken was there in the file draws of his mind. But the incident of the crowing of the rooster brought it from the level of merely being in the file draw, pulled it out, set it before the eyes of his mind, and it made its present, pressing, burning impression upon his mental consciousness. He called to mind that word. Hebrews 10.32.

31:35 Another usage of the verb, and what shall I say more?

31:44 Hebrews 10.32. That's the wrong reference. Is it? Oh, that's it. Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you. Because I

32:06 try to always check out all my references. That's when I found out I had in my notes Mark 14.32, and I said, that's wrong. And I took my Englishman's Greek and found out it was 72.

32:17 And yes, here we are. Thank you. 10.32. I was in 11.32.

32:22 But call to remembrance the former days in which, you were enlightened, you endured a great conflict of sufferings, etc. Now, what is he telling them to do? There were incidents in their former days that had not been pulled out of the file draws of the mind and obliterated. They were there. And he says,

32:42 now reach in and by a conscious act, pull them out and open them up upon the desk, as it were, of your mental furniture and gaze upon them. Call to remembrance the former days. Now, the primary purpose of the supper is bound up in the words anamnesis and the verb form anamnesco. And it does indeed mean that its purpose is to engage in a conscious act of mental reflection, a concentration of the mind upon an object, fact, or person.

33:24 Now, tie this in with 1 Corinthians 10. And what is the inevitable conclusion? 1 Corinthians 10.16.

33:35 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion, a koinonia, a participation of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a koinonia, a communion, a participation in the body of Christ? Now, you see, sacramentalists love this passage. From Roman Catholics to those who go halfway with Calvin. And by the way, remember, Cunningham even calls Calvin's position on the sacraments

34:11 a hopeless, confused mess, that no one can sort out what Calvin was trying to say. Trying to move away from Rome's superstition and sacramentalism, but something short of what they would call the mere memorial service of the Zinglians, Calvin came up with a position that even Cunningham could not figure out. So I don't feel so bad when I read Calvin on the sacrament of the Lord's Supper and find it difficult to ascertain what he's saying. But this is one of the passages, you see, that does seem to have sacramental language about it. Is it not a participation of the blood of Christ?

34:51 And a participation or koinonia of the body of Christ? But when we take our Lord's words and put them on the front of these verses, and the repetition of those words in the apostolic instruction on the back end from 1 Corinthians 11, it is koinonia or participation by means of what? The act of remembrance. And where there is no remembrance, there is no koinonia. Remembrance is the means of participation in the body and blood

35:26 of our Lord Jesus Christ. So the primary purpose of the supper, ought to dominate all facets of the communion service. And what is that primary purpose? It is to have fellowship with the person of Jesus Christ as crucified for us by means of calling to mind who he is as the only Savior of sinners. What he became in order to become our Savior.

36:05 What he did in undertaking our salvation. What we receive as the fruit of his death. And what we owe him as the debt of grace. Dagg, in his systematic, in his, not systematic theology, what's the name of his book? J.L. Dagg?

36:28 Manual. Manual, thank you, of theology. Dagg, I believe, has captured the essence of it in his words. Words found on page 210. That's the book of, second part of the book where he deals with church

36:42 order. He says, the Lord's supper was instituted on the night when Jesus was betrayed to be crucified and serves for a memorial of his sufferings in death. When we remember him, we are to remember his agonies, his broken body, and his shed blood. In preaching the gospel, Paul determined to know nothing but Jesus Christ.

37:06 And him crucified. So, in the Eucharist, Christ is presented to view, not as transfigured on Mount Tabor, or as glorified at his Father's right hand, but as suffering and dying. We delight to keep in memory the honors which they whom we love have received. But Jesus calls us to remember the humiliation which he endured.

37:36 In the lowest point of his humiliation, the supper directs our thoughts. This do in remembrance of me. Remembrance of his person is central. But remembrance of him in what capacity? In what he underwent in

37:56 the giving of his body to death, and in what he underwent in the shedding of his blood. This is the way by which we have to remember him. Communion, koinonia, fellowship in the blood of Christ and in the body of Christ. And so the primary purpose of the supper ought to dominate all facets of the service. Practical

38:25 conclusion? Any ministry of the word preceding the partaking of the elements should lead to our greater ability to remember him. In the precise framework which he has mandated. Any remarks at the table, the choice of our hymns, the direction and the content of our prayers, everything should be an arrow pointing to the primary purpose of the supper, which is to remember our dying Lord Jesus Christ.

Crucial Question 3: Predominant Perspectives - Secondary Purposes

39:04 But then, secondly, under this matter of the that should predominate our planning and administration of the supper of remembrance, not only should the primary purpose of the supper dominate all facets, but secondly, the secondary purposes of the supper ought to regulate some facets of the service. The secondary purposes of the supper ought to regulate some facets of the service. And here again, Dagg speaks with great

39:41 perception when he says, the simple ceremony is admirably contrived to serve more than a single purpose. And what are some of those secondary purposes? Well, let me suggest four of them. Number one, the supper is a renewed call to feed upon Christ as our life and salvation. The supper

40:10 serves as a renewed call to feed upon Christ as our life and salvation. What we do, we are to do in remembrance of Him, yes,

40:26 but it's in remembrance of Him who, as crucified, is our very life, and has stated that in the most graphic terms in the passage in John 6, 55, 53, and in that whole context, a passage which sacramentalists love to apply in a very artificial way to the Supper of Remembrance. And here again I quote Dagg on page 210. While it shows forth the Lord's death, the Supper represents at the same time the spiritual benefit which the believer derives from it. He eats the bread and drinks the fruit of the vine

41:10 in token of receiving His spiritual sustenance from Christ crucified. The rite preaches the doctrine that Christ died for our sins and that we live by His death. For our Lord said, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. These remarkable words teach the necessity of His atoning sacrifice and of faith in that.

41:40 Without that sacrifice, without these, salvation and eternal life are impossible. When Christ said, My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed, He did not refer to His flesh and blood literally understood. He calls Himself the living bread which came down from heaven. This cannot be affirmed of His literal flesh.

42:02 To have eaten this literally would not have secured everlasting life. And equally inefficacious is the Roman eschatology, a ceremony in which they absurdly imagine they eat the real body of Christ. To state it crassly, it is a cannibalistic exercise. His body is present in the Eucharist in no other sense than in that which we can discern it.

42:26 When He said, This is my body, the plain meaning is this represents my body. So we point to a picture and say, This is Christ on the cross. The Eucharist is a picture in which the bread represents the body of Christ. It represents the body of Christ suffering for our sins.

42:44 Faith discerns what the picture represents. It discerns the Lord's body in the commemorative representation of it and derives spiritual nourishment from the atoning sacrifice made by His broken body and shed blood. And so in planning and in conducting the Supper of Remembrance, we ought to keep the body of Christ. We ought to keep in mind and regulate facets of the service to underscore that it is not only in its primary intention a season of calling to remembrance our Lord Himself,

43:23 particularly in the humiliation of His crucifixion on our behalf, but it is a renewed call to feed upon Him as our life and salvation. A secondary. And as the second of the secondary purposes is, the Supper is intended to be a visible display of our unity in Christ. It is intended to be a visible display of our unity in Christ.

43:55 1 Corinthians 10, 17, Seeing that we who are many are one bread or one loaf, one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. So our partaking of the one loaf is the external symbol of our being one body. Our unity in Christ is displayed at the Supper of Remembrance. This is why we practice the reception of new members at the Supper, not because there is expressed biblical want, but because we believe that that Supper where that unity is visibly displayed is a very appropriate supper.

44:39 It is a very appropriate place to do it. It is here that calls to reconciliation among brethren can be made very effectively. As the loaf sits before the people, we can exhort them and say we are all about to partake of one loaf. We are declaring our unity in the fellowship and remembrance of Christ crucified.

45:00 Are we declaring a lie? As we come to render the sacrifice of praise to our Lord, do we remember in confidence, coming with this gift of praise that we have ought against our brother, or our brother has ought against us, let it be a call to reconciliation if such is necessary. But then its third secondary purpose is this. It is a powerful and vivid proclamation of the gospel.

45:29 It is a powerful and vivid proclamation of the gospel. 1 Corinthians 11 and verse 26, As oft as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you are proclaiming forth, you are preaching. This other word is translated in Acts 4.2 and 13.38 and in other contexts.

45:59 You are proclaiming, preaching forth the Lord's death until he come. This is why we encourage the children and the unconverted to be present. As the spoken word has reached their ears, let the visible word, reach their eyes, and even their sense of smell. It was a most moving thing when we were interviewing one of the young ladies for membership a few months ago.

46:28 And most of you know that we are very reluctant to take anyone whom we could not call a young adult into membership. And this girl was right on the borderline. And as we were interviewing her for membership and asked her why she wanted to become a member, one of her reasons was this. She said, Because of what God has done in my heart in making Christ precious to me, every time I sit at the communion service and the plate is passed with the bread on it, she said, my heart is left on the plate as it passes.

47:04 I tell you, it was hard to hold back the tears. You see, there was, God was using the preaching of Christ and the visible elements to confirm to her own spirit that she was indeed one who was feeding upon Christ and was a man of God. And she said, I am a man of God. I am a man of God.

47:18 I am a man of God. I am a man of God. I am a man of God. And she longed to enter into that symbolic feeding upon him because she had come truly and spiritually to feed upon the Lord Jesus.

47:29 So do not discourage the presence of outsiders and unbelievers, but use this opportunity to underscore one of its secondary purposes, namely, that of being a powerful and vivid declaration of the gospel. And then a fourth secondary purpose of the supper is, is that it's a renewed call to self-examination and holiness of life.

47:56 And of course, this is clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 10, 20, and 21. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord or of the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?

48:15 Or are we stronger than he? Here Paul uses the occasion of making reference to the Lord's Supper to underscore that the child of God must be wholly the Lord's. He cannot divide his allegiance between the Lord and demons. And then, of course, in verses 27 to 32 of chapter 11, the warning of unworthy participation.

48:44 Verse 28, let a man prove himself and suffer so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. And so the whole concept of self-examination with reference to a discerning participation of the supper and single-hearted devotion to the Lord whom we remember. It is appropriate, therefore, that you should use the occasion of the Lord's Supper to underscore the fact that it is intended of God, to become a renewed call to self-examination and to holiness of life. Why did Jesus shed his blood?

49:29 And then perhaps to comment briefly on such passages as Titus 2, 11 to 14, Ephesians 5, 25 and following, 1 Corinthians 6, 19 and 20. You were bought with a price. You are not your own. Glorify God therefore in your body.

49:48 1 Corinthians 6, 19 and 20. You were bought with a price. You are not your own. Glorify God therefore in your body.

49:49 You are bought with a price. You are not your own. Glorify God therefore in your body. Now don't be discouraged or feel yourself in bondage if at every communion service you do not find yourself able

50:04 to focus upon the primary purpose and all of the secondary purposes. Rather, examine your communion services over the scope of six months and ask, have we kept the focus upon the primary purpose have we kept the focus upon the primary purpose and have we incorporated to a greater or lesser degree all of the elements of the secondary purposes? Don't expect to incorporate all of the secondary purposes and to highlight them explicitly at every service. Don't expect to do that. It would clog it with too much of your own words

50:43 and keep people from remembering the Lord himself. But look back every six months or so and ask yourself, But look back every six months or so and ask yourself, am I taking advantage of these divinely instituted secondary purposes and highlighting them from one communion service to another so that over the passage of months and years your people are receiving the full-orbed benefit of a whole biblical doctrine of the Lord's Supper. All right? Now having addressed ourselves to these three basic questions, the crucial questions,

Miscellaneous Counsel 1: Beware of Moving from Apostolic Simplicity

51:25 let me conclude my guidelines for the Supper of Remembrance with some practical warnings and exhortations. And I think at this point we ought to take our break. I think this would be the best place because these concluding exhortations, I have five of them, might run us too long, so let's break here, all right? All right brethren, having addressed the crucial questions concerning the Supper of Remembrance, All right brethren, having addressed the crucial questions concerning the Supper of Remembrance, All right brethren, having addressed the crucial questions concerning the Supper of Remembrance, now my second major heading is some Miscellaneous Councils concerning

52:07 the Supper of Remembrance and I have five of them. Number one, Beware of any movement away from the simplicity of apostolic perspectives and directives concerning the Supper of Remembrance. Beware of any movement away from the simplicity the simplicity of the apostolic perspectives and directives touching the Supper of Remembrance. It is a fact of church history that a corruption of the sacraments has often led to or been the

52:51 accompaniment of a corruption of the gospel itself. A corruption of the sacraments has often led to or been the accompaniment of a corruption of the gospel itself. The spoken word and the visible words stand or fall together in their purity or in their corruption. The spoken word and the visible words, baptism in the Lord's Supper, stand or fall together in their purity or in their corruption.

53:32 As long as Christ crucified is precious to men because Spirit-anointed preaching has made Him precious, the simplicity and joyful dignity of a simple Supper of Remembrance will satisfy the hearts of God's people. As long as Christ crucified is precious to men because Spirit-anointed preaching has made Him precious, the simplicity and joyful dignity of a simple Supper of Remembrance

54:07 will suffice. The Lord is also sufficient to。」 Let Christ be unknown and unloved, and men will itch for ritual and form to take His place. IWM transcendental and multi-dimensional so shall seen. IWM transcendental and multi-dimensional so shall seen. тест, tesach, locus ministratum, and the

54:44 destruction magical powers will replace mental reflection now i commend an excellent section in john owen volume 8 pages 560 to 565 which underscores this truth he contrasts what the supper should be with what it is in the superstition pomp and ritual of the harlot of rome so beware of any movement away from the simplicity of the apostolic perspectives and

Miscellaneous Counsel 2: Beware of Legalism over Circumstantial Details

55:28 directives touching the supper of remembrance because the minute there's any such movement somewhere the gospel has been corrupted or christ is not precious through the proclamation of that gospel all right second warning or counsel is this beware of a legalistic mentality that would rend the body of christ over circumstantial details pertaining to the

56:08 supper beware of a legalistic mentality that would rend the body of christ over circumstantial details pertaining to the supper church history tells a tragic tale of carnal outbursts and divisions over circumstantial details respecting the supper i remember reading several years ago

56:41 someone lamb basting using anything other than bread that was without leaven and anything other than fermented wine and mocking any other practice and calling it a cracker and grape juice substitute for the lord of the earth and the lord of the earth and the lord of the earth and the lord of the spirit believed in Jesus for the Lord's Lord's is most of you whom

57:23 you to you to you to wine, which may well be what was used at the Passover supper and merged into the initial institution, or the 12.5% of a good, well-aged Beaujolais or California dry red wine, why

58:07 not a white wine? Red, white, rosé. You see, where do you stop? Where does one stop with the mentality that would wring the body of Christ over the question of fermented wine?

58:26 Likewise, over unleavened or leavened bread, all it says is a loaf. All that is essential to the circumstances is a loaf of bread. What about the one cup, as opposed to many cups? One table. Shall we kneel, sit in a pew, come to one table? These are circumstances

58:54 pertaining to the supper. What is essential is that there is bread that is broken, and there is the fruit of the vine that has been crushed, poured out, and is drunk. And it's interesting that though the Bible has its word for wine, oinos, which in most contexts does refer to fermented fruit of the vine, the word oinos is not used. It is used to be used directly in conjunction with any of the classical passages, or what we would call the pivotal passages, but the term the fruit of the vine is used. Now, that's just

59:36 a fact. Do with it what you will. Now, why do we partake of one loaf here in our own situation? Well, in the regular consecutive reading through the scriptures, I can remember as I try to recall the details, that several of us, it was in our, I think, first time reading through.

59:57 After we established as a church and began that practice, that having come to 1 Corinthians and reading, particularly chapter 10, we are one loaf, or we all partake, one body, we all partake of one loaf. At the next elders' meeting, there was some discussion, said, well, would not the symbolism be more vivid? Were we to have one loaf? Why can't we have one loaf? We used to have squares of bread cut up, as they do in many places, and we

60:26 saw no good reason. Why we could not go to the one loaf? So what we did is, we discussed it as elders, we came to one mind, we then came to the people and said, we are of a mind to change this circumstance of our supper of remembrance and move from bread cut up into little cubes into one loaf from which we will all take a portion in order to demonstrate more vividly the significance that we all partake of the one loaf, that Christ had the one body, that we all partake

60:57 of the one loaf, and as we explained to the people, there was no disruption, they welcomed it, and the harmony and unity of the body was cemented by a circumstantial change, not fragmented. Now then, we wrestled with the concept of one cup, though there is not the same emphasis that you have in the 1 Corinthians 10. In the passage with respect to the one cup, we do know that the singular is used, the cup of the Lord, you cannot partake of the cup of the Lord and the table of demons, and

61:39 as we wrestled with that whole question of one cup, and I've been in situations where they profess to have one cup, but generally what they have is one pitcher and at least two silver cups. I don't know that I've ever been in a place where they actually had simply one, but be that as it may. We felt that in given our situation, where in no social situation do we partake of one cup, we don't pass around a common cup, it is not a part of our common social situation, some people would find it tremendously distracting, they would feel they were tempting God to pick up someone else's germs, others would counter and say yes, and if you went to fermented

62:21 wine, then you would have the possibility that the alcohol content would kill the germs, then I say. You might as well go to a port wine at 20%, make sure you're really going to kill the germs, but then we have people for whom alcohol was a real problem in their past, who to this day, the very smell of it is a temptation to them, others for whom the matter of partaking of any alcoholic beverage is a matter of conscience, we would be forcing them to violate their conscience, we could perceive all kinds of disruption coming over any attempt to kill the germs, but we felt that in given our situation, we would pass around a common cup, we don't pass around a common cup, we could perceive all kinds of disruption coming over any attempt to kill the germs, but we felt that in given our situation, we would be forcing them to press upon the people the matter of one cup, whereas regarding this as a circumstance,

63:05 we felt there was no good reason to press this at the expense of the unity of the body of God's people and the sensitivity on the one hand of some weaker brethren, or to cause unnecessary stumbling to brethren whom we know from pastoral dealings would have problems with fermented wine. So, that's why we didn't do it. Some would say, well, that's inconsistent, blah, blah, blah, blah, well, let him say to his own master, servant, stands or falls, and we are prepared to answer to our Lord until he gives us further light. Now, if God clearly requires something that goes against all of our sensibilities and

63:47 all of our aesthetic tastes, then we've just got to bite the bullet and do it. But we're not convinced that the Bible thus mandates that circumstance, that the central issue is. That as long as that grape contains its juice, it is not something that can be drunk, it is the juice pressed and crushed and poured forth that symbolizes the blood of Christ. And so long as we are drinking of the fruit of the vine, which could only come into our possession by the crushing of the grape, that the heart of the symbolism is thus maintained.

Miscellaneous Counsel 3: Demonstrate Eldership Parity and Combat Sacerdotalism

64:24 So, beware, brethren, of a legalistic mentality. That would. Rend the body of Christ over circumstantial details pertaining to the supper. Third counsel, use the occasion of the supper, use the occasion of the supper to demonstrate the parity of the eldership, to demonstrate the parity of the eldership, that's P-A-R-I-T-Y,

65:00 and to combat sacerdotalism, S-A-C-E-R-D-O-T-A-L-I-S-M, sacerdotalism and clericalism.

65:17 Sacerdotalism is excessive reliance on a priesthood. Clericalism is excessive power or elevation of the clergy. Now, I am aware that attempts have been made to prove that only those who labor in the word and in teaching, called in Presbyterian circles ministers of the word, are the proper stewards of the sacraments. Frankly, I cannot buy their attempts to ground such thinking in exegesis.

65:49 It doesn't wash with me when I Corinthians is used where it speaks of ministers as stewards of the mysteries of God, and that proof text is used to prove that only ministers should officiate at the Lord's supper. I see nothing. nothing in responsible exegesis to indicate that only a man laboring in the word and in teaching should officiate at the Lord's Supper. In fact, I see nothing to indicate that only elders should, that the Supper should be under the direction of the overseers. That I see by way of strong

66:30 deduction from the role of the overseer. Surely, then, this is a marvelous opportunity to have all of the elders lead at the table, and perhaps even to include non-elders in the prayers of the giving of thanks. We did this in the early days when our eldership was limited, lest people think that only Mr. Dixon and I could somehow, with our prayers, have the elements set apart to be used in this sacred way.

67:02 As though there were something in our prayers that gave to the bread and to the fruit of the vine some peculiar significance that the prayer of an ordinary member of the congregation could not do. So we deliberately would include them in the prayers of, quote, consecration, to break the back of any sacerdotalism, any clericalism. So use the occasion of the Supper to demonstrate the parity of the eldership when God gives you a plurality of eldership, and perhaps even earlier, you can incorporate the ordinary members in good standing who have come to some place of stature in the minds of the people to assist at the Lord's table,

67:45 and thereby, early in your ministry, break the back of any incipient clericalism. All right? Fourth, counsel, and here you'll be disappointed because I'm going to give you work and not the fruit of my own work. Study carefully the issue of the Lord's table.

Miscellaneous Counsel 4: Study Open vs. Closed Communion

68:05 The issue of open or closed communion. Study carefully the issue of open or closed communion.

68:17 Now, the issue simply stated is this. Whether anyone but immersed believers who are members of your own local assembly should be encouraged or even permitted to come to the Lord's table in your own assembly. Now, the most closed expression of closed communion is very neat, very simple, very tidy, and very logical. It says the table of the Lord is set within specific individual local congregations, and therefore, only the members

68:58 in good standing of any specific individual local assembly have a right to come to the table. That's closed communion in the strictest sense. In a more loose sense, there would be some like Dagg, who hold basically to closed communion, who would say that where you have other members from other specific assemblies made up of immersed, professed disciples walking in fellowship with Christ and not under corrected discipline. They use the incident. Paul was obviously welcome to the communion service at Troas,

69:39 though he was not a member of that specific local church. Though some would argue as an apostle, he was in principle a member of any specific local church where he might arrive, and someone might counter argue and say, ah, yes, but they didn't assume so at Jerusalem. Because when he came down to Jerusalem in Acts chapter 9 they didn't receive him, he had to prove by Barnabas' testimony that he had indeed been brought upon by grace. And someone say, yes, but that passage doesn't have changed because his standing as a Christian was not yet cleared. And so I'm aware of that. And

70:12 I'm aware of the arguments, brethren, and they're there. So there's no simplistic response to this. But some would say, closed communion, yes, but open to people of like faith in order. They are welcome should they be among us.

70:27 So closed communion would take in people who hold both of those views. Then you have what you might call semi-open communion, in which people say, yes, it is an institution instituted by Christ, deposited in the local church with its specific membership, but it should also be open to those of like faith in order and go even a step further. Wherever anyone is a member in good standing of an evangelical church that believes and practices biblical church order, even a pedobaptist church does not have within its membership communicant members who are not baptized. In their judgment, they are baptized.

71:11 In our judgment, we would regard their baptism as irregular or non-existent, but in their own judgment, they regard themselves as baptized. And so in a semi-closed communion situation, you would insist, as we do, that no one is welcome to the table who is not found within the orbit of a specific local church. The table is not for any Tom, Dick, and Harry who has to be baptized. The table is not for any Christian who has not declared himself a Christian and who has not put that profession under the scrutiny of a body of discerning elders and is not under the discipline of a specific church.

71:50 That identification with the church precedes participation in the privileges of membership in the church. Identification precedes privilege. And therefore, we practice a semi-open, or some would say semi-closed, it all depends how you look at it, where you want to put the emphasis. And others, they say we leave it completely to the individual conscience.

72:15 You have men like John Bunyan and Hall, who are the ableist exponents of totally open communion, and their position is nothing should be required to come to the table but what is required to be a Christian. And if you are a Christian, then you belong at the table. To make any other requirement is to set up legalistic standards around the table of Christ. Well, I personally, having read Bunyan's argument from stem to stern, and I believe sections of Hall, I believe their fundamental error is that they do not distinguish between what is necessary to become a Christian and what is necessary to be a professed disciple

72:55 walking in an orderly manner within the visible church of Christ. But you must, brethren, study carefully this issue, because sooner or later, if under God you are developing in your people a biblical mindset, they are going to raise the question. You are not going to avoid this question if you are really teaching your people to think biblically. Sooner or later, they are going to ask it.

73:17 So study carefully the issue. I would commend Fuller, Volume 3,

73:24 Fuller, Volume 3, pages 499 to 514, for Fuller's statement on closed communion. Fuller, Volume 3, and his works have been reprinted, as you know, 499 to 514, and then Dagg, in the second section of his work that we referred to earlier, the section on church polity, pages 214 to 225.

73:58 That's the closed communion position stated by two able proponents. Then I mentioned earlier Hall and Bunyan, and you'll have to find those in various things. I have my own old Jay Green thing, of the complete works of Bunyan in three volumes. It's so difficult to find your way around that because it's split up in a very illogical way, but I'm sure we have that in our own church library, and sooner or later you'll want to read the arguments on both sides and then let each man, let each church, be fully persuaded in his own mind.

74:36 But let me give you the rationale for our practice so at least you'll have one approach that I trust will help you as you interact with the church. with these other men as you read them. We're convinced that we have a responsibility to bear witness at any given point in our life as a church to the whole counsel of God and never preserve one truth at the expense of another. Now I'm convinced that the principles of closed communion bear witness to this truth at the expense of other truths.

75:10 It is true that the table of the Lord is set within the local church. And Paul writes to the church at Corinth holding them responsible to correct the disorders of that table set within that local church. But I believe the closed communion position guards that truth at the expense of some other truths. Is it true that there is such a thing as the universal church?

75:41 Well, if you've not had the doctrine of church in systematics, you may not know the answer to that yet. But if you've had your systematics, you know the answer to that. There is a doctrine in scripture of the universal church. And our relationship to the people of God who are part of the universal church is such that we regard members who are communicant members in good standing of well-ordered pedo-baptist churches, we regard their churches as true churches.

76:13 We do not unchurch our pedo-baptist brethren. Now many of our Baptist forefathers forefathers would. We've refused to do so. We refuse to unchurch them because it's evident Christ has not.

76:26 His presence has been most powerfully manifested in past centuries in pedo-baptist churches. That's a fact. Facts are stubborn things. So if Christ has chosen to dwell in pedo-baptist congregations with what we would regard as an erroneous view of baptism,

76:49 if it hasn't driven him away so that he can be a Christian, if it hasn't driven him away so that he can be a Christian, if it hasn't driven him away so that they are no longer churches,

76:54 then we must bear witness to the reality that we recognize those whom Christ recognizes. And therefore we believe that we have a responsibility not only to bear witness to this truth, but also to bear witness to the doctrine of the universal church and that we do not unchurch our pedo-baptist brethren. That's why, though we insist that only church members partake and lay it upon people's conscience without political or religious policing. We say if you are a member in good standing of an evangelical church, a church where Christ's word is preached and loved, we know that such churches either practice infant baptism

77:38 leading to public confession of faith before a person is welcomed to the table, or in churches that would be what we call mainline Bible churches or independent fundamentalist churches, etc. Most of them practice the immersion of professed disciples. Then we believe we are bearing witness to the truth that we recognize the church universal and that we should welcome any such people who happen to be among us to sit down at the Lord's table with us to bear witness at one and the same time to the fact that this is a table set within this local church, but it also is a great fact that the Lord Jesus, whose death we celebrate,

78:23 was given birth to his church universal, and we want to bear witness to that truth. Furthermore, you can't roll back 2,000 years of church history. As much as we'd like to, we can't do it. And I've often thought, wouldn't it be wonderful when indeed there was universal practice among all the apostolic churches and no confusion?

78:50 Well, we can't do it as much as we'd like to. And therefore, we must, as God speaks, we must, as God speaks, God's people wrestle with these things and try to come up with a position that helps us to hold to as many truths at one and the same time as possible without relinquishing any truth for which God holds us accountable. So, brethren, that's a little rationale for our own practice. And until God gives us further light, that's how we're going to operate.

79:22 Now, it's amazing how many times we've had good opportunities to speak to people when they've come to us after communion service and said to me or one of the other elders, you know, I must not have heard you right, but I thought I heard you say in the announcements that your practice was ba-dum-ba-dum-ba-dum. And since I didn't want to cause offense, I didn't partake of the supper, but you really, did I hear you wrongly that you only welcome church members? And he said, no, you heard us rightly. Well, how come?

79:50 We say, you've got ten minutes? Sit down, we'll be glad to tell you. And we've had many opportunities to challenge us, to challenge us, to challenge people who've never thought through the doctrine of the church because of our practice. And it's been used of God to challenge them to think through their whole freelance Christianity in which they've had no identification with the local church.

Miscellaneous Counsel 5: Secure Orderly Distribution of Elements

80:14 All right, fifth and finally,

80:18 spare no pains, spare no pains to secure an orderly,

80:29 undistracting,

80:33 dignified plan of distributing the elements.

80:40 Spare no pains to secure an orderly, undistracting, dignified plan of distributing the elements. Now, if ever, brethren, the mandate of 1 Corinthians 14.40 is vital. It is at the Supper of Remembrance.

81:01 The mandate, let all things be done decently and in order.

81:09 Particularly, you see, when the primary activity is Remembrance, it is mental. You know how quickly pure mental concentration can be broken by a slight distraction. And therefore, we must seek, by God's grace, to secure, and I've chosen my words carefully, an orderly, undistracting, dignified plan of distributing the elements. Where there is a lack of planning, confusion, and disorder, enter, the minds of God's people are drawn away from their concentration upon Christ.

81:50 If necessary, in the early days, have a practice session with those who are going to administer and serve the elements.

82:00 Nothing wrong whatsoever. If people have rehearsals for a wedding, so that nothing in that wedding distracts from the central concerns, so that there is dignified joy in the wedding ceremony, a ceremony for which there's no express biblical warrant, how much more for the supper of remembrance, a supper which is warranted and mandated by the word of Christ and his apostles. So I urge you, don't get into sloppy practices in the early days. Think through and walk through, if necessary, with the men, where they're going to stand, at what point they're going to stand, so that any visitor who comes,

82:45 among you and your people are, in a sense, they don't even have to think about what's going on in the distribution of the elements because it is done in such an orderly, undistracting, dignified manner. All of the concentration, then, can be upon Christ and remembering him according to his commandment. Now that will change as the church grows. You'll have to make modifications.

83:14 You know what one of our present things is everyone sitting in the central banks where they're just about filled to overflowing now and very soon we're going to have to work out a way whereby we can orderly and without distraction get the elements distributed to people in the side pews. Well, it'll mean getting our heads together, whether we need some more plates for distribution, but we're determined that no matter what the growth of the church is, we will not in any way overturn that orderly, undistracting, dignified, plan of distribution which not only honors God, but enables us to enter in fully to the purpose of that supper.