Sermon Tone Analysis

“As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”[1]

For almost two thousand years, followers of Christ, the Risen Son of God, have gathered in assembly to instruct one another in righteousness, to build one another in the Faith, and to worship the Lord Jesus as the Living Saviour of all who believe.

Some gathered in secret, their very lives at risk because they worshipped Jesus the Lord.

Some gathered openly, rejoicing in the freedom God had given.

Some conducted stately rituals scripted centuries before, while others shared in forums that emphasised spontaneity.

All alike united as enclaves of Heaven, communities of faith where Christ is remembered and where His Word is taught so that members of the congregation may be instructed in righteousness.

All have looked forward to His return, just as He promised.

Across cultural divides, whenever Christians unite, a regular act of worship is the observance of the Lord’s Table.

This is the communal meal that was instituted by the Lord Jesus Himself.

Looking back to a conflict within the Church of God at Corinth, we witness a meal that had degenerated into a personal observance.

Because it had ceased to be a communal meal, Paul was forced to confront the attitude of the Corinthian Christians.

Addressing their self-centred error, he seized the opportunity to remind them of what the Meal was to represent.

Of course, we are enriched through their error since we now have this fuller teaching of God’s intention.

As we focus on worshipping the Living Son of God today, I invite you to contemplate the words that the Apostle wrote to the Corinthian Christians which are found in *1 Corinthians 11:26*.

“As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

*The Meal is Designed to be an Ongoing Observance* — “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

You know very well that the Meal is to be observed on a continuing basis, but it is good to explore precisely what it means for us to observe the Meal on a continuing basis and to explore as well some of the ramifications that are associated with that truth.

The churches of our Lord Jesus Christ have been entrusted with two ordinances—ordinances and not sacraments.

It is necessary that we distinguish between the two concepts because considerable confusion persists among the professed people of God.

To speak of a sacrament connotes to many people that participating in the act confers grace to the participant.

Tacitly, the concept of a sacrament imputes powers to the act itself.

So, in the sacramental view, the participant is bettered, or at least benefited, through participating in the act.

In contradistinction to this is the concept of an ordinance, which implicitly denies conferring grace through participation in the act.

An ordinance is a tradition that pictures divine truth.

Whatever benefit may be conferred is the result of the participants attitude and approach to the act and not the result of participating in the act */per se/*.

It is for this reason that the Apostle will conclude his instruction on the Lord’s Table with the admonition for those participating to examine themselves and to judge themselves [*1 Corinthians 11:28, 31*].

Christ gave to the churches two ordinances—one that is to be observed initially by all who wish to follow Christ as Lord and one that is to observed in assembly on a regular basis.

The first ordinance is, of course, baptism.

Baptism is the act of identification with Jesus, as the one confessing the Faith pictures the truths concerning Christ’s death, burial and resurrection.

This is the import of the Apostle’s words to the Roman Christians.

“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

“For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.

For one who has died has been set free from sin.

Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.

We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.

For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God” [*Romans 6:3-10*].

The Apostle is appealing to believers to live as though what they professed were real.

What did we profess when we were baptised?

We identified with Jesus, stating through our own burial in water and resurrection out of the same water, that we believe the Good News that Jesus died and was buried, and that He rose from the dead.

We identified with Him, saying that we counted our old nature to have been dead before God, though now buried.

However, just as the Saviour was raised to newness of life, so when we are raised from the water we are confessing that we have been raised through faith in Him to new life.

Implicit in Paul’s explanation is the statement of hope that marks the life of each one who is baptised, for they testify that they believe with a perfect faith that even should they die before Christ’s return they know that they will be raised imperishable.

The one baptised confesses that he shall be raised from the dead.

Do you have faith in Jesus the Son of God?

Why do you delay obeying His command?

The Master Himself has said that we are responsible to baptise those who are discipled, and that this baptism is to be into the Name of the Triune God [*Matthew 28:19*].

Those who repent are to be baptised in the Name of Jesus Christ [*Acts 2:38*].

“Why do you wait?”

This question, asked of Saul of Tarsus must be asked of all who say they believe the Gospel of Christ.

There is a point that needs to be made in order to move beyond this truth.

Those who are not baptised are not invited to partake of the Lord’s Table.

It is a mystery to me why anyone would want to confess fellowship with the people of God while refusing identification with the Head of the church?

We are told that those who believed Peter’s message at Pentecost, participated in the “breaking of bread and the prayers” [*Acts 2:42*] only after they were baptised.

I cannot find a single instance of unbaptised people participating at, or even invited to, the Lord’s Table in the accounts of the New Testament.

Lest you think this stated position overly harsh, I invite you to consider the position held among the early churches.

Among the writings of the earliest Christians that have been gathered is a work known as the Didache, or “The Lord’s Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations.”

This particular work is thought to date to no later than A.D. 120, or shortly after the death of the last of the Apostles.

In that work, the question of who should partake of the Eucharist is raised.

This is what the early Christians were taught in this work.

“But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving (Eucharist), but they who have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord hath said, ‘Give not that which is holy to the dogs.’”[2]

Not only were unbaptised people excluded from the Eucharist, but justification for excluding those who were unbaptised was citation of the strong words the Master spoke concerning the impropriety of sharing holy things with unholy people.

Contemporary Christians have become quite timid in speaking the truth in our day.

Perhaps it is because we do not truly love the Saviour as much as we love the praise of men.

Baptism is the initiatory ordinance entrusted to the churches.

It is to be administered to all who profess Christ, and it is to be performed once.

As an aside, it is to be performed because the candidate has become a Christian and not in order to make the candidate a Christian.

Moreover, it is to picture the truths of the Gospel as related to Christ and concerning the transformation the candidate is professing.

Having been baptised, the believer may partake at the Lord’s Table, confessing faith in the sacrifice of the Saviour, confessing fellowship with the assembly wherein he or she partake of the Meal, and confessing anticipation of the Lord’s return.

In the verse that serves as our text today, Paul indicates that the Meal is to be observed repeatedly.

In other words, there is one baptism, but the Lord’s Table is an ongoing observance.

What is apparent is that no schedule is given in the words Paul wrote.

The church in which Lynda and I came to faith observed the Lord’s Table once each year—at the evening service on Easter Sunday.

The rationale was that it was an evening Meal and not a breakfast according to the language of the New Testament; and it was the opening act in the drama of the Master’s passion.

Hence, the congregation observed the Meal in the evening and on Easter Sunday.

Later, I came to realise that many churches observe the Communion Meal each week.

The basis usually given to support this practise is that the early churches broke bread day-by-day.

There is strong evidence that the custom of the early churches was to observe the Meal as the Body assembled each Lord’s Day.

Thus, it is an integral part of the worship for these churches.

Many churches in the United States observe the Meal on a quarterly basis.

Often this is pragmatically justified by contending that an annual observance is too infrequent and a weekly observance may lead to disregarding the importance of the worship associated with the Meal.

There is a pragmatic streak among evangelical Christians, especially in Canada.

There is a fear that weekly observance may be too frequent leading to undue familiarity with the Meal, and so the churches often adopt a monthly schedule of observance.

My own observation of the practise of a monthly Meal is that it is no guarantee against treating the rite in a casual manner.

None of the aforementioned views is wrong, and perhaps each appeals to different segments among the churches.

However, there is no standard that is mandated in Scripture and we must be careful not to elevate our preferences to the level of convictions.

Paul’s instruction to the Romans fits here, “each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” [*Romans 14:5*].

What is important to note is that nowhere are we given a command to observe the ordinance on a particular schedule.

Whether a church observes the Meal annually, quarterly, monthly or weekly—or even according to some other intermittent schedule—is immaterial.

What is vital is to remember that the Lord’s Supper is an act of worship in which redeemed people in assembly remember the sacrifice of the Saviour, rejoice in the fellowship of the Body, and renew hope in the promised return of the Master.

To iterate, history indicates a transition generally took place in the regularity of observance of the Lord’s Table among the churches as the birth of the Faith receded into the past.

“The Lord’s Supper was not only a part of the worship, but a cardinal point in it.

The observance of this feast was also by the command of Christ, who said, ‘This do in remembrance of me.’

His body was broken for us; His blood was shed for the remission of our sins…

“This service was of a much more private character than the public one of worship [see *1 Corinthians 1:17–34*] and restricted to baptized Christians.

There seems to have been at first a daily administration of this ordinance [*Acts 2:46*], but later it seems to have been observed every first day of the week [*Acts 20:7*].

At first also it was held in the evening at the close of a meal eaten in common, following the example of Christ and His disciples.

The meal was called the Agape—or love feast—and was [only] afterwards separated from the Eucharist.

The Lord’s Supper being held in the early morning while the common meal was eaten in the evening.