The Supper

It is much easier to discuss forms and techniques than to practice love. The essence of the Lord’s Supper has little to do with many of the conversations (or arguments) that have surrounded it for centuries (frequency, form, who can serve trays, exact contents inside the trays, etc.). Rather, the essence is found in what the elements represent and what the implications are in terms of our life together as the body of Christ. Liz brought to my mind some of the “hidden meaning” of the video clip we saw from the movie “Places in the Heart.” As the trays were passed everyone was represented: rich, poor, homeless, widows, different races, both genders, the disadvantaged, the privileged, the under privileged, adults, and children. All were there. All were eating the bread and drinking the cup. For one moment in time they all stood on level ground at the foot of the cross. “Peace of Christ” they whispered to themselves and each other. Oh, how much well all need the peace of Christ in our lives. Our spiritual need is the first great uniter. Our common redemption in Christ is the second and greater uniter of the church. May we live out the implications of such unity.

Share this post:
avatar

Byron FikePreaching Minister

Byron has been the preaching minister at Clear Lake since 1999. He and his wife have three grown children, who have also devoted their lives to serving the Lord. In his personal time, Byron likes to read books, watch movies, and play with his little dog Willie. He also is an avid follower of Alabama football, having grown up in Tuscaloosa during the glory days of Bear Bryant.

Comments

3 Responses to “The Supper”

  1. avatar Andreia says:

    I dont want to drive discussion too far off your message of unity, which was a good one. However, I want to tell you about the discussions with my children about the movie clip. They were particularly interested in the children that took communion. “Why can’t we do that, mommy?” they asked.

    I have never felt comfortable with the answer that I had gotten in my youth that communion was for members of the club only. I remember attending a Catholic mass once while in college with some friends. One of my friends was Episcopalian and my rather “devote” Catholic would not allow my Episcopalian friend to partake of the communion. It made for some awkward moments in the car, that frankly, were not unlike the moment in our car after service. Finally, I gave up pretense and answered my child with earnest truth. “I dont understand it either, baby.”

    So if communion is a sharing with members of the body, and if it used to center around a meal where all were served, why isn’t it all-inclusive now? Why does the members-only thing still hang over the practice?

    Im just asking…

  2. avatar Jeremy says:

    Byron, that was awesome! Now, if we can only get the wine back (VIVA ITALIA!). JK…sorta…
    I’ve been down this road in Italy before. There was this big discussion as to whether or not is should be leavened or unleavened bread (one local missionary insisted that it SHOULDN’T be leavened bread, which was the first time I encountered that side.)
    Coming from a Christian University that thought I could go to the Greek and Hebrew and find them a direct answer and solve all their problems. I didn’t do that. I explain my knowledge and experience on the topic, that God is more concerned with the SPIRIT of what is being done in the Lord’s supper than what is being eaten or drunk (drank?, who knows?, I don’t.). They didn’t like that too much. So they asked one of their supporting elders from the states, who said the same thing. Then they asked a visiting professor from a prominent Christian University, he said the same thing. Hmmm…do we see a pattern yet?
    In the end, they just continued to believe what they did in the beginning. (On bit of a separate note, we also spent WEEKS trying to get JC in the ground for three days AND three nights (sign of Jonah). While that is important I guess, I as frustrated because there were thousands of people living around us that didn’t even know JC died, much less died for THEM. Mamma mia.

  3. avatar Byron says:

    In response to Andreia: Our approach to children taking communion has typically been the idea that it is better for them to begin taking the LS after their baptism since they will, hopefully, at that point better appreciate the sacrifice of Christ on their behalf. This is the approach I took with my own children.

    Another approach would be to view the LS as a communion where the whole family participates. It then becomes another opportunity to teach as the whole family shares together in the body and blood alone with the rest of the family of God.

    I’m not sure which is better but I suspect that in the early church they were not as concerned as we are in “who” ate and drank. My cop out answer is: every family should decide for themselves what is best for their children in this regard.