The Lord’s Supper is NOT an Addendum

HolyCommunionOnce again I was reminded of our need to rethink how we observe the Lord’s Supper (Eucharist or Holy Communion, if you will).

Off to the side was the Holy Communion table–the bread and the cup–as an addendum (it had lost its place).

According to the Webster’s dictionary, an addendum is “something that is added; especially : a section of a book that is added to the main or original text.”  That’s the message that I got from how the Holy Communion was observed today.

Just before we were dismissed, the preacher said that the Communion table is available for anyone who wishes to partake–off to the side.

Who bestowed on the preacher such an authority to reduce the Lord’s Supper’s central role in worship?  And when a local body of believers gather, do we have the right to take such an individualistic to the Lord’s Supper?

All this could only be owing to our faulty and poor theology of the Lord’s Supper.

For example, the preacher impressed on his hearers the need to love one another in community, but then, he turn around and reduced the observance of the Lord’s Supper–a means of communal grace–to a mere individualistic meal (the message: it’s between you and your Lord, re-inforcing that personal salvation nonsense–the very thing the Apostle Paul wrote against in 1 Corinthians 10-11).

For it was never meant to be an addendum–something added on at the main of the worship service.

This entry was posted in Eucharist, Lord's Supper, Lord's Table and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Lord’s Supper is NOT an Addendum

  1. 123kylephillips says:

    Oh my. Deep sigh. What a picture of how we have diminished the worship and witness of God to mere ideas, abstractions, pagan (Platonic) notions of reality! Biblical truth is always incarnated, lived, flesh and blood, bread and wine. Thank you Jesus for leaving us a meal, “taste and see that I am good,” to remember and live the banquet of the new creation!

  2. Colin says:

    “Communal Grace”.. Exactly. And one thing Cranmer was seeking to do in his work on the BCP was enable the CoE to regain a sense of “Communion”, gathering together in a common shared need for meeting with Christ and being renewed by Him. How well the CoE achieved this over the centuries is doubtless variable. And another passion was that frequent – even weekly – reception would become normal. As Wesley urged on those who listened to him. Surely not an occasional optional extra. Pity the rubric of BCP in its final 1662 form urges a minimum of only 3 times a year, one being Easter. At one time years ago that was about all I did – and I felt it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s