Is THIS Any Way To.....

[wpe3bql]

..... Take The Lord's Supper??

One Bible study group I occasionally attend has this practice about communion:

The leader invites all who are believers (baptized or not) to partake if they wish. (Some don't partake.)

Those that do form a line, usually it's husband & wife and "eligible" kids in a group.

Then they approach the table, pull off a piece of unleavened bread and then dip that piece into a large cup of grape juice, and then ingest the soggy piece of bread into their mouths.

This is done one-person-at-a-time until the last participant gets done.


I've never seen the Lord's Supper done this way before.

I'm not being critical, but I just wonder if any of you out there in BB land have witnessed the Lord's Supper done this way.

 

[padredurand]

..... Take The Lord's Supper??

One Bible study group I occasionally attend has this practice about communion:

The leader invites all who are believers (baptized or not) to partake if they wish. (Some don't partake.)

Those that do form a line, usually it's husband & wife and "eligible" kids in a group.

Then they approach the table, pull off a piece of unleavened bread and then dip that piece into a large cup of grape juice, and then ingest the soggy piece of bread into their mouths.

This is done one-person-at-a-time until the last participant gets done.


I've never seen the Lord's Supper done this way before.

I'm not being critical, but I just wonder if any of you out there in BB land have witnessed the Lord's Supper done this way.

It's called intinction. It is quick, easy, dirties only a single cup and goes against the form and manner of the Last Supper.

Matthew 26:26-27 NAS77

26 And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you;​

The taking of the bread and cup are two separate and distinct actions. Of course we could argue that Jesus didn't use silver plates and disposable plastic cups either.

Intinction is widely used in mainline denominations that like to keep their attachments to the RC.

 

[Rolfe]

My childhood church (Lutheran) that I grew up in practiced something similar. Always thought about the germs being passed.

 

[Jerome]

Louisville's trendy SojournChurch (Reformed SBC) uses this "Dunkin Donuts" method:

people coming to the table, taking (breaking) the bread, and dipping it in the common cup -- just as in the Scriptures. The words of communion are spoken over everyone who takes the elements, "This is the body of the Lord, broken for you..." and "This is the blood of the Lord, shed for you..." It is a meaningful time, and we celebrate the table in EVERY service of Sojourn gathered.

This SojournChurch apparently attracts quite a few from the Seminary, so look for this practice to come to a church near you soon.

 

[padredurand]

My childhood church (Lutheran) that I grew up in practiced something similar. Always thought about the germs being passed.

That's why you use real wine. It's like hand sanitizer but sweeter.

 

[JamesL]

It's called intinction. It is quick, easy, dirties only a single cup and goes against the form and manner of the Last Supper.

Matthew 26:26-27 NAS77

26 And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you;​

The taking of the bread and cup are two separate and distinct actions. Of course we could argue that Jesus didn't use silver plates and disposable plastic cups either.

Intinction is widely used in mainline denominations that like to keep their attachments to the RC.

I'm not sure how you figure that it goes against the form and manner of the Last Supper, any more than shot glasses of grape juice and crackers

 

[InTheLight]

I'm not sure how you figure that it goes against the form and manner of the Last Supper, any more than shot glasses of grape juice and crackers

I thought he covered with, "The taking of the bread and cup are two separate and distinct actions".

 

[JamesL]

I thought he covered with, "The taking of the bread and cup are two separate and distinct actions".

That's the point. A cracker and shot glass of grape juice are separate.

Is separate the high point? What if the elements are different from scripture?

 

[Use of Time]

It sounds like it would behoove you to be towards the front of that line. I'm trying to imagine what the cup looks like towards the end.

 

[JonC]

..... Take The Lord's Supper??

No, it's not (a proper way, anyhow). But it is efficient and get's things moving quickly along, which is just as important as doing something symbolically which means little if anything to anyone anyway. :tear:

 

[padredurand]

That's the point. A cracker and shot glass of grape juice are separate.

Is separate the high point? What if the elements are different from scripture?

I'm a little confused about what you are asking. Let me see if I can expound on what I posted earlier;

Matthew 26:26-27 NAS77

26 And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you;​

Let's start with verse 26: Jesus took bread from the Passover table. Let's answer your last question first. He took bread. Leavened or unleavened? We use whole matzo crackers and break them as they are served to the congregation. We have also used a loaf of homemade bread that was still steaming out of the oven when we put it on the table but I digress. The point is Jesus used the common element of bread and used that as a symbol for His body. He did not use Doritos, Cheezits or corn tortillas.

Jesus took the bread, gave thanks, broke it and said to the disciples, "Take, eat. They did. It's gone. Consumed. This is My body; broken for you. The symbolism is full and complete.

Verse 27: Same meal but a different symbol. "...for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." (Matthew 26:28 NAS77) Jesus took the cup, gave thanks and gave it to the disciples. "Drink it." He said. There is a difference between drink and dunk. I looked it up in my Webster's.

He didn't say anything about speeding up the process, using less utensils, dipping, dunking or using Mountain Dew in place of the cup at the Passover table.

I have a 20 page paper up in the attic leftover from seminary on this subject I could bore you with but I think this is much simpler than we make it out to be. The bottom line is the Lord left us with two ordinances: Communion and Baptism. The least we could do is follow the prescriptive form and not go through convoluted explanations why we want to do something different.

 

[JamesL]

Padre,
A 20 page paper wouldn't bore me unless it was mere opinion regurgitated. But, what I'm asking is if you're gagging on a gnat.

Are the separate/together issue, or the drink/dunk issue more important than other "details" of the incident?

Does it also have to be with exactly the same bread? Are crackers sufficient? And is there any biblical support for a substitute?

What style of cup do you use? Is that cup made of the same material as the one from the biblical narrative? Doe we have to share one cup, or are individual shot glasses sufficient?

Do you use real wine? Is the age of the wine important? Can it be sipped, or full mouthful swallows?


If we dig in and demand that this part be exactly duplicated, then does every part have to be exact?

Who gets to determine if there is leeway (liberty), or if there's any abuse?

Are we crossing the line into legalism?

 

[JonC]

...what I'm asking is if you're gagging on a gnat.

I've often wondered if there are really fewer gnats than we suppose. The problem, IMHO, is that sometimes we take something as holding little meaning in the details, and perhaps even strict observance as legalistic. But sometimes things may have a significance that may escape us for a time. The elements being separate are, I believe, one of these. The type of bread (not necessarily the commonness...this was not common as daily bread, but bread specifically set aside for a special time and place. This was a passover meal. Wine is also symbolic throughout Scripture. So perhaps the Lord's Supper is not our remembering after all. Maybe it focuses on God's promise to give us His Son as our food and drink. Maybe this is a ratification of our inclusion in the New Covenant (a rememberance or testimony of what God has done). And if we see it that way, then just perhaps we should appreciate a sense of tradition and even a sense that it is not up to us to alter or change....except in an attempt to be closer to Scripture.

 

[padredurand]

Padre,
A 20 page paper wouldn't bore me unless it was mere opinion regurgitated. But, what I'm asking is if you're gagging on a gnat.

Are the separate/together issue, or the drink/dunk issue more important than other "details" of the incident?

Does it also have to be with exactly the same bread? Are crackers sufficient? And is there any biblical support for a substitute?

What style of cup do you use? Is that cup made of the same material as the one from the biblical narrative? Doe we have to share one cup, or are individual shot glasses sufficient?

Do you use real wine? Is the age of the wine important? Can it be sipped, or full mouthful swallows?


If we dig in and demand that this part be exactly duplicated, then does every part have to be exact?

Who gets to determine if there is leeway (liberty), or if there's any abuse?

Are we crossing the line into legalism?

We have two ordinances: Communion and Baptism. In the same line of thinking why don't we do away with baptistry and just take folk out in the parking lot and spray them down with a garden hose. After all it is water.

 

[Revmitchell]

Some folks are gagging at gnats to show others are gagging at gnats.

 

[JamesL]

We have two ordinances: Communion and Baptism. In the same line of thinking why don't we do away with baptistry and just take folk out in the parking lot and spray them down with a garden hose. After all it is water.

Some would argue that washing feet is an ordinance. Who gets to determine whether or not something qualifies as an ordinance?

Even still, some could justly argue that biblical baptism is done outdoors only. After all, it's a public profession, why hide it inside a building?

 

[JamesL]

Some folks are gagging at gnats to show others are gagging at gnats.

Since "some" is more than one, and "folks" is plural, just how many of them folks is in these here parts?

 

[wpe3bql]

Oh, BTW, I've heard the person in my OP sometimes refer to the Lord's Supper as (shudder!) a SACRAMENT!!!!

(Maybe he still can't get past his early family's Anglican roots.)