I wish to begin this morning by reading from 'Come to the Table,' by John Mark Hicks. Hicks writes: God never intended an altar, though He planned for it. Instead, God intended a Table to enjoy the communion of His people. While the altar epitomizes the atoning work of God in forgiving sin, the Table epitomizes the experience of communion.

The altar, the Coss of Jesus Christ, was a means to an end. It was the penultimate act of God in order to bring about, through atonement, the ultimate intent of God, which is communion. The altar was . . . for the sake of the Table. The altar, in terms of its goal, serves the Table. The altar, by its atoning work, enables the Table. Atonement secures communion. The Cross grounds the Table.

Prayer

Last week, we looked at the Lord’s Supper as it was instituted and shaped in the experience of Passover. We discovered how the first practice of the Lord’s Supper was in the context of a meal, that it was a joyful occasion, and that it was characterized by service and hope. The early church came to call this meal “Eucharist” because it was characterized by joyful thanksgiving for God’s spiritual gifts of redemption and deliverance. Just as Passover recited in the haggadah the experience of Israel at the Exodus, so the Lord’s Supper remembers and recites again the deliverance we received by the death and resurrection of Jesus.

This is different than the Catholic understanding where the Table becomes an altar for the ongoing sacrifice of Christ. In the opinion of Catholic theologians, it is in Mass that the atoning work of Christ is repeated again and again in the taking of the bread and cup, so much so that the bread is the actual body of Christ and the cup is the actual blood of Christ. Notice here that the emphasis was upon the reenactment of the atonement itself, not the retelling of the deliverance that the atonement made possible, as we saw in the Passover and the early Supper. Communion, as understood by the early church and reflected in the New Testament, was not an actual reenactment of the atonement but the reexperiencing and retelling of a past deliverance – of an atonement already accomplished for us, and a forgiveness already received, being appropriated and experienced again in the present. The work of Christ at the Cross is finished. Nothing can be added to that work. It can only be received and experienced, and that is what we do in communion.

The Churches of Christ followed the tradition of the radical reformer John Zwingli who rid the church of its symbols and anything that appeared Catholic. While attempting to correct past abuses, Zwingli swept away the whole notion that Communion was in any way a feast where the Christian haggadah was to be retold and reexperienced. Instead, for Zwingli, the Lord’s Supper was a memorial where the Christian was to reflect or “remember” the death of Christ.

Ironically, many of us from the Restoration tradition who followed Zwingli functionally ended up making the same mistake as the Catholics. While most of us do not believe that Christ is being sacrificed over and over again as we share communion, we do often emphasize only the forgiveness of sins at the Table and not the deliverance brought to us by the forgiveness of our sins. But as John Mark Hicks points out, the Table is not the Altar. The Table celebrates and remembers the Altar because the Altar has made the Table possible.

To illustrate, Passover also was a time for remembering the deliverance of God as He passed over the homes with the blood of the lamb smeared on the door. But when Israel celebrated Passover, it was not a quiet, meditative and somber occasion where the family meditated on the death of the lamb. The point was not the death of the lamb – the point was the deliverance achieved by that death and redeeming blood. So, Israel ate a meal, communed, and shared. The same is true for us. Throughout the New Testament, we see over and over how the Lord’s Supper became a meal of joy where God’s great act of deliverance at the Cross and our communion with God and each other is celebrated.

Some of you struggled this week with my comments because of the words of Scripture from Corinthians: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you remember the Lord’s death until he comes.” (I Corinthians 11:26). It is true that the proclamation of Christ’s death at the Table is one aspect of the Supper, and not one to be quickly dismissed. My point throughout this series is not to suggest that the celebration of the Table as a reflective memorial is a wrong celebration of the Table. My point is that it is not the only way to celebrate the Table; in fact, it is a dimension of the Table rarely celebrated by the early church. Until the fourth century, the Lord’s Supper was part of a common meal, or the agape fellowship meal. The great majority of New Testament texts place the Supper in the context of a joyful meal of community, and nowhere is this more true than in Luke/Acts.

Throughout Luke’s Gospel, Jesus “broke bread” with His disciples, and Luke continues this theme into the book of Acts. Jesus broke bread with the 5,000 (Luke 9:11, 16), He broke bread with His disciples at their last Passover meal (Luke 22:16, 19), He broke bread with the two disciples in Emmaus (Luke 24:30), and the church continued to break bread together as a new community in Acts (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, 11). When Luke refers to “breaking bread” in Acts, we are supposed to hear the depth of its meaning which he already has developed in the meal passages in his Gospel. “Breaking bread” in Acts 2:42 is not a new concept. To “break bread” simply meant to eat with Jesus. That is something Jesus had been doing it with His disciples all along.

In other words, the Lord’s Supper should not surprise us, nor should we view it as a new institution of Jesus. It should be viewed within a larger picture that Luke has painted for us: Jesus loves to eat with His disciples. And that’s exactly the point Luke wants us to see: Just as Jesus broke bread with His disciples during His earthly ministry, Jesus is still breaking bread with His disciples as the church gathers at the Table. Jesus is still mysteriously present as we take the bread and cup because He loves to eat with His people. More on that next week . . .

So having read the Gospel of Luke and knowing that Jesus regularly shows up at supper time to “break bread”, we should find it the most natural thing in the world for those who follow Jesus to find themselves breaking bread together. That is exactly what happens. Let’s read Acts 2:42-47. This new community called the church “devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayers.” At first glance, it appears that Luke is describing four activities of the early church; but at closer glance, he is probably describing only two: teaching and fellowship. The breaking of bread and prayer describe the fellowship of the church together. Therefore, Luke directly links the breaking of bread with fellowship. The breaking of bread is communion, with Jesus and with each other. It is a shared experience, a shared meal. Not only did they share a meal, but they shared their possessions. Thus, they experienced community, or koinonia, as they shared meals and shared wealth. In other words, this community shared their complete lives together, including their food and their money. Those activities of the earliest church became the paradigm for the way the church will live outs its life throughout the Book of Acts. Not content to just describe the fellowship of the earliest believers, Luke makes it even clearer in verses 46-47: Day by day, they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the good will of all the people.

This community gathered daily for both teaching and for the breaking of bread. Some have tried to distinguish the breaking of bread in verse 42 from the breaking of bread in verse 46 because of their bias that the Lord’s Supper should only be taken once a week and only on Sunday. It is true that the early church took the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20), and that is an example I believe the church should follow. But nowhere in Scripture are we given a prohibition against taking communion anywhere and anytime that we remember Jesus. Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper on Thursday night. Thus we see from this passage in Acts that the early church broke bread together daily. I believe this early church in Jerusalem celebrated the Supper every day together. Sure it sounds like they are just eating. They ate “food.” But that’s Luke’s point. The Lord’s Supper is a common meal that is most uncommon, not because of its formality or its emblems, but because of the uncommon Host.

Wherever the church gathers around Tables for fellowship and sharing, there bread is broken and Christ is present. Breaking bread is a daily activity of the church because it is in the meal of sharing and gratitude that we experience the deliverance of Jesus again and again through His saved community. I strongly and firmly believe that this church would discover new life and power if we were free to celebrate every meal together as the Lord’s meal where we come to discern the presence of the living Christ as we commune together. It is time to free us to eat the Supper, and there the church can rediscover joy and hope that has been so often missing.

“Breaking bread” then is a meal where Jesus is host and we all sit together as a community of His disciples. We share our food together in the Supper because of the communion we have come to share with each other by virtue of the deliverance and work of Christ. It is not our own worthiness that has brought us here, but the worthiness of Christ and what He has done for us. None of us come to the Table by our own merits, or because we have met the test. We are here by His invitation only. Because it is Him that invites, we find ourselves around the Table as part of a community that did not come by our choice but only by God’s grace and gift.

Breaking bread then in the church at first was not a solemn funeral but a joyful celebration of the new community Christ was creating in their midst. It was in this feast that they could see the future – Christ was dead, Christ was buried, Christ was raised.

The Table became the present experience of the Table to come. They ate with hope as they re-experienced again and again the victory of Jesus over death as they ate together. You finding it hard to believe that communion involved something besides quiet meditation? Luke says in Acts 2:46 that the breaking of bread was accompanied by “resounding jubilation” or “enthusiastic outbursts,” from the literal Greek. The fellowship meals of Israel too were accompanied by great outbursts of joy (Deuteronomy 12:7, 12, 18; 14:26; 27:7). According to Luke, joy and communion just go together, like peanut butter and jelly, like biscuits and gravy, like bread and wine. It is a great irony that a church so determined to follow the example of the early church in celebrating the Lord’s Supper regularly has celebrated the Supper with anything but joy. We have focused more on keeping people quiet during communion than we have on inviting celebrations of great joy. I suspect that the church might find a joy it has never known before if we can deliver the Table from the bondage of silence and individualization.

Tables are by nature communal and interactive. The Lord’s Supper as understood in the New Testament is not a private individualistic moment with God. That may be good American theology, but it certainly isn’t good biblical theology. I believe that our silence week after week undermines the very nature of the Table and the goal of the Table which is fellowship, or koinonia. The sacrificial meals of the Old Testament were shared with family and community. The meals with Jesus in the New Testament were shared with the family of faith. Unfortunately, the church eats its meal together in silence. We eat the Lord’s Supper together like two old married people who dine out in silence because they have been together so long that they no longer have anything to say.
The Lord’s Supper is not a “table for one.” Tables are meant for conversation and for sharing. The Lord’s Table is where we “discern the Body” as Paul instructed the Corinthians, where we share our lives, and where we share again and again in the presence of Christ who hosts us and meets us here. Jesus loves to eat with His disciples, and today He longs to share this meal with us.

This morning you are invited to the Table. There are tables posted around the auditorium with bread and the cup. You are invited to come share the Supper today with family, friends or anyone with whom you wish to share communion. I encourage you to serve each other. You can say “Peace” to each other. Or you can share a story of God’s love and deliverance in your life. Or you can express your love for each other. When you are finished, you can return to your seat. You may wish to share communion with someone who was unable to go to the Table. You also are welcome to in quiet reflection as well if you do not wish, or you are not able, to come to a table. You will be served as normal. Christ invites you now to come to the Table where His body is broken for you, and where His blood has been shed for your salvation. Christ was dead. Christ is risen! Let us eat now with our living Lord.


» Back to top