All Christian churches observe the rite of Communion on a regular basis. Nearly all Christians agree that the ritual is for the assembled Church, and that it primary purpose is to remember Christ Jesus and the death he suffered in order to save his people. From there the understandings diverge.
It’s frustrating that Christians have differing views on what Communion means, but strong disagreement does not mean there is not something there of great value, or that Communion cannot be understood. The importance of Communion demands that we look again. It is a subject that non-Christians should understand, as well. While this article is written for Christians, it also provides a good fly-on-the-wall opportunity for non-Christians. Communion guides what it means to be humans living together in peace and in mutual support. It is as much a social contract as America’s Constitution. In fact, the implications of Communion reach much further.
“Communion” comes from the same root word as “commune”. Communion says something about people being together and functioning together. Christian Communion is a reference to the church as community but, more fundamentally, to the relationship between the Church and its Lord, Jesus Christ. The ceremonial “feeding” on Christ represents a joining together with Christ to create that communion.
Most branches of the Church proclaim that some sort of miracle or “mystery” takes place during the ritual, wherein elements of wine and bread become the actual blood and body of Christ. The Westminster Confession (the defining document of Presbyterian churches) says that the ritual serves as a sealing of benefits to believers, that it provides spiritual nourishment, and that it is a bond and pledge between Christians and Christ, as well as between Christians.
Why are there many views about Communion? Fundamentally it is because, while Jesus initiated Communion and commanded its perpetual observance, he did not explain its meaning. The recorded words from that first Communion are fairly cryptic. Additionally, the fact that Jesus introduced it to his disciples shortly prior to his crucifixion has been understood as emphasizing the importance of the ceremony. It was the famous Last Supper. The highly regarded ceremony, in combination with its cryptic presentation, has proved to be fertile soil for the range of interpretations within the Church.
We are given a glimpse of the early practice of Communion through Paul’s first letter to the church at Corinth. We will look more carefully at that letter later in the series. Over the centuries, Communion became more ritualized in the Roman Catholic and then the Greek Orthodox churches. When the Protestant Reformation took place, Communion was reinterpreted many times. The most well known new interpretations were associated with Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Huldrych Zwingli. These variations have carried on so that Communion is practiced differently today in different Christian churches.
But the sense that Communion is important to the church has not changed. The various practices now all have their claims to tradition, which is to say, they are not easily tampered with. People tend to develop strong attachments to long-held rituals.
In the Evangelical circles of my experience, it is fairly common to hear an announcement of an imminent Communion service for which we are exhorted to “prepare our hearts”. It is an exhortation that puzzles me. What does it mean for me to prepare my heart? Am I supposed to be more somber in the days or hours leading up to Communion? Am I supposed to be more penitent? More mindful of Christ’s sacrifice? More joyful? Am I supposed to make sure I don’t have any unresolved sins or relationships that require mending? And if I am more “prepared” will the ceremony be more effectual when it takes place? Is it okay for me to be less somber, less penitent, less mindful of Christ’s sacrifices, less joyful, less mindful of unresolved sins on days that are not immediately prior to a Communion service? If the event itself is effectual, isn’t my attendance and sincerity what I should be concerned with? Does the ceremony accomplish what it is supposed to accomplish? Are those participating in the ceremony conscious of what is supposed to be accomplished by it? What is supposed to be accomplish by it?
The Communion service is often presented to congregations with a brief reading from one of the passages associated with it, likely to be followed by an equally brief commentary. There may be a warning for those in attendance who ought not participate. There may be a mention of a “means of grace”, or a “seal”, or even the “real presence of Christ”. But the presentation tends to be perfunctory and not very insightful.
Among those assembled, there is a palpable sense of solemnity, a cognizance of something important taking place, but also a foggy uncertainty. (“Something important is going on here, and I want to tune in to it, but I don’t know what to do or think to make that happen.”) It is difficult to feel passionately about muddle.
There are many puzzles related to Communion activity that don’t seem to be addressed. For example, if we consume some of the real blood and body of Jesus Christ, shouldn’t that make us different in some observable way? If I am “spiritually nourished”, in what way is that so? When I eat a normal meal I enjoy the taste and I can feel myself getting full. Sometimes I can even sense an energy boost. What is the parallel in Communion, whether it is physical or spiritual or some combination of the two?
If Communion is a “sealing” or a “bond” or a “pledge”; how so? If I am sealed or bonded or pledged, why do I need to repeat the rite? These are terms that indicate finality; they do not fit into regularly repeated ritual practices. Do these words imply that my salvation is not already sealed by grace through faith?
Or is the point of Communion to remind me of the salvation I have already received? But if Communion is essentially a reminder, what does the “real presence” add? Is Communion a time when I remember that Christ died for me? If so, am I supposed to be remorseful and sorrowful…or should I be full of joyful celebration as I recognize the wonderful consequences of his sacrifice?
Is Communion a time when I am supposed to be examining myself to determine whether I am worthy of Christ? Or, knowing that I am certainly not worthy, is it a time when I should rejoice at Christ’s grace and acceptance of me? Is it a time when I should be examining myself to see whether I have been harboring sin? Should my failures keep me from taking Communion?
I am convinced that Communion is rich in meaning, rich in various meanings. But I am also convinced that the significances of Communion have not received their due, while a variety of speculative notions, tangential ideas, and downright false concepts have been assigned to it. These confusions do a lot of damage.
Sometimes I have objected to statements made during Communion services, sometimes sharing my objections with a friend or family member. But these discussions have been brief and have felt like sound bites lifted out of context. The series that follows is my attempt to grapple with the big picture of Communion and to express what I believe is God’s intention for it. I believe the Church can do much better in the practice and that doing so would properly influence the Church to greater worship and fellowship and service.
(end of part 1 of an 8 part series)
Recent Comments