In
1 Cor 11 we learn that the Lord's Supper in Corinth was a big meal.
Paul does not invalidate the meal as the Lord's Supper because it was a
big meal, but because the eaters were being selfish, not discerning
others as also being part of Christ's body. This meal was apparently
regular enough (nightly?) to meet the nutritional needs of "those who
don't have enough" (v. 22). Paul's Plan B solution for this selfish
eating, if a person was too hungry to wait on the others, was to eat at
home. His Plan A solution, was to wait on one another. He never offered a
Plan to minimize the meal to a symbolic-only ritual. That's what the
Catholics made of it, and what we inherited, and what we defend, despite
that not being found in the text.
The
early church "feasted" with one another, having "love feasts", which,
like in Corinth, were sometimes abused as a selfish "feed me!" event:
WEB 2 Peter 2: 10, 13 "those who walk after the flesh in the lust of defilement and despise authority ... count it pleasure to revel in the daytime, spots and defects, reveling in their deceit while they feast with you;"
and
Jude 1:13 These are hidden rocky reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you, shepherds who without fear feed themselves
The earliest church of Christ "took their food with gladness and singleness of heart" on a day by day basis (Acts 2).
The earliest church made sure the widows were fed every day (Acts 6).
The
Biblical example of the New Testament church is to feast together,
apparently on some sort of regular schedule, making sure the needy got
fed on a daily basis.
If your congregation is not doing that, is it adhering to the New Testament pattern? Is it truly a New Testament church?
Just askin'....
No comments:
Post a Comment