First of all, let me give you some context for this post. This post in an excerpt from a paper I recently wrote on Acts 2:42-47. This passage describes the first group of Messianic Jews in Jerusalem after the day of Pentecost. This excerpt talks about how they would "break bread" in each others' homes and discuses a little bit of the theology behind the idea of communion. Its some food for thought - if you will.
Anyways, if you have any questions, or would like to know the sources I used in the paper, please don't hesitate to ask.
Enjoy!
The second act of worship seen in both verses 42 and 46 is “breaking of bread.” This is commonly mistaken for the sacrament of communion performed in the church today. “Rather, Luke recalls the practice of devout Jewish families who following temple worship would share meals together as symbolic of their social and spiritual solidarity” (Soards 72). The “breaking of bread” refers to a common Jewish practice that would take place at a communal meal. “The Jewish practice of saying grace before a meal includes taking a loaf of bread, giving thanks, breaking it, and distributing it (Matt. 14:19). To “break bread” could designate a common meal” (Freedman 199). This does not mean, however, that what the new believers were doing in acts was not completely isolated from what Jesus Christ commanded them to do at the last supper (Luke 22:14-20). “Probably the best understanding is to see [breaking of bread] as a combination of the two – an agape meal (as noted in 1 Corinthians 11:20-34) followed by the Lord’s Supper” (Janzen 24). This has profound implications for the way the church practices breaking of bread now. Perhaps, when Christ called his church to remember him every time we break bread and take the cup, he was not referring to when the church participated in the sacrament of communion every first Sunday of the month. Instead, perhaps Jesus was calling his church to remember him every time they gathered together - with each other, with their friends, with their families - to simply to eat and drink. Perhaps then, the Lord’s Supper should not just be reserved for every first Sunday of month. Instead, maybe remembrance of Jesus should take place at breakfast, lunch and dinner.
Posts
5 comments:
That's a really interesting idea. So you're saying that Communion wasn't meant to be a ritual in and of itself at all? Or at least an insitutionalized ritual we do at church?
That's what I'm saying.
But I also want to point out that what we have now is not a bad thing. It is a step in the right direction. I just think that the idea of the Lord's Supper was meant for so much more and that the church kind of missed the boat on that one.
I agree we missed the boat, but I see the danger in swinging the opposite way, and letting it become too casual a thing, and forgetting how it's something different than just sitting and eating, but making Christ the centre of it.
It's funny, we've done comunion with our young adults group in different ways (with a huge dinner, presenting each other with the bread and cup, etc.) and one time we did it at church where there were four stations, each with loaves of bread and juice, and we presented the bread and juice to the person behind us in line. It was really cool, to be able to share as a church, and overall had good response, but there were still people (mostly older) that actually made a point to mention how they disagreed with the way we did it, and that it is important to partake in the pews, alone. So yeah, we've missed the boat.
Sweeeeet. I've been making this argument for years. Good to see there are the likeminded among my peers.
I am seriously SO jealous you get to still write papers on things like this!
Post a Comment