This week’s question and answer will end up being the first part of a series. It will bridge the gap between several different questions asked in the live meetings. It begins with the validity of the Eucharist and trans-substantiation as a doctrine and go on to explore aspects of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.  It will touch on the ceremony of Kiddush to show where the form of Christian communion as often practiced actually comes from and what we lose in understanding because of it. Finally we’ll make the connection to the idea of eating and drinking unworthily and attempt to resolve the issue of the unforgivable sin.

The comment was made in the gathering that the New Testament church was probably very different than our gatherings here, so I asked what people think we ought to change or if we ought to change and why? The reaction was immediate and critical.  Yes we ought to be different.  Reaction was slower to suggest what needed changing. The idea of meeting in homes came up, but was balanced by the awareness that when Peter stood up for the first recorded sermon of the early church, 5000 people responded so it seems that maybe that meeting was not in a home. If you have ever been to Israel you are aware of the natural amphitheater where Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, also not a home and complete with a natural platform.  The idea of home church is certainly valid. If you show up to lunch, you’ll find that concept being practiced though we also attend a building for services. Actually, church as practiced today owes a lot to the form established by synagogues.

Let’s see if you recognize this. In synagogues across the world, gatherings often conclude with a ceremony called Kiddush. A Barchu (blessing) is recited over 2 particular elements which are shared with the congregation. The first is bread and the second wine. This is not borrowed from the church but was borrowed by Paul as the weekly elements to use for communion.  Let’s see how that happened. The command of Jesus to “Do this in remembrance of me” indeed focused on these elements so Paul is not inventing something new but Jesus’ command was in reference to the annual Passover meal. Paul recognized that a weekly Passover was not desirable or practical, yet early believers were doing this and abusing the practice. His instruction assumed that believers would continue an annual Passover but weekly the Kiddush provided an opportunity to remind ourselves more often of what Jesus commanded at Passover. The meanings would be understood because the Passover was not being replaced, just abbreviated appropriately for a weekly celebration.

Because certain people were taking advantage of others to eat gluttonously and to avoid having to provide their own food, Paul referred to this as an unworthy manner. While the ceremony is a good time to reflect on the spiritual condition of our souls and to confess to God those things that He wants to forgive and we need off our conscience, guilt should never be a reason not to come to the table if you’re a member of the family. If we are running from the family then we should abstain but never if we feel unworthy or not good enough. You were never invited there because you were good enough. If you have confessed and turned from sin or are willing to do this, come and partake with the rest of us imperfect family members and with your perfect Father, through the perfect offering of His Son.

Jesus had given specific meaning to elements in the meal that are far more significant than just what we learn from the idea that they are bread and wine representing body and blood. If we see the context of Jesus’ statements in the specific places in the Passover celebration we see immediately that Jesus was explaining things that had been the subject of debate ever since Moses explained how to celebrate the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. His comments are making sense out of a mystery for the disciples, not creating a new mysticism. In light of this we see that Jesus is not establishing trans-substantiation as a doctrine or creating a new ceremony.  So what is the meaning behind the bread? (We’ll get to this and the wine in the next post.)