Series: The Cross

1 Cor 11:23-34


Introduction

Meals are an important part of life and therefore also of the religious life. Eating together is more than taking in food and drink. It is friendship, intimacy, belonging. Good food in good company is also spiritual food.

In the Hebrew Bible, for instance, when God would make a covenant with God's people, they would celebrate and seal the covenant with a covenant meal. When the king wanted to extend mercy or forgiveness to someone – as King David did to Mephibosheth (2 Sam 9) – he would invite that person to a meal: "you shall eat at my table always".

It is therefore not surprising that a meal stands at the centre of Christian worship – although we would have to ask what is Christian about this meal.

Right from the beginning Christians would regularly meet for worship and fellowship around a meal and in that context also built in a special way to celebrate the joy that their life was grounded in Jesus Christ.

What we notice in the Lord's Supper tradition is the special references to the Cross, the death of Jesus. Let me remind you:

… I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, 11:24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 11:25 In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." 11:26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. 11:27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord.

The interlocking of the Lord's Supper with the Cross stands out:

Jesus is introduced as the host of the Lord's Supper with a specific reference to his passion: "the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread."

The elements of bread (flesh) and wine (blood) point to his life given for others for the forgiveness of sin.

The community of faith, participating in the Lord's Supper are interpreted as proclaiming "the Lord's death until he comes."

And the behaviour of the participants is inter-related with the passion of Jesus: "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord."

Let us try to understand how and why the apostle Paul inter-relates the Lord's Supper with the Cross of Christ.

The best description for what we mean by "church" is Paul's naming of the church in Corinth as "coming together" (vv. 18-20). Often, perhaps every afternoon, the Christians in Corinth – rich and poor, home owners and slaves, widows and wharf labourers, nannies and children – "came together" for a meal, for fellowship, for worship, and in that context also to observe the "Lord's Supper".

They would bring their own food and, remembering that "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof" (Ps 24:1), they consecrated the food to the Lord. With this act of consecration they showed their desire to share. The food now belonged to the whole community. Their primary intention was not to eat their own meal, but they wanted to share and then eat together.

By doing that, they manifested the church of God (v. 22), and they demonstrated their unity in Christ (10:16). Then they ate and drank.

At least here at the community meal - later called "Agape" ("Love": Jude 12; Ign. Smyrn. 8:2; [2 Pet 2:13]) - all the members of the community would get enough to eat!

They would eat and sing and pray and listen to a sermon - and in that context, probably towards the end of the gathering, they would also celebrate the "Lord's Supper" (so called in the New Testament only in v. 20).

A discord must have begun to spoil the atmosphere in the church. Paul speaks of "divisions" and "factions" among them (vv. 18f.); and he distinguishes between their "own meals" (v. 21) and the "Lord's Supper" (v. 20). What had happened?

Most likely, those who were rich and had more leisure time came earlier than the rest (implied in vv.21, 33) and brought some extras like fish and meat and good wine for themselves. They began to eat before the slaves and labourers and nannies had arrived. Indeed, it must have happened at times, that while there was not enough food left for the late-comers (v. 21), some of those who had come early were already drunk.

The problem was twofold.

· Individualism. There were those in the church who thought that they had already arrived (1 Cor 4:8). Not the welfare of the whole community, not the mission of the church in the world, but the benefit of the individual or of a certain group of individuals (1 Cor 1:12) was their determining interest.

· Hand in hand with their individualism was their lack of concern for the "late-comers". They knew of the late-comers. But they probably thought that it was most important that "after supper" (v. 25) all people would participate in the "cup". Is the sacrament not more important than the meal? Does not the sacrament feed the soul, while food only provides pleasure for the perishing body? This is what those thought who had enough to eat!

How does the apostle deal with the situation? How does the gospel speak into the situation?

The problem is serious. First of all, the apostle underlines the seriousness of the problem. He hurls at the church an unbelievable verdict: "when you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord's supper" (v. 20). Given the importance of the Lord's Supper, Paul seems to question the church's Christian identity. Had the church become another religious club, of which there were many in Corinth? How shall we understand such a harsh criticism?

A social problem had gained theological significance! Paul does not criticize the spiritual experiences of the Christians. He does not question the legitimacy of their singing, preaching, healing and praying. His scathing criticism is directed against a church that claims to celebrate the Lord’s Supper, but at the same time fails to display a social conscience. For him it was an intolerable contradiction that they met for the Lord’s Supper, but failed to fully integrate the slaves, the servants and the labourers in the community meal: "... do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing?" (v. 22). With this question he suggests an essential inter-relationship between the nature of the church, as the church of God, and the mission of the church in the world.

Was it not the central passion of Jesus to share his life with the outsiders, the "late-comers"? Did Jesus not eat with publicans and sinners, and in direct consequence of his life-style was criticized, opposed, arrested and finally killed? Indeed, did his opponents not call him "a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners" (Mt 11:19 = Lk 7:34; Mk 2:16)? How then can the church celebrate the Lord's Supper and not give equal status to the lower social classes? That, for Paul, was a denial of the Lordship of Christ and therefore a negation of their Christian identity.

And yet, on the other hand, Paul could also not imagine that a church could cease to exist or to exist without celebrating the Lord's Supper. Was the church in Corinth not part of the "church of God" (1 Cor 1:2)? Could God's creation be annulled by human disobedience? Paul finds this difficult to imagine. Therefore, as a compromise, he suggests that in future they should eat their real meal at home (v. 22), and then meet together for a separate "Lords Supper".

So the problem is serious. It cuts to the very nature and being of the church. What is the response?

The answer is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ as saviour and Jesus Christ as example. Let me explain!

In this situation, like in every situation where the Christian faith is at stake, Jesus Christ must me named. He alone is God's Word for every situation.

He, Jesus Christ, therefore is named as the host at the Lord's Supper and he is understood in relation to his cross, his death.

Paul does not preach morality. He simply reminds the Christians in Corinth to whom they belong. Perhaps, if the Christian leaders in Corinth realize who the well spring of their lives is, they may be more thankful and more compassionate.

"… the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread ... as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes" (11:23, 26).

By participating in the Lord's supper they remember that Christ died for them. He is the foundation of their lives.

… no one can lay any foundation other than the one that has been laid; that foundation is Jesus Christ. (1 Cor 3:11)

Paul said a little earlier in the epistle.

That is the first thing that we must always remember:

• "This is my body which is for you"!
• "This is my blood (= life) of the new covenant poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins"!

We celebrate, we worship, we give thanks that God has done for us what we could not do for ourselves. In the cross of Christ God has opened the gateway into God's divine life.

We don't have to do anything: We can open our hearts and feed on Christ by faith. He is God's Word to us. The Word is "Yes". That is what we mean when we call him "saviour".

We don't worship alone. We don't remember alone. We don't give thanks alone.

We are social beings. We worship together. In our celebration of Christ as God's word to us we become aware of each other: "If one member suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honoured, all rejoice together with it." (1 Cor 12:26)

And as we are grateful for God's "yes" to us, as we become aware of each other, we remember Jesus not only as saviour but also as example. How he spent his life with the "late-comers" of life.

Therefore, my friends, the closer we come to Christ, the more sensitive we become to the burdens of others. Again the apostle brings it into language:. "Bear one another's burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ." (Gal 6:2)

The "unworthy" – "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord." – is not directed against our private morality. It says that where the cross of Christ is honoured we do not forget about the nannies and wharfies and slaves and eat our own meal. But we share with them what we have. "Unworthy" means inappropriate to the occasion. It is inappropriate to the occasion of the Lord's Supper to accept Jesus as saviour but refuse to follow him as example.

So, my friends, as you eat and drink in remembrance of Christ, relax in the fact that he is God's "yes" to you; at the same realise that this "yes" includes the invitation to bear each other's burden.


Thorwald Lorenzen 1 February 2004

Last updated: 2 February 2004