The Lord’s Supper: A Church’s Meal

Sermon Transcript

Well today is our second and final week of this two-week series of sermons I’m calling “suboptimal ingestion”—we could have done a graphic for it, but it would have been kind of gross. These are biblical sermons, but they’re not the kind of biblical sermons I think are healthiest for a church’s regular diet. The healthiest regular diet of sermons for a church, in my judgment, is a series through a book of the Bible, in which each sermon’s structure and emphasis is submitted to the structure and emphasis of the biblical passage. Lord willing, we’ll begin that again next week when we start the Gospel of Luke. But that’s not what we’re doing today. Today we’re doing a topical sermon, in which we are bringing our own question to the passage. Last week we asked the questions, “What is baptism, and what is its relationship to church membership?” This week we’re asking the question, “What is the Lord’s Supper, and what is its relationship to church membership?” But we’re asking it of a longer passage than last week, and one whose emphasis still provides us with a helpful answer to our question. In this passage God, through the apostle Paul, exhorts us to take the Lord’s Supper like it’s the Lord’s supper. How can we do that? Three ways we see in this passage: Take it when you come together as a church, take it while remembering and proclaiming the Lord’s death, and take it with self-examination.

 

When you come together as a church

 

Our passage begins with some context. Paul says he’s writing not to commend them, because when they come together, far from that gathering being for the better, it’s for the worse. He basically says throughout the passage that they’d be better off staying home if they are going to act like this. And the reason he gives in verse 18 is because there are divisions among them. He quickly qualifies that statement in verse 19 by saying that not all division is bad. Some is necessary, in order that those who are genuine among them may be recognized. Back in chapter 5 of this letter, in fact, Paul commanded the church to remove a man living in unrepentant sin from among them. He went on to tell them that they should not associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—significant for this passage, he adds that the church in Corinth should “not even eat with such a one” (1 Cor 5:11). That sure sounds divisive, doesn’t it? Remove a man from your church? And don’t just remove that man, but anyone who bears the name of brother who is living in serious, observable, unrepentant sin, even someone who’s greedy or drinks too much?

 

Unity is no doubt a high value in the Bible, but it is never presented to us in the Bible as a goal to be sought at the expense of genuine Christianity. Trying above all else to get and keep everyone in the same church is one of the best ways to kill genuine Christianity in the long run. It’s also unloving to those who are not genuine. If someone is calling themselves a Christian while not living like one, one of the best things you can do is divide from them so that, as our passage says, those who are genuine may be recognized, they can see that they are not among them, and then they can repent and become a genuine Christian! To treat someone who isn’t living like a Christian as though they are one may feel better both to you and to them, but it only further exposes them to eternal danger. A 10-year-old child once told the great preacher Martyn Lloyd-Jones that he wasn’t a Christian, and Lloyd-Jones commended the child for his wisdom, because, Lloyd-Jones said, one of the first steps to becoming a Christian is realizing you aren’t one. Jesus said he came not to bring peace, but a sword, to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law (Matt 10:34-35), as one would take up their cross and follow him, while another would show him or herself to not be genuine. So there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. That’s the good kind of disunity.

 

But there is also a bad kind, and that’s the focus of this text. The bad kind is that when they come together, they eat in such a way as to render the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper itself null and void. When they came together, some were going ahead and filling themselves, while other poor members of the church starved. And while some were starving, others were drinking so much that they were getting drunk. When Jesus first instituted the Lord’s Supper, he did it as part of a bigger meal, the Passover meal, which you can learn more about tonight at our prayer service. So here, it’s clear that the Lord’s Supper was celebrated by the church in Corinth as part of a larger meal that they ate when they came together as a church, such that some could starve from being deprived of food at it, and others could get drunk off the wine. Evidence we have from the ancient church shows that taking the Lord’s Supper as part of a larger meal was normal after the time of the apostles as well, though it’s not required that it be observed that way in the Bible, and the practice did fade from the church within a few centuries of the apostles.

 

We, like almost all churches today, don’t take the Supper as part of a larger meal, and so we don’t have to worry about anyone getting drunk during this meal (the fruit of the vine we use isn’t even alcoholic), nor do we have to worry about anyone starving because someone ate all the wafers, but what we can learn from these verses significant to the question we’re bringing to the text today is the context in which the Lord’s Supper is taken: Not in your houses, as a meal you eat by yourself, with your friends, or with your earthly family, but, in the words of verse 17: When you come together. We see the same language again in verse 20: When you come together. We see it again later in the passage. Verse 33: When you come together, and then again in verse 34: When you come together. And there is no doubt who makes up the “you” who are coming together, because Paul said in the second verse of this letter, 1 Corinthians 1:2, that it was written to the church of God in Corinth, and in verse 18 of this passage he specifies that he is talking about what happens when you come together as a church. The Gospel accounts of Jesus’ life are clear that he ate with tax collectors and sinners (e.g., Luke 5:29-32), but they’re equally clear that when he instituted the Lord’s Supper, he only ate it with his disciples (e.g., Luke 22:14). The Lord’s Supper is a meal for the Lord’s church, when they come together as a church.

 

Now, Paul doesn’t explain entirely why that’s the case here in 1 Corinthians 11, in part because he already explained it in chapter 10. Here’s what he says there in verses 16-18: “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar?” The word there for participation is fellowship, and he says in verse 17 because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. As Bobby Jamieson has put it, where baptism binds the one to the many, in the Lord’s Supper, the many are made one. The Lord’s Supper is not a “me and Jesus” moment; it’s a “me and Jesus’ body” moment. That’s what made the fact that some were going ahead and eating while others starved so heinous. And that’s why it’s taken by a church, when you come together as a church, rather than in the privacy of your home. Without the church together, the sign no longer signifies.

 

Who is it, then, who comes together as a church, and thus takes the Lord’s Supper, in the Bible? You might think it’s just anyone who comes to a church gathering, but the letter of 1 Corinthians shows us that’s not the case. Listen to this verse from 1 Corinthians 14:23 – “If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?” Notice there that there is a difference between the whole church which comes together, and the outsiders or unbelievers, who enter the gathering, but are still considered unbelievers or outsiders. And there is clearly a sense that they knew who belonged to which group, or else how could they have known when the whole church came together, and when an unbeliever or outsider entered? When we speak of church members, this is all we mean: Those who comprise the church, as opposed to the unbelievers or outsiders.

 

What, then, distinguishes church members from the unbelievers or outsiders? First and most obviously, church members are believers. So back in verse 2, when Paul says he’s writing to the church of God that is in Corinth, he then identifies the church as those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours. And by believer, the Bible doesn’t just mean those who say they are Christians, but those whose lives reflect that. So in chapter 6 we read “that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God[.] Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

 

Ok, so the church of God is comprised of believers, and that distinguishes them from the unbelievers or outsiders. But there is more that distinguishes them than belief. Another mark that distinguishes the church from the unbelievers or outsiders is the one we looked at last week: baptism. So we read in 1 Corinthians 12:13 that “in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” How do you go from unbeliever to believer? By believing. But how do you go from outsider to insider? How do you go from outside the body to inside the body? Through baptism. So if you’re keeping track, we could say that church members are distinguished from unbelievers or outsiders not by attending services (both do that), but by belief that results in a changed life, baptism, and finally, by accountability. The membership that baptism brings you into is an accountable membership.

 

We see this in 1 Corinthians 5, to which we’ve already alluded. There we read of a notorious sinner, and referring to him, Paul says to the Corinthians in 1 Cor 5:2, “Let him who has done this be removed from among you.” Their membership in the church was the sort of thing from which they could be removed, and the church had the authority to remove them. In fact, later in that same chapter we see again this inside/outside dichotomy: “Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you’” (1 Cor 5:12-13). What’s the difference between the insider and outsider there? The outsider is not subject to the judgment of the church, while the insider is, and can be removed from the church. Remember that the church isn’t just the gathering—unbelievers or outsiders are welcome at the gathering. Thus removal from the church isn’t prohibition from attending the gathering, but a dissolution of a more formal bond we call membership. Removal, or what is sometimes called church discipline, is a change in status from insider to outsider. In fact, the more common term for that in the history of the church is excommunication, a removal from communion, another word for the Lord’s Supper that emphasizes its corporate nature.

 

I mentioned last week the ancient church practice of having a different area of the building, called the narthex, in which the unbaptized, the catechumens, would sit. You know who else would sit there? Those under church discipline. Then in the service they’d have the ministry of the word, which all attended, and then when it was time to take the Lord’s Supper, those in the narthex would be dismissed. Some Eastern Orthodox churches to this day still say, “As many as are catechumens, depart!” before serving the Lord’s Supper, and I think what we’re seeing here in 1 Corinthians shows good biblical reasons for doing something like that. We see here that the Lord’s Supper is taken by a church, when you come together as a church. So if you are not a believer, if you have not been baptized, or if you are not accountable to a church in such a way that you can be removed from it, what’s ordinarily called a church member, you should not take the Lord’s Supper. And, since it is a meal to be taken when you come together as a church, you should not take it in your small group, your Bible study, your summer camp, at your wedding, in the privacy of your own home, or anywhere besides the gathering of a church.

 

Now I want to apologize to any of you who have attended services prior to this Sunday, because I do not believe we have been as clear about this as we should be when we serve the Lord’s Supper. Usually what I say when I serve the Lord’s Supper is ambiguous: On the front end, I say if you are receiving and resting on Jesus alone for salvation, you’re welcome to take. But then, on the back end, I say if you become a believer in Christ, you should talk to one of us about getting baptized, joining the church, and taking the supper with us in future weeks. When a few of you have come to me privately and asked if you should take the supper before getting baptized and joining the church, I’ve counseled you not to, and to instead wait until you’ve been baptized and thereby received into the membership of the church, but the more public teaching has been confusing, and confusion serves no one. As a result, I look up each week when we take the Lord’s Supper and see a number of people taking who I know aren’t members of any local church, and I think that’s more on me than on you. So I am sorry for not being clearer that the Lord’s Supper is a meal given to churches to take when they come together as a church, and the people who comprise the church are baptized believers who are accountable to a local church. Please forgive me.

 

I can’t undo the past, but I can admit when I was wrong, ask your forgiveness, and try to get it right going forward. In that spirit, let me just address some of the different types of attendees I assume are here today. Many of you are obviously members of this church, and you are welcome to take the Lord’s Supper every time we gather, though I’ll say more later about how you should examine yourself before doing so. Others of you may be visiting for a Sunday, but you are members of other churches to whom you are accountable, who have exercised their authority to affirm that you have been baptized and that you are a believer in Jesus Christ. You also are welcome to take with us.

 

Others of you are unbelievers, and unless this is your first Sunday with us, you’ve probably heard us explain before that you should not take the Lord’s Supper, though we are glad to have you with us and would love to welcome to you to take that meal with us if you will believe, be baptized, and join a church. The group we’ve served the worst with these instructions is those of you who would identify yourselves as believers in Jesus Christ, but who either have not been baptized, or are not accountable to any local church because you have not formally joined one. I won’t rehash last week’s sermon on baptism, but if you haven’t been baptized, you should get baptized before taking the Lord’s Supper, and I will add this week that if you aren’t a member of a local church, you should join one before taking the Lord’s Supper.

 

And as you hear me say that, please don’t hear me say you aren’t welcome here or we don’t want you here. We’re sincerely glad you are at this service, and the door is open to joining this church and taking the supper with us; we’re just saying there is a door. Our next baptism and membership class is in March, but if you are so convinced of your need to join a church that you want to get the ball rolling sooner, let me know and I’d be glad to meet with you and other interested parties sooner to cover the baptism and membership class content. If it turns out this church isn’t for you, I’d be happy to help you find one you can join so that you can take the Lord’s Supper with them. And if you need some time to figure that out and that means for the next few months you won’t be taking the Lord’s Supper out of a desire to honor the principles I’m laying out here, you’ll be fine. There is no saving grace in the Lord’s Supper that you cannot get by faith in Jesus Christ, and you can have him today, even if it then takes a few months before you become a member and take the Supper.

 

On that note, let me speak to the kids in the room. Some of you may already have become believers in Jesus Christ. Others of you, like the ten-year-old who spoke to Martyn Lloyd-Jones, may know you aren’t a Christian, and still others may be figuring it out. Whichever the case may be, I’d give you the same counsel I’m giving everyone: You shouldn’t take the Lord’s Supper until you get baptized and join a church. And at this church, we want to do our best to help you really understand what that means and what you’d be committing to by joining a church before we’d baptize you or receive you into the membership of this church, which means the younger you are, the more likely we’ll be to encourage you to believe in Jesus, love him, serve him, walk with him, rejoice in him, but we’ll wait to baptize you into membership. By all means, if you ever reach a point where you do want to get baptized, join the church, and take the Lord’s Supper with us, we’d be glad to talk to you, even though we will likely tell you that we’re going to wait. Kids, you do not need to be at all afraid of that outcome. Let me reiterate: There is no saving grace in baptism, membership, or the Lord’s Supper that you cannot get by faith in Jesus Christ, and you are never too young to repent and believe in him. Believe in him, and when a church judges that your profession of faith is credible, you are ready to publicly profess it, and ready to take on the accountability and duties of church membership, then you can get baptized, join a church, and take the Lord’s Supper.

 

I understand some of these ideas will be new to many of you in the room, and perhaps even initially off-putting. We’ve not taught it clearly, and though much of it is common to the history of the church, it’s not well taught in many churches today. Furthermore, I mentioned last week that while ancient societies tended to assume they had the right to assign each individual an identity, modern societies like the majority culture where we live tend to assume each individual has the right to assert their chosen individual identity on the community. But in the Bible the individual’s profession and the community’s affirmation, in this case the church’s, are both legitimate and important. As the church should not try to force feed anyone the Lord’s Supper, neither should anyone try to force the church to give it to them, or feel like they’re somehow entitled to it because they assert themselves to be a Christian. To extend an analogy I began last week, to take the Lord’s Supper when you aren’t ready to join a church or they aren’t ready to receive you into membership would be like expecting to play in an NFL game when you aren’t ready to sign a contract with any team or they aren’t ready to sign you. You have to join the team to play in the game. Take the Lord’s Supper like it’s the Lord’s Supper by taking it with the Lord’s body, his church, when you come together as a church.

 

And next, take it while remembering and proclaiming the Lord’s death.

 

While remembering and proclaiming the Lord’s death

 

After reiterating in verse 22 that Paul cannot commend them for the way they’re attempting to take the Lord’s Supper in a disunified way, he explains why he can’t commend them for this: Because he received from the Lord what he delivered to them. This is why Protestant churches like ours have only two sacraments, as opposed to the seven of the Roman Catholic Church: Because our Lord only instituted two, and this is one of them. It’s also why the Corinthians couldn’t just take it in whatever way they pleased: It is the Lord’s Supper, not ours. You can host your own dinner at your house, but when you come together as a church, you should be taking the Lord’s Supper as a unified church body. And more to the point of this passage, that also means we can’t assign to the Lord’s Supper whatever meaning we might choose. Since it is his, it means what he says it means, and the verses that follow explain what he says it means.

 

First we read of him taking the bread, and of it he said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” Now some in the history of Christianity have taught this means the bread becomes the literal body of Jesus Christ when the priest says these words over it. In Roman Catholicism particularly, this is known as the doctrine of transubstantiation, which means the substance, the essence of the bread is transformed into the body of Christ, even though the accidents, the visible properties, remain bread. And the argument from this verse is that Jesus himself said, “This is my body,” not, “This represents my body” or “This symbolizes my body.” Who could argue with that?

 

Well, many have actually, and I’ll add myself to their number. Since Jesus is the one who said, “This is my body,” let’s consider some other statements from Jesus to see how he expected to be understood. In John 10:9 Jesus said, “I am the door.” He didn’t say he was like the door; he simply said, “I am the door.” Surely, then, this shows that Jesus is essentially a rectangular material object that you open and close to enter and exit a room. Well ok maybe we can understand that metaphorically, but what about in Matthew 13:20 when Jesus says that a seed sown in rocky ground is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy? He doesn’t say it represents or symbolizes, he just says it is. Surely, then, a seed sown on rocky ground is actually and essentially a human who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, even though the accidents are that of a seed?

 

Or what about in this very passage, in the next verse, where we read that the cup Jesus used at the Last Supper is the new covenant in his blood. The cup itself must have been the new covenant, right? I’ll stop there, because we all recognize that’s ridiculous. We all realize that words have meaning in context, and the word is can mean something like represents without twisting the meaning of the word. Recently I went to the Franklin Institute with my kids, and once we walked in, without even trying to generate a sermon illustration, I pointed at the big statue of Ben Franklin and simply said to my kids, “There’s Ben Franklin!” Now would my kids have really been true to my intention if they had turned to me and said, “But dad, I thought Ben Franklin died centuries ago”? No, they didn’t do that, because they knew I didn’t mean that, even though I simply used the word “is.” So here, the bread is no more Jesus’ physical body than the cup is the new covenant. But the bread does represent Jesus’ body, like that statue represents Benjamin Franklin, and like the cup represents the new covenant.

 

Why then give us bread as a representation of his body? He tells us that we are to do this in remembrance of him. And he didn’t pull this out of thin air. He did it in the context of the Jewish Passover, the meal at which God’s people remembered their salvation from slavery in Egypt. Again, come to the prayer service tonight to learn more about that. But when Jesus ate the Passover with his disciples, he didn’t say, “This is the bread of the Passover.” He said, “This is my body. Do this in remembrance of me.” He was proclaiming to them a new salvation to which they would look back, a new exodus, a new Passover, of which he was the center.

 

And the reason is right there in verse 24: This is my body, which is for you. It was his body that Jesus was going to give on the cross for his people, to bear the judgment their sins deserved. And so in the next verse we see he also takes the cup, and says it is the new covenant in his blood. The Passover meal was the meal of the old covenant, the meal that reminded the partakers of God’s great saving act that inaugurated the old covenant: The exodus from Egypt. But the meal of the new covenant is the Lord’s Supper, in which we remember the body of Jesus that was given for us on the cross, and in which we remember the blood of Christ that was shed for us on the cross. The act itself, when administered with these words, reminds us of the Lord’s death on our behalf, in which our redemption was accomplished.

 

Do you see the kindness of the Lord in giving us such a meal? He knows the weakness of our faith, and how prone to forget we are. So he gives us a ritual through which we are reminded of him week in and week out, and through which we are reminded not only through our ears, but through our hands, as we take the bread in hand, through our taste buds, as we eat the bread, and drink of the cup, through our sense of smell, as we smell the fruit of the vine. In this each week there is a reminder that we have been saved, brothers and sisters, by the body and blood of our Lord Jesus that he offered on the cross on our behalf! We are no longer slaves to our sin, and we are no longer under the curse that our sins deserve. Instead, we are the recipients of immeasurable grace, immeasurable kindness, a new and eternal covenant. Are we not so prone to forget? When I start to covet the life God has given others, when I start to grumble against him in my heart, when I get anxious, isn’t one of the things happening there that I’m forgetting what immeasurable grace I’ve received? Well by God’s grace there’s a meal each week in which we get to remember. This is one of the reasons you come to church gatherings instead of tailgating for the Eagles game and listening to the sermon online later. You can get an audio recording of a sermon anywhere, but you can only taste and see the reminder of grace Jesus instituted when you come together as a church and take it.

 

Jesus speaks to us through it: This is my body, which is for you. This cup is the new covenant in my blood. He gave himself for us. This is another reason we as a church shouldn’t want just anyone to take it, because when we serve this meal, by doing so, we are saying something to them. The act speaks, and says, “You are in the new covenant!” and we wouldn’t want to deceive something into thinking they are, when in fact they aren’t, because it’s not our covenant; it’s Jesus’. Maybe you’re not a member of any church but you believe you are in the new covenant through faith; that’s great! Praise God! We’re just asking that you give us or another church the opportunity to get to know you well enough that we too can affirm that you are part of that new covenant community, and then we’d be glad to remind you of what Jesus did for you by taking the Lord’s Supper with you.

 

But the Lord’s Supper isn’t just remembrance; it’s also proclamation. The bread and the cup remind us, but you still must take and eat. And verse 26 says as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. The act speaks to you, but you also speak through the act, which is another reason a person’s profession of faith should be assessed and made public through baptism and membership before taking the Lord’s Supper. When we take the Lord’s Supper as the Lord’s Supper, then, we take it in remembrance of his death, and we take it proclaiming his death on our behalf. And finally, therefore, we take it with self-examination.

 

With self-examination

 

If the Lord’s Supper is the Lord’s supper, if it’s not just ours to do with it what we will, and if by the Lord’s will, the bread represents his body, and the cup represents the new covenant in his blood, then the conclusion of verse 27 follows: Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. When someone attacks a police officer, there’s a stricter penalty enforced on them than if they attacked a private citizen, because an attack on a police officer is an attack on the state itself. Why? Because the police represent the state. So also to take of the bread and the cup unworthily, when it is the bread and cup of the Lord, is to sin against the body and blood of the Lord, since the bread and the cup represent his body and blood. It’s a big deal.

 

So what, then, should you do? Verse 28 tells us: Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. Writing to the church, under the assumption that outsiders aren’t taking the Lord’s Supper, he still tells those inside the church to examine themselves, and then only eat of the bread and drink of the cup after that self-examination. And the reason he then gives is that anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. What does it mean to discern the body? It means to recognize what you are doing when you receive a meal that represents the body and blood of the Lord—you are professing faith in that Lord, and you are saying, by the act, that you are one with the people of the Lord, his body, for remember what we saw from chapter 10: “Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”

 

It’s sinful any time you eat while your brother or sister starves. It’s sinful any time you get drunk. But you add to the guilt of it when you do it when you come together as a church, because your actions are contradicting what you are professing by taking the Lord’s Supper. You’re dragging his body and blood into your sin. And therefore, you are subjecting yourself to a more severe judgment from the Lord. The text goes on to say that some of them were getting sick and dying as a means of God’s discipline, to wake them up and call them to repentance, so that they will not be condemned along with the world.

 

How then, for you who are believing, baptized members of churches, should you examine yourselves? Two things you want to look for: Unrepentant sin, and unresolved conflict. First, unrepentant sin, by which I mean, are you planning to leave this service and go sin again? You slept with your boyfriend Saturday night, and after church you plan to do it again Sunday night. You abused your wife Saturday, and you plan to do it again after church Sunday. You stole from your company last week, and you plan to do it again next week. We saw earlier in 1 Corinthians 5 that if you call yourself a Christian but do things like that, we should not be eating this meal with you. If we know you’re doing it, then it’s our job to remove you from membership as an act of church discipline, but if you know you’re doing it, it’s your job to remove yourself until you repent. So examine yourself for serious, observable, unrepentant sin.

 

And examine yourself for unresolved conflict, and what I mean by this is not just any unresolved conflict; Christians expect the world to hate them on some level. What I mean is unresolved conflict within the church. Jesus, speaking under the terms of the old covenant, said, “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift” (Matt 5:23-24). Applying that to the Lord’s Supper, the idea would be that if you know you need to apologize to another member of the church, or you need to forgive another member of the church, you shouldn’t take the Lord’s Supper with them until you’ve done so. Remember that the act speaks, and you don’t want to say something through the action that is contrary to your life. In taking the Lord’s Supper, you are saying, “We are one!” but then if after the service you won’t greet the person lovingly, you’ve added the guilt of taking the Lord’s Supper unworthily to the guilt of unrepentance or unforgiveness.

 

When you examine yourself in these ways, if you find that there is unrepentant sin or unresolved conflict in your life, you shouldn’t take the Lord’s Supper, but you also shouldn’t despair. Go, repent. Go, be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then do come take the Lord’s Supper.

 

Because when you examine yourself, you should always find some sin that remains, some unbelief, some lack of love toward your brothers and sisters. When you find that, and you sincerely want to repent of it, this is exactly the meal for you, because in this meal Jesus reminds you that he shed his blood for those very sins, and that because he did, they are now all forgiven in the sight of a holy God. In this meal we remember that he is now risen from the dead, and will come again to eat with us in a new heaven and new earth, where will sin will be no more, where our love for one another will be perfected, and where there will be one flock united under one shepherd. I have heard of some churches in which very few members take the Lord’s Supper, because it is considered presumptuous to do so. That’s out of step with the gospel. If you are a baptized member of a gospel-preaching church and you want to kill your sin and get more of Jesus, come and take.

 

But I think it is fair to say that in the Christianity of 2025 Philadelphia, our danger is not with people taking the Lord’s Supper too seriously, or examining themselves too vigorously. It is much more with people taking it too lightly, and feeling entitled to it. Examine yourselves, therefore, so that you may not eat and drink judgment on yourself, but might rather take the Lord’s Supper as the Lord’s supper.