How Often Should We Celebrate Communion?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

The doctrine — between the two extremes

• The question posed (in the host's frame): most groups believe in celebrating the Lord's Supper — the question names the questioner's own communion among them. But how frequently should this celebration be observed? And the question's own framing: communion, or the Lord's Supper, was instituted by Jesus himself, on the night before he was crucified (as the question states it). It is observed widely — the question instances one church that celebrates communion, or mass, every single week (its day named in the question's layer), and others that celebrate much less frequently than that. And there's a lot of debate about this: does the bible give us any clues, as to how frequently the earliest church celebrated communion? And how frequently should the questioner's own people observe the Lord's Supper? The answer: well, first of all, let me say that communion is a very important doctrine of the church. And I think sometimes we don't emphasize it as much as we should. Now, there are two extremes, that I think we should avoid. On the one hand: the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the elements — of the bread, and the fruit of the vine — actually turn into the physical body and blood of Jesus. So that when they celebrate what they call the mass, it's actually a new sacrifice of Jesus. And in fact, after the priest says the prayer of consecration, the people are to actually worship those elements, as Jesus. They're to adore and worship these elements, because they're no longer elements — that's Jesus. Well, I think that is clearly false. One example would be: when Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, he says: this is my body. This is my blood. And so that's how the Catholic Church says: well, literally, this is. But when he said that to his disciples, his body was standing before them. His blood was still coursing through his veins. So they obviously knew: no, that's not his physical body and blood. But he's saying: this represents my body, that's going to be broken for you. And my blood, that's going to be shed for you. The opposite extreme would be to say: it's merely a symbol. While that is symbolic, as I've just described it, it's not merely a symbol. And here's why: I think when we participate, the Lord comes spiritually, in a special way. He honors our faith. Now, this is not the only way the Lord comes. Obviously, anytime we pray, we can have the presence of the Lord. But when we contemplate Christ's sacrifice for us, and we seek to apply the benefits of his sacrifice to our lives, and then we celebrate his second coming — because part of that communion is, as the Apostle Paul explained in First Corinthians (the chapter as he gives it): we do show, or re-represent, the Lord's death, until he comes. And Jesus, when he instituted the Lord's Supper ('when he ensued the Lord's Supper', as heard), said: I'm not going to drink of this with you again, until I do it in the kingdom of God. So even Jesus said: this is pointing towards the second coming. So it looks back — it looks back to the Cross. But it looks forward, to the second coming. So therefore, we can expect: whenever we have that intensity, of thinking of Christ's sacrifice applied to our lives, and thinking about his coming again — looking forward to that — and we have faith: then Christ comes, in a very real and personal way, spiritually. And that's why we should take advantage of this opportunity: for forgiveness, for healing, for deliverance ('for delivering reference', as heard). And so we believe Christ is spiritually present. Now, given all that: I think the Lord's Supper should be celebrated, in a prominent way, in our churches.

Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 11

The frequency counsel — at least yearly, at most monthly, by opinion

• Now, if you try to identify how often: I would say that the Bible doesn't say, specifically. In fact — again, the Corinthians chapter (named above): Paul simply says, as often as you do it. So he doesn't say how often. But if you think of the Lord's Supper being based on the Passover: the Passover was celebrated once a year. So that — I think — a minimum should be once a year. Now, Catholics, and some other Protestants, celebrate every week. It's the central part of their service. Because, at least for the Catholics, they look at it as an ongoing sacrifice — it helps you with your sins. So naturally, they want to do it every time. So I think that's too often. I think that turns it into either a false concept, as if it is the most important element of the service. And it also may be — trivializes it ('it also may be trivializes it', as heard). Because if you don't take that serious of a view, and you say it's symbolic: well, then it just becomes a ritual, that you repeat over and over. It loses its significance. So my concern about having it every week would be: diminishing the significance. Or turning it into a ritual, or a ceremony. Displacing other elements. We want to have plenty of time for worship, preaching, prayer. And not just let the service become a ritual. So, in other words, I would say: somewhere in the middle. Now, if you look at Acts (the chapter as he gives it), it indicates that they celebrated quite frequently. Of course, when they talk about breaking of bread ('breaking a bread', as heard), I think it could mean both — the Lord's supper, and fellowship meals. So you don't always know if they're talking about one, or the other, or both. But they didn't know it would be at least 2 000 years (as the figures stand), before the Lord came back. They probably were expecting him to come back, in a few weeks. So they're probably celebrating quite frequently. Whereas, from our perspective, we realize: well, it's probably not meant to be every week or two. Because the Lord isn't coming — at least, from a historical perspective — he wasn't planning to come back, in a month or two. So, as a pastor, what I usually did was celebrate three or four times a year. That, to me — that was frequent enough, to keep the importance, and the blessing. But not so often, that it just became a ceremonial ritual. And I also try to consider: not everybody can be at every service. So if you only have it once a year, and somebody is sick or out of town, they might go two years. And that's not good. So if you have it three or four times a year — and so, once a quarter would be easy. Or, a lot of times, I would do it towards the beginning of the year, kind of as a Consecration. And then do it around Easter, because that naturally lends itself, to contemplating Christ's death. And then in the fall, as we began the school year again: a good time of renewal. Or, you know, heading to the Future: consecration. Sometimes we had a watch Night Service. And we would have communion, and foot washing, at that time ('we would have communion in Fort washing at that time', as heard). So I do believe that several times a year is generally good. But there's no hard and fast rule. I think it should be at least once a year. Maybe as much as once a quarter, or once a month. But this is just my opinion. There's no absolute scripture. If you get more than once a month, I would be concerned that it becomes more of a ritual, a ceremony, with less meaning. And displaces other things, that need to be emphasized, in the life of the church.

Scriptures: Acts 2

Scripture index: 1 Corinthians 11; Acts 2.