The Lord’s Supper
by Rev Dr Jeffrey Khoo
Introduction
The Lord’s Supper is called the Lord’s Supper because it was instituted by the Lord Himself just before His death. The Lord’s Supper like Water Baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace. It is the external, visible display of an internal, invisible reality of our salvation. For example, when we go through the waters of baptism, we are publicly declaring what has already happened in our heart, namely, the washing away of our sins, our new life in Christ, and our hope in the future resurrection.
Note that Water Baptism and the Lord’s Supper do not save. They are just outward symbols of an inward reality. Just like the wedding ring. It is not the ring but the vow that makes a person married to another.
Let us consider the meaning and significance of the Lord’s Supper. According to the Westminster Shorter Catechism, “The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to Christ’s appointment, his death showed forth; and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporal and carnal, but by faith, made partakers of his body and blood, with all his benefits, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace.”
The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded for us in all three synoptic gospels in Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:19-20. Paul discussed the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:23-34. When we partake of the Lord’s Supper, we remember the Lord’s atoning work on the cross, and when we partake of it by faith, we receive spiritual profit and help to live the Christian life.
Now, there are four different views on what the Lord’s Supper means. Let us look at them one by one.
(1) Roman Catholic View
The Roman Catholic view of the Lord’s Supper is called “transubstantiation.” Transubstantiation teaches that the bread and the cup literally become the body and the blood of Christ. When the priest utters the words of Christ, “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” the bread and the wine magically turn into the actual body and blood of Christ. Partaking of the bread and the cup actually means eating the real flesh and drinking the real blood of Christ. Sometimes they put the bread or the wafer into a monstrance to be worshipped. The wafer becomes God. This is idolatry. The Roman Catholic Church also teaches that each time the Eucharist is observed, Christ is crucified all over again. This goes against Hebrews 7:27 which tells us that Christ’s sacrifice was once for all, and not repeatable.
Jesus did not mean a literal eating of His actual flesh and literal drinking of His actual blood in John 6:53. He was not advocating cannibalism. The context clearly indicates that His words bought to be understood spiritually. Jesus was speaking about spiritual eating and drinking. The body and the blood point to Christ’s work on the cross. Believe in Christ, and when He lives in you, you will be saved.
The Roman Catholic view is thus heretical and idolatrous.
(2) Lutheran View
The Lutheran view of the Lord’s Supper came from Martin Luther, the 16th century reformer. Luther was a very devout Roman Catholic scholar and monk before he became a Christian and Protestant. He said, “I was indeed a pious monk, and followed the rules of my order more strictly than I can express. If ever a monk could obtain heaven by his monkish works, I should certainly have been entitled to it.”
Although Luther is to be commended for his reformation of the church insofar as the doctrine of salvation is concerned, we regret to note that he did not reject totally the Roman Catholic view of transubstantiation. It must be noted that Luther did not agree with the Roman Catholic view that the bread and cup literally and magically became the flesh and blood of Christ. He believed that the bread was still bread, and the wine was still wine. Nevertheless, he conceded that the physical body and blood of Christ were somehow present “in, with, and under” the bread and wine.
Luther’s view is called “consubstantiation.” Luther used an iron bar heated with fire to illustrate his point. The iron after it is heated remains iron, but now there is the element of heat, and the heat is in the iron itself, is with the iron, and is around the iron.
Again Luther, like the Roman Catholics, failed to understand that Jesus’ words concerning eating His flesh and drinking His blood had to be taken figuratively or spiritually. Christ is not physically present in the bread and the wine.
(3) Zwinglian View
Ulrich Zwingli was a Swiss Reformer who taught that the Lord’s Supper was simply a commemoration of the Lord’s work on the cross. In 1 Corinthians 11:24, Jesus said, “this do in remembrance of me.” Zwingli was correct to say that the bread and the cup did not contain but merely represented the body and blood of Christ.
Although Zwingli was correct to say that the bread and cup represented or symbolised the body and blood of Christ, there was one shortcoming to his view; he failed to see the spiritual presence of Christ in the elements.
(4) Calvinistic View
Calvin agreed with Zwingli that the elements represented the body and blood of Christ. Calvin used the words “symbols,” “signs,” and “images,” to explain the meaning of the bread and the cup. Calvin also taught that the Lord’s Supper was a commemoration of Christ and His work on the cross.
Calvin rightly taught that the partaking of the Lord’s Supper had an additional significance. It was a spiritual exercise. The whole ceremony was sacred. All participants must observe it with great reverence and fear.
At True Life B-P Church, we keep the Lord’s Supper once a month. Has it become a routine for us? Do we observe it as something we have to do as a matter of course, or do we partake of it each time with a worshipful attitude searching our hearts, confessing our sins, and renewing our commitment to Christ? The Corinthian Christian did not regard properly the body and the blood of Christ, and the Lord struck them with illness, and some even died (1 Cor 11:27-30).
But if we come before the Lord’s table humbly, sincerely, reverentially, and partake of the bread and the cup by faith, we will receive a special blessing from heaven. Such gracious benefits from God Calvin said cannot be explained, but experienced. So the Lord’s Supper is not just a commemoration; it is also a spiritual exercise.
Conclusion
There are four views on the meaning and significance of the Lord’s Supper: (1) Roman Catholic (transubstantiation), (2) Lutheran (consubstantiation), (3) Zwinglian (commemoration), and (4) Calvinistic (spiritual). The first two views are erroneous. The third is true but incomplete. Calvin’s view is the biblical view in all its fulness.
THE GOSPEL OF LIFE: The Epistles of Life
I John 1:1-2
The Life Eternal in God Revealed to Men
How similarly does the Apostle commence this Epistle as he with the Gospel. “The beginning” that is mentioned here is the same as “the beginning” of John 1:1, ages upon ages before “the beginning” of Genesis 1:1 when God created the universe.
That which was from the beginning, says Calvin, refers to the deity of Christ, His divine nature, which was with God. From all eternity, that beginning that had no beginning!
John testifies to his and the other apostles’ coming into contact with the Deity, Who has come in the flesh (1 John 4:2) so that we have “heard, and seen with our eyes, and which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled.” How this statement reflects what John had written earlier “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”
For three-and-a-half years John and the other apostles had lived together with our Lord, walked and talked together as they went about Judea preaching, teaching and healing. They believed with all their hearts Jesus Christ was the Son of God, the Saviour of the world. While the bulk of Jesus’ audience left Him because of unbelief, the apostles stuck with Him through thick and thin. When Jesus tested them after the Feeding of the Five Thousand, if they would also go away, Peter answered, “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the Living God” (John 6:68, 69). Can you say that of Jesus Christ?
In the Gospel Christ is called the Word. Here He is called the Word of Life or the Lively Word, inasmuch as it is declared earlier “in Him was life.” Jesus is the Word of Life because He has poured out His life on all creatures, and now He restores life in us who had perished, dead in Adam’s sin. (Calvin).
