At least I am fortunate in being aware of my own ineptitude.
-Luther

Saturday, April 6, 2013

Maundy Thursday [1 Corinthians 11:23-26] (28 March 2013)

This sermon was delivered at St. John's Lutheran Church Karoonda (6:30 pm) and Trinity Lutheran Church Tailem Bend (8:30 pm).  

You squint your eyes in the sun, you line up your shot, you adjust for wind, you wind up . . . and put the ball through the wind screen of the car 3 meters behind you. That's what we call 'stumbling out of the blocks'. But just because the ball leaves your hands, or just because the runner gets a good start off the blocks, doesn't necessarily mean they'll clear every hurdle, or that they won't stumble just in front of the finish line. It means that you won't even be able to get that far. Now, the Corinthian church was stumbling out of the blocks, so Paul has to put in lay in front of them the entire race, so to speak. So this sermon is about the Lord's Supper.

But how did the Corinthian church stumble out of the blocks? What had they done? It was all about their practice of the Lord's Supper, and it was harmful to them. The Maundy Thursday reading every year is Paul's sharing of the solution to the problem, but the problem itself is found in the surrounding verses: he moves from one problem in their worship service behavior to this one: “But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.” and “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. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world. 33 So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another-- 34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home-- so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.” And that's the context.

And the context reveals two things: first, they had split themselves into groups who were either at odds with each other or at the least looked down on each other. That set the stage for a problem in the divine service itself. And it went like this: the congregation gathered before the start of the worship service for what we would call “fellowship time”, but what they would call “a meal of love.” And this isn't the Lord's Supper – that's in the divine service. This is the shared love of the congregation expressing itself in sitting down and eating together. But there was a problem, not everybody in the congregation was exactly like everyone else. Some of them had to work, and some of them didn't. So those who didn't have to work would arrive at the place where the divine service would take place, and the ones who had to work would arrive late. But the ones who arrived early ate too much and drank too much, and the latecomers who were less wealthy to begin with also received less food (and since this was a meal of love: less love). So the problem with the Lord's Supper started even before the divine service started! The people were celebrating their own supper, as Paul says, meaning that in their despising of their fellow congregation members, they were despising the Lord's work. And you have to wonder, did it get to the point that they had eaten all the bread and drank all the wine so that there was nothing left over when the service started and it came time to celebrate the Lord's Supper? Talk about stumbling off the blocks. And the scary thing is you can just picture how easily the problem came about.

The problem came about as easily as our problems at our dinner tables come about. First, you get in the habit of being so busy that you can't actually sit around a table together. That's stumbling out of the blocks, because just being at the table isn't the whole job either, but it takes the listening and respect that comes from being together at the table. But you cut all that out if you're not even at table.
That's how the selfishness of the Corinthian members who were at fault prevented them from keeping the Lord's Supper the way it should have been done from start to finish. They couldn't even get to the start: and the start was having the bread and the wine (according to Christ's institution) and having the people there united in their confession of what they were receiving (and how could you have that if they're not even united about being together at the dining table, much less the Lord's table?)

This is harmful to the Church of all times and places because it destroys the gift of Communion by breaking 2nd and 5th commandments. The 2nd commandment is broken also in terms of teaching, and in that type of situation, the teaching is that the Lord's Supper is nothing important, which is false teaching. And the 5th commandment is broken in terms of love, and it is broken in these types of situations with individualism.

And individualism has no place at the communion railing, because the Lord's Supper is something that is received by individual mouths but believed in common from a common altar and a common confession of faith. The temptation is to say that since the Sacrament is received by an individual mouth that it is only a private matter between that person and God. And to say that is really being communal because it's welcoming. But it's individualistic, because it doesn't go back to the Lord's Word, just personal opinion.

But the most important part is what we did hear in the Epistle reading: Paul's solution is to present again to the congregation the Lord's Words of Institution. Paul would have the Corinthians receive the Lord's Supper according to our Lord's institution from beginning to end, so he gives them the words again: “For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.” He doesn't just say “wait for everyone else. Stop eating and drinking everything.” Well, he does, but only after he gives them the Lord's own words. He's not interested in them just getting the first part of the Supper right, but the whole part. He would have them compare their behavior with the whole doctrine of the Lord's Supper as he had delivered it to them. Because it was delivered to Paul himself from the Lord through the apostles who were there on that night when Jesus was betrayed. He refers them, not only here but all throughout 1 Corinthians back to the doctrine they had received from him, in all the challenges they had.

And there's a reason for that: the Lord's Word, and the teaching of it, is so good. He would remind them of the whole act of the Lord's Supper because it is so good for them. It's so good to take the Lord at his Word, much better than the other way (as Paul was showing them). So they should have enough bread and wine around to have the Sacrament, but they should also receive the Sacrament in agreement with all of Christ's institution. That is to say that the bread and wine is consecrated, that is set apart as holy. This happens when the pastor says Christ's own words, and the people are to believe that yes, this very bread, and this very wine is the body and blood of Jesus. But it doesn't just stop there, as if you could just parade around the consecrated elements and not eat and drink them. That also isn't in agreement with Christ's instituion. These are to be distributed by the pastor (and those assisting him). But it doesn't just stop there, as if you could just pocket the elements and take them home. They are received on the tongue and in the mouth, eaten and drunk. And those who receive them do so in agreement with what Christ says: 1)This is the true body and blood of Christ which I receive, under the bread and wine, into my mouth 2) for the forgiveness of my sins. Because 3) When Jesus says, “For you”, here he truly means me. And when all of that, from start to finish happens, the Lord's death is shown forth at the same time. We take seriously doing this as Jesus said “in remembrance of me” when we're doing the whole sacrament in agreement with his words. We take seriously that he gave thanks when he instituted the meal, and so we give thanks that we have received it.

Paul didn't commend the Corinthians because they were destroying the gift of the Lord's Supper. But that's not what Christ instituted this Supper for. Far from destroying the gift, he would have them receive the Supper by hungering for its benefits: forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation.

And lastly, there's a reason these words are best laid before the congregation during Holy Week. The benefits of the Lord's Supper are the benefits of the death of the one who instituted it in the first place: Christ. The Lord's Supper is so wonderful because it delivers the promises of the cross. It delivers forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation. So Lutherans follow Paul and take any abuse of any part of the Sacrament pretty seriously, because the Sacrament is the visible Word, it is the Gospel applied to you according to Jesus' words.

Christ's death make the Words of Institution what they are. And here, just one word is needed: διαθήκη . This word can be translated either covenant or testament, but Luther always preferred the translation “testament” because a testament is a gift that requires a death for it to be distributed, and Jesus instituted the Supper on the night when he was betrayed.

And wow, if we can't even have a nice dinner at home, what hope is there for the Lord's Supper? According to God's Word, there is hope. God sanctifies his house and our homes by the Word of God and our prayer, not through our selfishness, but despite it.

Conclusion: When we see how easy it is to stumble out of the blocks, we appreciate all the more that it is the Lord's Supper. That's what Paul put before the Corinthians then, and puts before us now. This wasn't news to them, but a reminder of what they had been taught, and it isn't news to us, because there are many many opportunities to receive again everything included when Christ says, “This do.” Amen.

No comments:

Post a Comment