On Matters of Communion

Alright, grab a Bible, something to write with, seconds on dessert if you like, you know.

Another cup of coffee if you'd like. We can't hear too good over here.

I don't have to anymore. Joshua has created some new system where I am not required to do clap syncing.

So yeah. So no more. Clap on. Clap off. Clap on.

Clap on. Clap on. Clap on. Clap on. Never mind. I'm showing my age again. Are there people who have...

Sarah, I've got to ask you. Have you seen the clap on, clap off commercials for the clapper? You see?

See, that's the scary thing right there. She doesn't know what I'm referring to. Ch -ch -ch -chia.

Ch -ch -ch -ch. Alright. That's just frightening.

Absolutely frightening. Alright, let's pray we will get started. Lord Jesus Christ, giver and perfecter of our faith, we thank you and we praise you for continuing among us the preaching of your gospel for our instruction, for our edification.

Send your blessing upon the word which has been spoken to us and your Holy Spirit. Increase our saving knowledge of you that day by day we may be strengthened in the divine truth and remain steadfast in your grace.

Give us strength to fight the good fight and by faith to overcome all the temptations of Satan, our sinful flesh, and the world so that we may finally receive the salvation of our souls.

For you live and reign with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen. Alright.

Now, I have been asked to do some instruction by the deacons on a topic that hopefully will not be controversial.

But on Easter Sunday, we will be reintroducing at Kongsvinger something that has not been used at Kongsvinger in a long time.

And we will be reintroducing it as an option, you need to know that. But what we're going to be reintroducing is

Kongsvinger's chalice. This is Kongsvinger's chalice. This is, people call this a chalice or they can call it the common cup.

And what will happen is, is that that will become an option for those who want the option, this is not mandatory, for those who would like to receive the blood of Christ from a common cup, from the chalice, that will be an option and that will be reintroduced on Easter Sunday of this year.

Now, that being the case, I think we need to do a little bit of work as far as taking a look at what scripture teaches and also look at the history then of communion vessels, is maybe a good way to put it.

And in 1 Corinthians chapter 10, 1 Corinthians chapter 10, we read these words,

Paul writing to the church at Corinth, says, Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry.

I speak as to sensible people, judge for yourselves what I say. And watch what it says.

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? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

And so you'll get the idea then here that what happened in the ancient world when

Christ originally instituted the Lord's Supper, it says in the text that on the night when

Jesus betrayed He took bread, but then also it says that when He had taken the cup and He gave it to them saying, take, drink, this is the blood of the new covenant which is shed for you for the forgiveness of your sins.

And notice it uses the singular word cup, uno. And the cup is a visible representation then, we all drinking from the same cup, the same cup is a visible representation of the unity that we have as a body together.

It's a visible representation of that. Now in our days, we all understand how germs work.

In the ancient world they didn't understand how germs worked. As a result of that, with the understanding of how germs and viruses and bacteria work, there was in the 19th century a change to, as far as communion practices, that kind of swept the nation, swept the nation.

But we're going to note then that historically this was not the case. And so here's what it says, in September of 1864, sorry, 1894, a couple of newspapers reported that Brooklyn's Bedford Avenue Baptist Church was introducing, quote, a novelty in communion service, the individual little cups for each communicant.

A century ago this idea was so insanely crazy that apparently Brooklynites just had to see it for themselves and the church was packed to the gills with visitors desperate to know what it would be like to drink grape juice out of a little shot glass.

These would be communicants who went home disappointed. As it turned out, the newspapers in question had jumped the gun, reported a bit of speculation by the church's pastor as a fact, and that same way that modern newspapers crash the stock market every time

President Trump tweets something, Pastor J .H. Gunning, however, had had his first taste of fame and he wasn't about to give it up.

As soon as the service was over he called a business meeting where the purchase of the tiny little gold and silver shot glasses was approved and from that moment a brand new worship tradition was born, ready to take its place in the same pantheon as the

Gregorian chant in the smoke machine, sort of. So it's actually not known with a ton of certainty which congregation was the first to use individual common cups.

There are at least seven congregations who are making that claim, but it is known that the idea is barely over 100 years old.

It is uniquely Protestant and it was invented somewhere in the American northeast in a case, it's clear, that it didn't take long at all to go from gold and silver to cheap glasses to uber cheap plastic glasses and soon we were all slurping the newly invented grape juice out of tiny little shot glasses and then flicking the empty cups at that cute girl from the youth group.

Whoever wrote this kind of wrote it a little bit tongue in cheek, but the idea is this, is that the practice of having individual cups literally is just a little over 100 years old.

It's not something that has been a common practice in Christianity. In fact, for much of Christian history, the vast majority of it, almost two millennia, the only option for receiving the blood of Christ was a chalice.

And the fact that Kongsvinger has a chalice, our chalice, the company that made this is no longer in business, but this was

Kongsvinger's chalice. And Kongsvinger is how old, Dwayne? Do we know the exact, is it 139 now?

138? All right. So 138 years ago, when

Kongsvinger got rolling, at some point prior to the end of the 19th century, this chalice was acquired for use by the members of Kongsvinger.

And I would also note that several of you, you have relatives who are in our graveyard who drank from this cup.

They drank from this cup. And individual glasses were not an option until the end of the 19th century.

That's when that came about. So Kongsvinger had been up and rolling as a church before the invention and implementation of individual cups.

Now, a little bit of a note. We noted then that Paul says, the cup of blessing that we bless, notice it's singular, not plural.

It doesn't say cups. The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?

The answer is yes, it is. The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? The answer is yes, it is.

Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. And so you get the idea here then that this is how the

Christian church has done this. Now in our day, there are still people who, and I actually understand this anxiety, who are not keen on this idea of receiving the blood of Christ from a common cup.

And nobody, we need to make this clear, nobody's going to be required to do so when

Kongsvinger reintroduces the chalice. Nobody will be required. The individual glasses will continue to be an option.

And of course, the reason being is that you think about it, you sit there and go, you know, what if I decide that I'm going to use the common cup, and there

I am at the altar, and the person next to me is going, and then you take a drink, this is the blood of Christ.

Okay, and then it's like you're sitting there going, I don't know if I want to touch that. Nobody is required to do that.

Nobody. And so the idea here is that what we're going to be reintroducing is something that's not only biblical, it's historical, it's part of the history of Kongsvinger, but it's just an option.

It is important to note that silver itself has, as one of its properties, its ability to kill bacteria, and the pastor of Kongsvinger will be wiping the cup every time somebody drinks from it.

But what will happen then is that when it's reintroduced, if you would like to drink the blood of Christ from the chalice, here's how it works.

And this is common practice throughout Lutheran churches around the country, is that I always come through first with the body of Christ.

I always come through with the bread. And then whoever's assisting me comes through with the individual cups.

And if you take an individual cup, you've communed, you've finished.

And so what I will be doing is I'll be looking for those who have chosen not to take one of the individual cups, and if your hand is empty and you've received the body of Christ, and then that's your signal to me,

I would like to receive the blood of Christ from the chalice. And then I'll come through, and then you'll receive it from the chalice.

So the idea is that when it comes to the blood of Christ, both options will be available, and they will continue to be available for you.

Nobody's being required to take one or the other. That's purely up to you.

When I first became a Lutheran, I was creeped out that the idea of a chalice really did not sit well with me.

I was not keen on the idea of sharing a cup with other people, and over a long period of time,

I changed my mind on it. I'd like to receive the blood of Christ from a chalice.

And, you know, in the last six, seven years before I became a pastor, that was how

I chose to receive the blood of Christ. My wife has always been a shot glass lady, and I don't think she's ever wanted to receive it any other way.

And I've never razzed her for that. So the idea here is that this is a biblical and historical option, but it's not a requirement.

The important thing is not the vessel that you receive it in. That's not the important thing.

The important thing is what's in the cup, what's in the glass. That's the important thing.

And so, you know, I wanted to put that out there. I've been asked to give some instruction along those lines.

Are there any questions in regard to the Council? Wasn't this settled at a Council meeting? I'm sorry, wasn't this settled at a

Council meeting about a year ago? It was an issue then.

So why is there the, you know, just, that's fine. Yeah. Yeah, you know, more than a year ago, the deacons decided that this wasn't an issue and that it should be available as an option.

There was some internal conflict as a result of this issue.

And I would also add, not only was there internal conflict, there was also the spreading of misinformation regarding the chalice and what was discussed.

And that spreading of misinformation, as you know, does require... Everything that you just stated here,

Pastor, was that, and it was stated at the time of the

Council meeting, that we weren't going to cut off the shot glasses. That's right. You were going to take the sip of the cup yourself when you were doing this.

Yep. And you were going to offer it to those who wanted the cup. Correct. Okay. So if those that wanted to get infested with the germs of everybody that didn't care, you know, you know, they're probably healthier today for it because...

It's a form of inoculation. Yeah, it's kind of like swimming in the river when you were a kid. Yeah. But for those who don't want life change or anything else like that, you know, that's fine and dandy.

Yeah. There's different, you know, there's intinction, there's sipping of the cup. That's correct. You know, do we have time to offer it all?

You know, we've got probably less than 20 people taking it now. It shouldn't be a problem. I mean, we're down.

Yeah. You know, it was decided then that we'd go with it.

I was kind of wondering why it wouldn't. Why is it taking this long?

Yeah. Mikey. A little bit of science. You actually share more bacteria shaking hands than you would. Yeah. Which is why

I secretly keep hand sanitizer with me. So every time I'm shaking you guys's hands, I'm never right. You just mentioned you had missed the beginning.

Why were we discussing it? Yeah. Pastor just said that the deacons wanted him to share the history of the chalice.

Yeah. Okay. And that's all he was doing. Yeah. No, I've been asked by the deacons. And that's good because it educates all of us.

Yeah. I think it was a good choice. We have our choice. Yeah. You have a choice.

Nobody's going to be required to do one or the other. So there will be a noticeable change in the way the words of institution are spoken because I don't know if you've noticed, but I always like,

I'm a little weary when I'm holding on to the whole tray of the shot glasses.

I don't ever, I've never felt that picking that thing up and saying, you know, the peace of the

Lord be with you always was a good thing because that kind of, you know, I, there was a real possibility.

I'm going to drop that thing because it's just not, it's not well -made for holding. So moving forward, when

I speak the words of institution, I'll be speaking it over the chalice. And when I say, yeah, as long as we, as often as we eat this bread and we drink this cup, we proclaim the

Lord's death until he comes. I won't be holding the shot glasses. I'll be holding the chalice because this is just a lot easier to wield.

Well, when we use the wooden one, that was much heavier. Okay. And the pastor never actually picked it up.

Really? He stood facing the altar and then just put his hands on it. Wow. Okay. At that point in time, and I've seen this with other pastors is when they're praying over it and having the words of distribution that this is the cup.

This is blood. This is his body. Right. You say this is his body. Oh, really?

And then, and then you go on to the next one. This is the blood of Christ. Yeah. I give it to you for the forgiveness of your sins.

Really? And then you just give it yourself communion. Uh -huh. Okay. Then now you're going to distribute it to the rest.

Right. Either through the shot glasses or through the chalice. And I've seen that and I never had a problem with that.

Yeah. I know. I don't know if you notice. I wait until the end at the end. You don't need to. You can do by example.

Yeah. And that's funny. That's kind of a practice we can talk about. In fact, I want to talk about that real quick.

Mike, did you have a question? Yeah. I just, you know, as you say, I, you know, spent time in Rome.

Why in the Catholic Church is it water and wine for the.

Okay. The priest always did water and wine and depending on the priest, some, you know, it was just a little water and they bump your hand away and others, you know, they kind of do, well, they didn't want to pollute it too much, you know?

Right. And others, you know, kind of was a little more on the wine side. Okay. And then the other thing

I noticed when, when they started, because it used to be just the priest drank.

Right. And then, I don't know, it was like 30 years ago. I noticed they're bringing it back.

Vatican too. And then I don't think they ever solved the problem of like somebody, one of the parishioners, like killing the chalice.

Really? Okay. Like, so then do you, do you have a bottle handy where you can refill it?

Or I mean, how's. Okay. Okay. All right.

So here's what we're going to do. I've got, I've got two sets of questions on the table.

I'm going to, I'm going to start with, with Dave's because they're easier. We'll come back to Rome's practices, some of which

I understand, some I don't understand. And then you'll notice in the back in the cabinet there, we have, we have a picture.

We do have a picture and we'll talk about that in a second. So pastoral practice regarding when does the pastor receive the

Lord's supper? There is no given instruction on this in scripture.

There are traditions. And then there are misperceptions. And and so since I serve two different congregations, it's it's helpful to make a distinction here between how

Kongsringer has its practices, as well as Emmanuel Radium. Emmanuel Radium, when it comes to the pastor communing, they do this thing, which

I think is great. And I wish more, more congregations would do it, is that the pastor does not commune himself, period.

What ends up happening is, is that once the congregation is done being communed, the head elder will go then to the altar and the pastor comes out and he comes to the comes to the altar.

He comes to the rail and he is welcomed to the rail the same way, with the same words that everybody else was welcomed.

This is, you know, welcome to the Lord's table. The pastor kneels and he receives from the head elder. He receives the body and blood of Christ and just like everybody else.

I like that. One of the reasons I like that is because I like receiving the

Lord's Supper. I do not. I think it actually means more to me to receive it than for me to commune myself.

Like you said earlier, I don't, you know, you said you didn't think there's a right or wrong way of doing this.

Yeah. And I would just throw it on a suggestion. Yeah. I like that idea too. A head elder or, you know, a deacon or somebody that can do that.

Now in seminary, there was a discussion on if you attend a congregation where the pastor communes himself, when is it appropriate for the pastor to commune himself?

Two practices then. Before everybody else or after everybody else and it's going to depend on the congregation and we were told that this is one of those things you have to pay attention to the congregation and any potential misperceptions that could come up as a result of it.

So we were told the horrible tragic tale of a pastor who received a call to a congregation where the previous congregation he had been to, it was the practice of the pastor to commune himself first.

And so he continued that practice when he got to this new call and the people in his congregations, they interpreted his actions as him basically saying,

I'm first, I'm better than you. And he never said any of those words. And so as a result of it, it created turmoil within the congregation and that was a problem that had to be overcome.

And so he ended up changing his practice and communing at the end. So the kind of the rule of thumb is that when you are serving in a congregation where there is a culture who is prone to misinterpret the actions of a pastor as somehow saying,

I'm better than you, then the pastor is to wait till the end and have the communion after.

So that way it doesn't unnecessarily create conflict within the congregation. But on the other end of it, if you have attended a congregation where the pastor, it is a common practice and it is expected that the pastor commune himself first, then you go with that because to wait to the end would actually have that same ramification.

Why is he waiting to the end? You know, it creates turmoil. And so the idea then is as pastors, we have to recognize that everything we do, everything we do is going to be interpreted as having some kind of significance.

It's either going to have religious significance or it's going to have significance regarding how people perceive how the pastor views himself within the congregation.

Right or wrong, that's just the reality of the situation. So at Kongsvinger, I've always made the practice of waiting and communing last.

You know, communing at the very end so that there would not be the misperception that somehow I was better or that I was putting myself above everybody else and, you know, kind of running and receiving the

Lord's Supper first. I, you know, I think given the culture here in the history of Kongsvinger, that potentially could have been misinterpreted.

So I wanted to take that off the table and I'm more than happy to go last. So, yeah.

I was just picturing what's going to be happening up here. You're going to require two assistants up on the altar now.

Nope, just one, just one. So what happens is, is that I go through with the bread and I don't know if you've noticed, but whoever's assisting me, they're usually, there's a little bit of a lag with my assistant when it comes to the wine.

So while they're still going through, I pick up the chalice and I come through a second time and then

I'll be looking, you know, do they have a shot glass or not? If they have a shot glass,

I just keep going. And I totally foresee, I mean, there's only a few people at Kongsvinger who are really keen on the chalice.

So, you know, but again, it's an option. It's not a requirement.

Nobody would require it. And as a kid, I don't even remember the pastors taking communion at all. Really? They probably did.

I don't know. I can't remember. Can't remember. I was a kid too long ago. I've been to Dinosaurs Rome here.

Yeah, it's a choice. That's all. It's just an option. You know, it's a historic option for the church historically, as well as this congregation.

Yeah. Yep. Yeah. Now let's steer into some of the questions in relation to Rome.

Again, I understand some of their communion practice, not all of it. I will say this.

I think that Rome has been unfairly charged with the charge that the reason why they have withheld the cup from the common people is because they wanted to save money.

Okay. And it's important to note that some of the words of Christ give the implication that if you are in a situation where you cannot afford or have access to wine, you can still have the

Lord's Supper if you have the bread. All right. And this is historically understood. And you'll note then throughout

Christian history, wine has not always been a readily available commodity. And it has not always been a readily available commodity at a reasonable price.

It's a commodity like every other commodity. It has seasons and times and when prices are high and prices are low.

And so as a result of that, there has been a historic practice in Rome to dilute, which is fine.

There's nothing wrong with that. But the problem is that what they ended up doing, and this is during the medieval period, they made it a dogma that the common laity were only to receive the bread.

Communion of one kind was the practice and not to receive the cup as well.

And at the time of the Reformation, and you can see this in the Lutheran Confessions, especially in the Augsburg Confession and in the

Apology of the Augsburg Confession, the Lutherans were making the claim that the laity should not be withheld from having the cup.

They should be offered that as well. And that was a radical idea at the time of the Reformation. That was a radical idea that created a lot of conflict.

And it really wasn't until Vatican II that you start to see Rome opening up to offering both kinds to the laity.

And that was one of the things that they let up on. But some of the fights that were waged over that,

I just consider them to be silly. Now, regarding water and wine, this is kind of an interesting discussion.

This is a side discussion. What is the proper practice in relation to people who suffer from alcoholism and their fear that even having a sip of alcoholic wine could send them on a bender?

So, in the last hundred years, a little more than a hundred years actually, we have the creation of grape juice, which was not possible prior to the invention of this thing, which was done by Welch, of Welch's grape juice.

And basically, he took pasteurization, took the pasteurization process and applied it to what would have become wine for the purpose of killing the yeast so that it wouldn't eat the sugars.

Prior to that, it was not possible to actually stomp a grape and for it not to ferment because if you have ever looked on the outside of a grape, you see that little white frosting on the outside of a grape skin.

That's the yeast then that ferments the wine. So, there has been a lot of blood spilt on whether or not it's appropriate for Christians to have grape juice.

It is because Christ didn't institute bread and grape juice.

He instituted bread and wine. And so, there are those who, based on that biblical reality, have said it is not appropriate for Christians to be offered grape juice if they are concerned regarding alcoholism and things of this nature, then they've come up with a different practice.

And the different practice is that this is where you would use shot glasses, funny enough. You pour water into a shot glass and then you take a few drops of the wine and put it into the shot glass of water so that it's still wine but it's diluted for the purpose of not hurting the conscience of the one who may suffer from alcoholism.

Now, personally, my personal opinion, this is not in any way a requirement.

My personal opinion, that practice of diluting wine makes a little bit more sense to me than grape juice, just historically.

I tend to sympathize with the arguments against the use of grape juice, but I in no way make it a dogma.

This is one of those things where the church has pretty much said that there's freedom and we're not going to say you can't have this or the other.

But I will note that 30 years ago, well, not 30 years, 20 -something years ago, there was a position paper by an

AALC pastor who argued against the use of grape juice quite well from not only history but also from Scripture and argued for the use of diluted wine rather than grape juice.

But you need to be aware, and when we talk about communion practices, what have been the different arguments and the different practices?

And then as far as killing the chalice... Well, I mean, they didn't know.

This happens. I've seen priests do that, but I've never seen Ed Laven do it. If you've ever heard the story of my grandmother's funeral, the priest who was presiding for her funeral mass, he killed an entire chalice before distributing anything and then poured another one.

And so, yeah, that was crazy. I am not making this up.

I mean, after he consecrated the elements, he had a full chalice. He took the chalice and he swirled it, he sniffed it, and threw that thing back and then poured another one.

And we're all like, what just happened? What just happened? And we were starting to add it up.

It's like, okay, this is his, like, fifth mass this morning. You know, how many glasses of wine has he had?

Anyway, yeah, but that's a whole other thing. Now, regarding... So what happens when you have a large congregation and the cup empties out?

This is where the use of a pitcher also comes in place. And so the practice then is that in larger congregations like that, you fill the pitcher up with the wine as well as you half fill a chalice.

And then as you go through the line, if they've run out, you just run to the altar, fill the chalice back up with the wine that's in the pitcher.

Does it not have a name? What's the name of the pitcher? I forget the name of it. It has a name, but I can't remember. So yeah, we'll call it the

Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch. So, yeah. You've got to give the priest or the pastor some credit if he's going to kill it.

Oh, yeah. That guy's got some... Yeah, that's... Saturday night never quit.

Yeah, I've shared the story once, but I'm not going to share it now.

The story of my grandmother's funeral is just an odyssey. Josh and I want to make it into a short film.

It's that bizarre. You even have a shirt about it. Yeah, yeah, that's right.

Play organ music now. All right.

Any other questions as it relates to communion practices? The cup, the chalice, the individual shot glasses.

This is not something radical. Nobody's going to require you to do anything other than what you've already been doing if that's what you so choose.

So, oh, look at the wooden ones. All right. So, those were the old shot glass holders previously here?

Okay. It's pretty heavy. Yeah. I... Yeah, I can see that.

Okay. They should be refinished when we put them out as a museum.

Yeah, you know what? I think you're right. I think they should be displayed somewhere. Says, in memory of Mr.

and Mrs. Oly Lynde. That's a while back.

Yeah. So, that was probably before plastic, right? What, did they have glass?

It was glass. Okay. 1956, they passed. So, probably that's about when these were bought.

Okay. All right. Cliff was saying he remembers using the chalice. He was, well, he didn't put the kids.

I can't remember for sure what was going on for a special occasion. Okay. It might have been even communion.

Okay. Our first communion after... They would pull the chalice out. Yep. Okay. So, I mean, that's nice that we have an eyewitness account of the use of the chalice here.

You know? So, yeah. Part of the misinformation that was spread that was a denial that our chalice had ever been used here.

All right. Looking at our time. Looking at our time.

Let's do this. Since we're talking about the Lord's Supper and we're talking about communion.

So, let's take a look at 1 Corinthians 11 and we'll round this out as far as a discussion of what it is that we receive in the

Lord's Supper. And we've noted again and again as we've been working our way through the Old Testament that in the types and shadows in the

Old Testament, you over and again, you see the appearance of bread. You see the appearance of wine.

And it's not just a one -time thing. It happens over and over and over and over again to the point where by the end of Leviticus, and you'll see this as we work our way through Leviticus.

By the end of Leviticus, every offering, every sacrifice must include wine and grain.

Every single one of them. Not just, it's not just select ones, but every one of them.

There's a wine and grain offering that goes along with every animal sacrifice. And so, all of that prefigures what it is we receive in the

Lord's Supper. And I find it fascinating that we Lutherans, over and again, we are raked over the coals by Protestants who basically say, you guys are nothing but a bunch of failed

Roman Catholics. Because you guys believe that you're receiving the body and blood of Christ in, with, under the bread and the wine.

Rome thinks that too. Well, actually, Rome thinks something a little bit different. But we have this in common with Rome.

We believe we're receiving the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. Why? Because that's what the scripture says.

And they sit there and go, well, how is that possible? I don't know. How is it possible to make the universe in six days?

You know, I think God's capable of doing what God does. So, a review of 1

Corinthians 11 is probably useful at this point. And in 1

Corinthians 11, again, always got to point out the context. You know, every church on planet earth has had seasons of conflict and weird things going on it, on inside of it.

But this one, I think, is like over the top. And I mean, and I really mean that. Could you imagine coming to Kongsvinger on a communion

Sunday, and a group within Kongsvinger has decided that they're not going to let some other people in Kongsvinger have the

Lord's Supper. They've chosen to make sure that this is impossible for them. And so, as part of their strategy to keep that group from having the

Lord's Supper, they've come up with this great idea. They're going to go up at the first setting, and they're going to, like, raid the altar, and they're going to chug all the wine, to the point where they've had so much wine that now some of them are actually drunk.

That's crazy -go -nuts, okay? And could you imagine being on the other end of that?

Like, those guys just, like, ate everything and drank the wine, and now Fagerlund's staggering.

What's going on here, right? It just doesn't make any sense.

It doesn't make any sense. And so, that's what's happening in the church at Corinth. And the way the dividing line works, then, is that you've got to remember the

Roman Empire, there wasn't much of a middle class at all, if there was a middle class.

And so, you were either wealthy, or you were poor. You either had property, and wealth, and means, or you had nothing.

And you were totally dependent, okay? And you were, you know, subsistence living.

And this is where the dividing line, then, is. Is that the rich at the church in Corinth, they were the ones who organized themselves.

Because, remember, Roman society, you know, if you are in the upper class, the lower class, the, you know, the everyday common folk, the hoi polloi, they are, they're dirt.

They're not, they're not, they're not as good as you are. They're less than you are. This is how they think.

And so, here you are in a church where everybody's supposed to be equal in the eyes of Christ, and they are bringing the status rules of Rome into church, and now they feel that it is their job to keep the poor from having the

Lord's Supper. That's what's going on here. I mean, I've never heard of a conflict quite like that in a church, at least today.

So, here's what Paul says. In the following instructions, I do not commend you.

Because when you come together, it is not for the better, it is for the worse.

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.

He's not saying this to their credit, by the way. There must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.

But when you come together, it's not the Lord's Supper that you eat. For in eating, one goes ahead with his own meal, one goes hungry, and another gets drunk.

When was the last time anyone got drunk here at Kongsvinger? During Communion Sunday.

I mean, just think about that. All right? And by the way, I don't know if you've noticed that Welch's grape juice, it's impossible to get drunk on.

So, what does this tell you, historically, is what's used in the Lord's Supper? Wine.

Right? I have yet to hear somebody who argues, you can't have wine in the Lord's Supper.

You know, well, it's right there. You know, well, we as Christians shouldn't be drinking alcohol. Well, it's part of the

Lord's Supper. It's right there. How do you get drunk on grape juice? Right? So, Paul then describes what they're doing, and here's his expletive.

What? You make our what? No way. Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?

Or do you despise the Church of God? And watch those. And humiliate those who have nothing. That's the dividing line.

So, now they're humiliating the poor among them, treating them with contempt, barring them from the

Lord's Supper. So, Paul says, what shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No.

I am not going to commend you in this. And so, what's the problem here at this point?

If you were to kind of like say, so, here we have this behavior. We have this behavior on the part of the rich at the

Church of Corinth, and they're humiliating and despising the poor in their congregation to the point where some of them are getting drunk on the communion wine.

What's the problem? Well, the problem here is that they are treating the bread and wine as if these are common things.

They're not seeing them for what they truly are. And so, Paul's going to correct them by reminding them again.

We're going to go back to the basics of what is the Lord's Supper. This is not something common.

This is something holy. And the reason it is holy is because Christ himself makes it holy.

So, here's what it says. For I received from the Lord what

I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus Christ, on the night when he was betrayed, took bread.

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. All right. So, Jesus takes the

Passover bread, which is this big flat thing.

He takes it, breaks it, hands it to his disciples, and he says,

Take, eat. And then what does he say it is? This is my body.

This is my body. So, what is it? Think of manna in the wilderness, right?

There's the children of Israel complaining because there's nothing to eat. And God says, all right,

I'm going to cause manna to fall by night. So, they wake up in the morning, and they look out of their tents, and all the wilderness is covered in this frost -like substance.

And they say, manna, manna, manna, which means, what is it?

Right? So, here we've got the bread. I'm going to ask the question, manna, what is it?

It's exactly what Jesus says it is, period. And sit there and go, that's crazy.

Go nuts, that's bonkers. That's, well, let's take a look at what Jesus says. I'm going to take a look at the

Gospel of John, chapter 6. All right.

So, Jesus has just performed the feeding of the 5 ,000 in the wilderness. And Jesus, you know, walks on the water.

They find Jesus. The crowd, after Jesus performed the miracle of the feeding of the 5 ,000, they recognized that he's probably the

Messiah. And so, they go looking for Jesus. And in John, chapter 6, 25, it says that when they found

Jesus on the other side of the sea, they said to him, Rabbi, when did you come here? Jesus answered them, amen, amen, truly, truly.

I say to you, you are seeking me not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.

Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you.

For on him, God the Father has set his seal. So then they said to him, well, what must we be doing to be doing the works of God?

Good question, by the way. But it's poorly phrased because you'll notice it says works plural. What must we be doing to doing the works of God?

Jesus answered them, this is the work, Tan Ergon, singular, this is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.

So they said to him, then what sign do you do so that we may see and believe you? What work do you do to perform?

Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness as it is written, he gave them bread from heaven to eat.

And you'll note here that this is also then referencing what Jesus did because he broke bread and divided fish in the wilderness, and he fed them in the wilderness the same way their fathers were fed in the wilderness.

So Jesus said to them, truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you bread from heaven, but my father gives you the true bread from heaven.

For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world. What is the bread of God?

Maybe I should say, who is the bread of God? Who is the bread of God? Jesus. So they said to him, well, sir, give us this bread.

And then Jesus says, I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me shall not hunger, whoever believes in me shall never thirst.

But I said to you that you have seen me, and yet you do not believe. All that the father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me,

I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.

And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it on the last day.

For this is the will of my father, that everyone who looks on the son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

Notice Jesus is teaching salvation by grace through faith, not by works. The work of God is to believe in the one whom the father has sent.

And so the one who believes in Jesus has eternal life. So now the Jews grumbled.

They were not happy with this answer, and here's the part that was tripping them up. So the

Jews grumbled, because he said, I am the bread that came down from heaven. They said, is not this

Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, I've come down from heaven? Jesus answered them, do not grumble among yourselves.

No one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day.

It is written in the prophets, and they will all be taught by God. Everyone who has heard and learned from the father comes to me.

Not that anyone has seen the father, except he who is from God. He has seen the father. So truly, truly,

I say to you, whoever believes. Watch this. Whoever believes has eternal life. Notice how that fits perfectly, then, with what we were looking at in our sermon today.

If you believe you have eternal life. And there it comes again. Watch these words. I am the bread of life.

Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.

I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever.

And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh. It's as if Jesus here is giving a pre -course, you know, an ahead -of -time lesson to help us understand the

Lord's Supper. Now the Jews disputed, and they said, how can this man give us his flesh to eat?

And watch what Jesus doesn't do. Jesus didn't say, doesn't go, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That's creepy, dudes.

Come on. There's no way on earth I could give you my flesh to eat. That just doesn't make any sense.

You misunderstood. You misheard me. Jesus does not do that. Watch what he does.

Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

We call that doubling down. Jesus doubled down.

And notice, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life.

I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is true food. My blood is true drink.

Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.

How do we abide in Christ? One of the ways in which we abide in Christ is by eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

This is what Jesus said. If you do not do these things, can you truly be saying you're abiding?

Right? You sit there and go, that's crazy. That's nuts. Ew, gross.

Is that also speaking to all the Jewish customs and all the sacrifices and the fact that only the priests got to eat the sacrifices, not the people?

People had to pay for them, deliver them, drop them off. Well, actually, that's not technically true. As we've been working our way through Leviticus, we're already beginning to see this.

That all of the sacrifices, not only were the priests allowed to partake and eat of that sacrifice, but the people who brought the offerings, they also ate the sacrifice.

And so here's the thing. Coming back then to sacrifices, the sacrifice of the Passover lamb, it was consumed.

None of it was to be left to the morning. And it is said of Jesus in the epistles of Paul, Christ, our

Passover lamb has been slain. What did you do with your Passover lamb? You ate it. All of the sacrifices for the

Day of Atonement, all of the sin offerings, all of the offerings that make you clean, what did you do with those bulls and rams and lambs and goats?

You ate it. Christ is our sin offering. And what did he tell us to do?

Right on. Exactly. And I know that this is, you sit there and go, how is this possible?

I don't know. I'm just telling you what Jesus said. Yes. This passage here and what you just taught us now puts to rest that theory.

This communion is symbolistic. It's not a symbol. It's not a symbol.

Yeah. And then one other thing you had mentioned that where the people taking the communion and tipping it back or whatever they had, they were taking it as for drink and for food for themselves, but in a sacrilegious type of way of doing things, a common way.

Um, they didn't, don't, they become complacent in their belief if they believed at all and that they needed to be reminded of this, that it's special.

And that's what Paul's doing. Also, uh, to remind everybody where I feel is, is we say that Lord's prayer every

Sunday and we probably say it two or three times. Do we actually sit down and actually analyze that?

I know for a fact I become complacent in it. Yeah. But if you analyze it, he takes care of you all the way through.

Exactly. Give you your food. Right. And it explains that's why there is the

Lord's prayer. Yeah. And stopping and considering what it is that you're saying, stopping and considering what you're receiving.

These, this is exactly, this is a good practice. Now let me finish out this portion of First Corinthians 11 because we are up on our time.

So Paul is in reminding them, you know, that Jesus, he took bread, broke it, said, this is my body, which is for you.

Do this in remembrance of me in the same way. Also, he took the cup after supper saying, this cup is the new covenant.

Notice cup again, singular because it is. This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me.

For as often as you eat this bread and you drink this cup, singular, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

And then we get to the definition of what it means to take the Lord's supper in an unworthy manner. 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. In other words, they're sinning against the body and blood of Christ.

How do you sin against something that isn't present? OK, so no, to take it in an unworthy manner is to actually sin against the very body and blood of Christ.

So Paul says, then let a person examine himself. Kind of your point, David, about examining yourself, thinking about what you're what's going on here.

So let a person examine himself then. And so eat of the bread and drink of the cup for anyone who eats without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

And that's what they were doing. They were not discerning the the bodily presence of Christ in the

Lord's supper, and they were drinking it and eating it as a common meal. And Paul says, no, you eat and you drink when you do it, when you eat and drink without discerning the body and blood of Christ, you eat and drink judgment on yourself.

You sin against the very body and blood of Christ. And then he says, this is why many of you are weak and ill, and some of you have died.

So you'll note that there were people who actually lost their lives by taking the

Lord's supper in an unworthy manner, by treating it as common and not recognizing that the true body and blood of Christ present in it.

So, all right, that's what we'll end today. We will pick up Leviticus next week.