|
Bro. Turner:
 How
can one reason with people who partake of the Lord's Supper
twice on the Lord's Day? They say we also sing and pray morning
and evening; and we can not exclude anyone, as each must examine
his own right to partake (1 Cor. 11:28). We surely can not
restrict these brethren, while we allow non-members to partake.
R.W.
Reply:
The
Lord's Supper is a memorial symbol, a living monument; and is
NOT in the same category as singing and praying. (Having something
in common, as, being a part of our worship on the Lord's
Day, does not make them the same in all respects.) Prayer
and song have not a symbolic significance as does the Lord's
Supper. Their frequency is regulated differently (Jas. 5:13; 1
Thes. 5:17). Reasoning (?) "We sing and pray more than
once.." shows a marked failure to understand the nature of
the Lord's Supper — and may also show a failure to understand
the proper use of prayer and song in public worship. These are
not ritualistic "items" to be performed.
The
second argument (?) also shows a misunderstanding of 1 Cor.
11:28. The Lord's Supper is clearly for the saints, and has
significance to them only. Paul was correcting misconduct among
saints when he wrote, "Let a man examine himself," and
was not saying that self-examination can eliminate the
difference in Christian and non-Christian. Lipscomb's comment on
this is excellent: "Let him ascertain by earnest
consideration whether he is in a proper state of mind for
commemorating and proclaiming
| |
the Lord's death; whether he feels a suitable
gratitude for the sacrifice it commemorates, and is firmly
resolved to observe the injunction of its founder."
We
do not build a fence about the Lord's Table — it is not a
"sacrament" subject to official administration or
withholding. One does not forbid total strangers to look upon a
family monument in the cemetery — though the stone has little
significance to such. "Let a man examine himself" is
sometimes carelessly used if a non-member inadvertently or
ignorantly partakes of the elements. Charitably, we may mean we
do not claim to be able to judge the heart, and in the case of a
stranger, can not know his life. We are simply saying, "God
knows if he is a Christian." But this is far from saying
the Lord's Supper was given to aliens; or that we should be
content with continued misuse, and make no effort to teach those
who seem not to know the nature of a memorial act.
The
"twice on the Lord's Day" folk may be of the modern
breed who thrive on "some new thing" — especially if
it has emotional impact, or they feel it indicates they are
smarter or more "spiritual" than others. If so, don't
be surprised when they show up in ascension robes, speaking in
tongues. The letter of inquiry gave insufficient evidence for
such judgment, and I am more inclined to believe this is some
quirk that has developed in ignorance of the nature and
significance of the Lord's memorial. If they had lived before
Christ they may have had breakfast, lunch, and dinner Passover
lambs. They certainly can offer no N.T. authority for their
practice.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
