Frequency of the Lord's Supper

Status
Not open for further replies.
Andres

Andres

Puritan Board Doctor
I'm interested in doing some reading/studying on the issue of the frequency of the Lord's Supper. Might my friends here on the board suggest some articles dealing with this topic? If possible I'd really like to hear arguments from both sides on this issue.
I'd prefer links to online articles if possible, but if there are any books that are must reads, I'll look into them also.
Thanks!
 
Hey Brother Andrew,
Good to have this discussion with everyone today - I'm really looking forward to discussing this at our Men's Bible Study too! I looked up the 1645 Directory of Public Worship just to see what it had to say on the matter, and this is what it says. It certainly is valuable in seeing what the thoughts of the day were (From: The Westminster Confession of Faith Subordinate Documents)

OF THE CELEBRATION OF THE COMMUNION, OR SACRAMENT OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.

THE communion, or supper of the Lord, is frequently to be celebrated; but how often, may be considered and determined by the ministers, and other church-governors of each congregation, as they shall find most convenient for the comfort and edification of the people committed to their charge. And, when it shall be administered, we judge it convenient to be done after the morning sermon.

The ignorant and the scandalous are not fit to receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper.

Where this sacrament cannot with convenience be frequently administered, it is requisite that publick warning be given the sabbath-day before the administration thereof: and that either then, or on some day of that week, something concerning that ordinance, and the due preparation thereunto, and participation thereof, be taught; that, by the diligent use of all means sanctified of God to that end, both in publick and private, all may come better prepared to that heavenly feast.

When the day is come for administration, the minister, having ended his sermon and prayer, shall make a short exhortation:

"Expressing the inestimable benefit we have by this sacrament, together with the ends and use thereof: setting forth the great necessity of having our comforts and strength renewed thereby in this our pilgrimage and warfare: how necessary it is that we come unto it with knowledge, faith, repentance, love, and with hungering and thirsting souls after Christ and his benefits: how great the danger to eat and drink unworthily.

Next, he is, in the name of Christ, on the one part, to warn all such as are ignorant, scandalous, profane, or that live in any sin or offence against their knowledge or conscience, that they presume not to come to that holy table; shewing them, that he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment unto himself: and, on the other part, he is in an especial manner to invite and encourage all that labour under the sense of the burden of their sins, and fear of wrath, and desire to reach out unto a greater progress in grace than yet they can attain unto, to come to the Lord's table; assuring them, in the same name, of ease, refreshing, and strength to their weak and wearied souls."

After this exhortation, warning, and invitation, the table being before decently covered, and so conveniently placed, that the communicants may orderly sit about it, or at it, the minister is to begin the action with sanctifying and blessing the elements of bread and wine set before him, (the bread in comely and convenient vessels, so prepared, that, being broken by him, and given, it may be distributed amongst the communicants; the wine also in large cups,) having first, in a few words, shewed that those elements, otherwise common, are now set apart and sanctified to this holy use, by the word of institution and prayer.

Let the words of institution be read out of the Evangelists, or out of the first Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, Chap. 11:23. I have received of the Lord, &c. to the 27th Verse, which the minister may, when he seeth requisite, explain and apply.

Let the prayer, thanksgiving, or blessing of the bread and wine, be to this effect:

"With humble and hearty acknowledgment of the greatness of our misery, from which neither .i.man; nor angel was able to deliver us, and of our great unworthiness of the least of all God's mercies; to give thanks to God for all his benefits, and especially for that great benefit of our redemption, the love of God the Father, the sufferings and merits of the Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, by which we are delivered; and for all means of grace, the word and sacraments; and for this sacrament in particular, by which Christ, and all his benefits, are applied and sealed up unto us, which, notwithstanding the denial of them unto others, are in great mercy continued unto us, after so much and long abuse of them all.

To profess that there is no other name under heaven by which we can be saved, but the name of Jesus Christ, by whom alone we receive liberty and life, have access to the throne of grace, are admitted to eat and drink at his own table, and are sealed up by his Spirit to an assurance of happiness and everlasting life.

Earnestly to pray to God, the Father of all mercies, and God of all consolation, to vouchsafe his gracious presence, and the effectual working of his Spirit in us; and so to sanctify these elements both of bread and wine, and to bless his own ordinance, that we may receive by faith the body and blood of Jesus Christ, crucified for us, and so to feed upon him, that he may be one with us, and we one with him; that he may live in us, and we in him, and to him who hath loved us, and given himself for us."

All which he is to endeavour to perform with suitable affections, answerable to such an holy action, and to stir up the like in the people.

The elements being now sanctified by the word and prayer, the minister, being at the table, is to take the bread in his hand, and say, in these expressions, (or other the like, used by Christ or his apostle upon this occasion)

"According to the holy institution, command, and example of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ, I take this bread, and, having given thanks, break it, and give it unto you; (there the minister, who is also himself to communicate, is to break the bread, and give it to the communicants) "Take ye, eat ye; this is the body of Christ which is broken for you: do this in remembrance of him."

In like manner the minister is to take the cup, and say, in these expressions, (or other the like, used by Christ or the apostle upon the same occasion)

"According to the institution, command, and example of our Lord Jesus Christ, I take this cup, and give it unto you; (here he giveth it to the communicants) This cup is the new testament in the blood of Christ, which is shed for the remission of the sins of many: drink ye all of it."

After all have communicated, the minister may, in a few words, put them in mind,

"Of the grace of God in Jesus Christ, held forth in this sacrament; and exhort them to walk worthy of it."

The minister is to give solemn thanks to God,

"For his rich mercy, and invaluable goodness, vouchsafed to them in that sacrament; and to entreat for pardon for the defects of the whole service, and for the gracious assistance of his good Spirit, whereby they may be enabled to walk in the strength of that grace, as becometh those who have received so great pledges of salvation."
 
Though I can not relay any sources I will say being a former RC I wish we had The Lord's Supper every week.....and I do know what I celebrate today is not the same as I used to do.
 
My Presbyterian congregation has 3 services every Sunday. The 8 AM service has communion every week. The 9:30 and 11 AM service has communion on the first Sunday of the month.
 
Following this thread, I'm curious if anyone knows why the FCC observes the Lord Supper less than frequently (as in biannually/quarterly)?
 
Why would we not want to observe this means of grace every Sunday? If one says it may become rote then let us skip all forms of order we practice every Sunday.
 
I think that is the traditional frequency (at least quarterly) going back a-ways. I think but am not sure my old PCUS church I grew up in was quarterly in the 60s.
irresistible_grace said:
Following this thread, I'm curious if anyone knows why the FCC observes the Lord Supper less than frequently (as in biannually/quarterly)?
Click to expand...
 
NaphtaliPress said:
I think that is the traditional frequency (at least quarterly) going back a-ways. I think but am not sure my old PCUS church I grew up in was quarterly in the 60s.
irresistible_grace said:
Following this thread, I'm curious if anyone knows why the FCC observes the Lord Supper less than frequently (as in biannually/quarterly)?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Any reason for doing it quarterly originally and historically?
 
earl40 said:
Why would we not want to observe this means of grace every Sunday?
Click to expand...

Here is one reason:

WLC:

Q. 171. How are they that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper to prepare themselves before they come unto it?
A. They that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper are, before they come, to prepare themselves thereunto, by examining themselves of their being in Christ, of their sins and wants; of the truth and measure of their knowledge, faith, repentance; love to God and the brethren, charity to all men, forgiving those that have done them wrong; of their desires after Christ, and of their new obedience; and by renewing the exercise of these graces, by serious meditation, and fervent prayer.

Q. 174. What is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper in the time of the administration of it?
A. It is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper, that, during the time of the administration of it, with all holy reverence and attention they wait upon God in that ordinance, diligently observe the sacramental elements and actions, heedfully discern the Lord's body, and affectionately meditate on his death and sufferings, and thereby stir up themselves to a vigorous exercise of their graces; in judging themselves, and sorrowing for sin; in earnest hungering and thirsting after Christ, feeding on him by faith, receiving of his fullness, trusting in his merits, rejoicing in his love, giving thanks for his grace; in renewing of their covenant with God, and love to all the saints.

Q. 175. What is the duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord's supper?
A. The duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord's supper, is seriously to consider how they have behaved themselves therein, and with what success; if they find quickening and comfort, to bless God for it, beg the continuance of it, watch against relapses, fulfill their vows, and encourage themselves to a frequent attendance on that ordinance: but if they find no present benefit, more exactly to review their preparation to, and carriage at, the sacrament; in both which, if they can approve themselves to God and their own consciences, they are to wait for the fruit of it in due time: but, if they see they have failed in either, they are to be humbled, and to attend upon it afterwards with more care and diligence.
Click to expand...

That is quite a lot to accomplish. It might be difficult for some churches to accomplish all of this each and every week and still have time for everything else.
 
Well does it become "rote" rather than special for those who attend such churches/"assemblies"? If it was just a memorial "ordinance" , I could see no problem with it being held weekly.

Also there are the important questions of self-examination, preparation and church sanctions, and how they relate to frequency of having the Lord' s Supper in a congregation.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
 
Peairtach said:
Well does it become "rote" rather than special for those who attend such churches/"assemblies"? If it was just a memorial "ordinance" , I could see no problem with it being held weekly.

Also there are the important questions of self-examination, preparation and church sanctions, and how they relate to frequency of having the Lord' s Supper in a congregation.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

The only problem I have with the "rote" argument "against" weekly observance of the Lord's Supper is that the same could be said of the Preaching of the Word or the Singing of the Psalms or the Reading of Scripture or of Prayer etc.
 
The Westminster Stds do not set a frequency and they certainly do not rule out weekly. I think as long as infrequent observers and frequent understand the pitfalls of their respective practices and guard against past problems, that should be sufficient at least to resolve the arguments from abuse for either practice.
irresistible_grace said:
Peairtach said:
Well does it become "rote" rather than special for those who attend such churches/"assemblies"? If it was just a memorial "ordinance" , I could see no problem with it being held weekly.

Also there are the important questions of self-examination, preparation and church sanctions, and how they relate to frequency of having the Lord' s Supper in a congregation.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

The only problem I have with the "rote" argument "against" weekly observance of the Lord's Supper is that the same could be said of the Preaching of the Word or the Singing of the Psalms or the Reading of Scripture or of Prayer etc.
Click to expand...
 
KMK said:
earl40 said:
Why would we not want to observe this means of grace every Sunday?
Click to expand...

Here is one reason:

WLC:

Q. 171. How are they that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper to prepare themselves before they come unto it?
A. They that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper are, before they come, to prepare themselves thereunto, by examining themselves of their being in Christ, of their sins and wants; of the truth and measure of their knowledge, faith, repentance; love to God and the brethren, charity to all men, forgiving those that have done them wrong; of their desires after Christ, and of their new obedience; and by renewing the exercise of these graces, by serious meditation, and fervent prayer.

Q. 174. What is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper in the time of the administration of it?
A. It is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper, that, during the time of the administration of it, with all holy reverence and attention they wait upon God in that ordinance, diligently observe the sacramental elements and actions, heedfully discern the Lord's body, and affectionately meditate on his death and sufferings, and thereby stir up themselves to a vigorous exercise of their graces; in judging themselves, and sorrowing for sin; in earnest hungering and thirsting after Christ, feeding on him by faith, receiving of his fullness, trusting in his merits, rejoicing in his love, giving thanks for his grace; in renewing of their covenant with God, and love to all the saints.

Q. 175. What is the duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord's supper?
A. The duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord's supper, is seriously to consider how they have behaved themselves therein, and with what success; if they find quickening and comfort, to bless God for it, beg the continuance of it, watch against relapses, fulfill their vows, and encourage themselves to a frequent attendance on that ordinance: but if they find no present benefit, more exactly to review their preparation to, and carriage at, the sacrament; in both which, if they can approve themselves to God and their own consciences, they are to wait for the fruit of it in due time: but, if they see they have failed in either, they are to be humbled, and to attend upon it afterwards with more care and diligence.
Click to expand...

That is quite a lot to accomplish. It might be difficult for some churches to accomplish all of this each and every week and still have time for everything else.
Click to expand...

This is my struggle with the frequency of communion as well. Here are some of my own arguments in favor of tradition Communion Seasons (Note: I was a supporter of weekly communion for about ten years, but have recently changed my thinking on the subject):

1) I honestly don't see how individuals AND Elders can fulfill all of these responsibilities on a weekly basis. I'm not saying it can't be done. In my own experience, I don't see weekly communion Elders taking the same initiative as communion season Elders in overseeing the flock. I like the purposeful gathering of the communion season with its lengthy time of preparation as opposed to simply tacking the LS on at the end of a service with an assumption that preparation has been made. Communion seasons don't really solve this problem, but they do insist upon a visible time of preparation, while weekly communion leaves a lot up to the individual. It seems to me that having preparation services and communicant/Elder interaction is a wiser and more careful way to handle the LS.

2) I struggle with the table always being open without purposeful oversight of members (not to say weekly communion churches don't have oversight). Communion seasons (though not solving the problem of oversight) at least insist upon having some kind of communicant/Elder interaction before the LS is celebrated. I think this interaction is critical because the Scriptures give qualifications for those who partake. There is no such thing as an open-ended invitation to the LS. There are things that can disqualify a person from partaking. The Elders need to be interacting with the communicants to determine if these disqualifications are present. Remember, that the argument is not simply "I want to partake every week", but we must consider the burden that weekly communion places upon the Elders to fulfill their duties of oversight and examination. Traditionally, we as ministers have recognized that the warning attached to the LS in 1 Corinthians 11:27 means that we are not to allow people to the table unless we have done our duty in fencing it. Weekly communion tends to say "keep coming to the table and if we notice a problem we'll intervene". This is unwise because the Scriptures make it clear that we are to address any problems BEFORE the supper, not after.

3) In addition, I think its a mistake to assume we must have the LS whenever we have preaching or the gathering of God's people. The Word of God is obviously a primary means of grace. Though the Sacraments are also a means of grace, they must by necessity be secondary in nature. The Sacraments are signs of something else, they are not the thing signified. What people seem to often miss is that when a sign is taken away, we still have the thing signified. The efficacy of the sign is not tied to the frequency of its use. We miss the point of a sign altogether if we insist that how often we do it somehow makes it more "meaningful". Of course, I am not suggesting we neglect the LS, but seasonal communion can by no stretch of the imagination be considered neglect. By contrast, the Scriptures are not a sign of anything, they are the very words of God. In fact, the Word of God is a means of grace seven days a week, whereas I notice that most weekly communion supporters only insist on having the LS on the Lord's Day. That is fine, but this seems to demonstrate that the Word of God is different that the LS, which is what the communion season adherents have been saying all along. The Word is primary, the LS is secondary.

4) Lots of weekly communion churches have two services on the Lord's Day but only have the LS during one of them. It would seem that a consistent application of their arguments would mean that the LS should be celebrated during each and every service.

5) "Breaking of bread" in the Scriptures does not always refer to the LS.

6) Jesus obviously replaced the Passover meal with the LS. The Passover meal was celebrated once a year without the Scriptures indicating that the people of God were deprived somehow by the infrequency of the meal.

7) A final (and most important) argument to note is that the Scriptures are silent on the frequency of communion. It should be a matter left to the discretion of a Session, whose wisdom takes into account the many factors that change from congregation to congregation.
 
Last edited:
NaphtaliPress said:
The Westminster Stds do not set a frequency and they certainly do not rule out weekly. I think as long as infrequent observers and frequent understand the pitfalls of their respective practices and guard against past problems, that should be sufficient at least to resolve the arguments from abuse for either practice.
Click to expand...


:agree:
 
Words of Life: The Bible and Weekly Communion

Wayne beat me to some links, but as the author of one of them and the only full-length treatment of it that I know of, I'll naturally offer more details (this was my M.Div thesis). I interact with Matthison and Horton as well:

CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction…………………………………… 1
Sacramentalism, Sacerdotalism & Hyper-Sacramentalism
Thesis

Chapter 2. History………………………………………… 8
Sub-Apostolic
Post-Nicene
Medieval
Reformation
Post-Reformation
Modern

Chapter 3. Word Of God………………………………… 16
The Word‘s Supremacy in General
The Word‘s Supremacy in Particular
Lord‘s Supper
Worship

Chapter 4. Exegesis………………………………………… 60
Acts 2:42ff
Acts 20:7
1 Corinthians 11:17ff.

Chapter 5. Refutation……………………………………… 67
Logical
Theological

Chapter 6. Conclusion……………………………………… 79

Appendices
A. Current Denominational Statements on Frequency 82
B. Non-Reformed Traditions & Weekly Communion 84
C. Matthison‘s Assertions …………………………… 86
D. Use of the Ceremonial Law………………………… 87
E. Helpful Charts……………………………………….. 89
Bibliography…………………………………………….. 90
 
There are good arguments for and against both weekly and quarterly observance, and in light of these I find that monthly observance is the best compromise. It is not so frequent as to become rote and allows ample time for reflection and preparation, while not being so infrequent as to become almost an afterthought.
 
Earl,

A partial response to your question: "Why would we not want to observe this means of grace every Sunday?" (from my booklet, p.69ff. [formatting may be off form my copy-paste]):

The next theme echoed throughout most of the authors is that the nature of the Supper requires weekly partaking by the congregation. In other words, a simple modus ponens is used: if p, then q; if the Supper is important, then it should be exercised frequently.176 By modus tollens, negating q would then negate p
meaning that those without frequent Communion do not consider the Supper as important.

The logic of this argument (which is never clearly presented, explained or defended) appears to be based upon a broader concept of relating frequency directly to the significance of the moral means or event in question: if event p is important, then it should be exercised frequently. Expressed in this form, it is readily apparent that although the form is valid, the premises are false. Many important events in the life of believers are not practiced frequently: public worship (only one day in seven), celebrations, birthdays or other significant events. In other words, this approach is not specific enough. Moreover, some of the terms are vague. What does 'important‘ mean? What exactly does 'frequent‘ mean? It means whatever the author desires it to mean.177

It could be contended that important should not be used but rather, "beneficial for spiritual growth." Stated thusly: if event p is beneficial for spiritual growth, then it should be exercised frequently. However, many events are beneficial for spiritual growth: all of the means of grace broadly conceived (prayer, family
worship, etc.)—and they are exercised more frequently than weekly Communion! A variation of this approach contends that since Christ is fed upon in the Supper, it should be practiced every week. Yet this simply intensifies the phrase from "beneficial for spiritual growth" to "greatly (importantly) beneficial for spiritual growth." In other words, the nature of the problem has not changed. If lesser means of grace are practiced more frequently (such as prayer) than
this "greater" means of grace, it clearly shows that this syllogism does not deal adequately either with the matter of frequency of observance or with the reality of the Christian life. It is through the daily activity of believing in Christ as proclaimed in the Word preached (weekly) and read (daily) (or even memorized) that, foundationally speaking, one feeds upon Christ and His benefits (Jn. 6:63).178

176 'Frequent‘ is used instead of 'weekly' because, as noted in the Introduction, some of the authors desire more than weekly Communion (cp. Horton and Matthison).

177 For instance, Horton quotes Deddens‘ work, Where Everything Points to Him, for more practical and ecclesiastical evidence in favor of weekly communion. Yet, Deddens‘ section on the Lord‘s Supper does not specify weekly Supper but suggests a "frequent" practice that, against the opening sentences of his section, does not necessarily lead to weekly communion but only to a frequency greater than the "four to six times a year common in many Reformed churches…" (p. 90).
178 See the previous sections on the Means of Grace and Worship for a fuller explanation. Further, our union in Christ is ever-present in the Christian life, Roms. 6:2; Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15; 2 Cor. 5:21; Eph. 1:3, 6, 7, 13; 2:6; 1 Jn. 5:11, Heb. 3:14.
 
Shawn Mathis said:
176 'Frequent‘ is used instead of 'weekly' because, as noted in the Introduction, some of the authors desire more than weekly Communion (cp. Horton and Matthison).
Click to expand...

Thank you Shane. Now to the matter that Matthison lives near me in Orlando I suspect he may be correct. Of course Horton, living on the west coast, sort of cancels that out.
 
I am not going to argue either way. I think it should be left for the elders to decide what is appropriate. I am definitely not against weekly though. As a parallel, I doubt any of us would have an issue if our congregation was blessed with baptizing new converts weekly. I don't think anyone would stand up and say that baptism had lost its meaning because it was happening too often in the church.
 
Weekly communion is not wrong per se.

But the question is how is it defended? If the argument imports suspicious theological arguments, then there is a problem. One such argument I deal with is that worship as such is not complete without the LS. Another argument is: preaching is deficient without the LS. Prima facia these are suspect arguments already.
 
Horton and Mathison convinced me of weekly communion long ago, though I fully recognize the difficulties many congregations will face--and I underscore the logistical difficulties. I am open and tolerant on the issue until people start saying that it is "Roman Catholic or papistic or something." That is historically false. The Fourth Lateran Council mandated that the laity go to communion at least once a year, which is a bizarre thing to mandate if everyone is participating in communion on a weekly basis.
 
Thanks Pastor. Very much looking forward to reading this and what an excellent thesis topic!

Shawn Mathis said:
Words of Life: The Bible and Weekly Communion

Wayne beat me to some links, but as the author of one of them and the only full-length treatment of it that I know of, I'll naturally offer more details (this was my M.Div thesis). I interact with Matthison and Horton as well:

CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction…………………………………… 1
Sacramentalism, Sacerdotalism & Hyper-Sacramentalism
Thesis

Chapter 2. History………………………………………… 8
Sub-Apostolic
Post-Nicene
Medieval
Reformation
Post-Reformation
Modern

Chapter 3. Word Of God………………………………… 16
The Word‘s Supremacy in General
The Word‘s Supremacy in Particular
Lord‘s Supper
Worship

Chapter 4. Exegesis………………………………………… 60
Acts 2:42ff
Acts 20:7
1 Corinthians 11:17ff.

Chapter 5. Refutation……………………………………… 67
Logical
Theological

Chapter 6. Conclusion……………………………………… 79

Appendices
A. Current Denominational Statements on Frequency 82
B. Non-Reformed Traditions & Weekly Communion 84
C. Matthison‘s Assertions …………………………… 86
D. Use of the Ceremonial Law………………………… 87
E. Helpful Charts……………………………………….. 89
Bibliography…………………………………………….. 90
Click to expand...
 
Shawn Mathis said:
Words of Life: The Bible and Weekly Communion

Wayne beat me to some links, but as the author of one of them and the only full-length treatment of it that I know of, I'll naturally offer more details (this was my M.Div thesis). I interact with Matthison and Horton as well:

CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction…………………………………… 1
Sacramentalism, Sacerdotalism & Hyper-Sacramentalism
Thesis

Chapter 2. History………………………………………… 8
Sub-Apostolic
Post-Nicene
Medieval
Reformation
Post-Reformation
Modern

Chapter 3. Word Of God………………………………… 16
The Word‘s Supremacy in General
The Word‘s Supremacy in Particular
Lord‘s Supper
Worship

Chapter 4. Exegesis………………………………………… 60
Acts 2:42ff
Acts 20:7
1 Corinthians 11:17ff.

Chapter 5. Refutation……………………………………… 67
Logical
Theological

Chapter 6. Conclusion……………………………………… 79

Appendices
A. Current Denominational Statements on Frequency 82
B. Non-Reformed Traditions & Weekly Communion 84
C. Matthison‘s Assertions …………………………… 86
D. Use of the Ceremonial Law………………………… 87
E. Helpful Charts……………………………………….. 89
Bibliography…………………………………………….. 90
Click to expand...

Shawn, I was not aware of your work until I saw it referenced in this thread. I read it this week and I would highly recommend it to anyone as a thoughtful work on the frequency of communion. Anyone who feels strongly that the Lord's Supper should be celebrated weekly should try to work through your book to understand the reasoning from the other side. Thanks for your efforts!
 
markkoller said:
Shawn Mathis said:
Words of Life: The Bible and Weekly Communion

Wayne beat me to some links, but as the author of one of them and the only full-length treatment of it that I know of, I'll naturally offer more details (this was my M.Div thesis). I interact with Matthison and Horton as well:

CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction…………………………………… 1
Sacramentalism, Sacerdotalism & Hyper-Sacramentalism
Thesis

Chapter 2. History………………………………………… 8
Sub-Apostolic
Post-Nicene
Medieval
Reformation
Post-Reformation
Modern

Chapter 3. Word Of God………………………………… 16
The Word‘s Supremacy in General
The Word‘s Supremacy in Particular
Lord‘s Supper
Worship

Chapter 4. Exegesis………………………………………… 60
Acts 2:42ff
Acts 20:7
1 Corinthians 11:17ff.

Chapter 5. Refutation……………………………………… 67
Logical
Theological

Chapter 6. Conclusion……………………………………… 79

Appendices
A. Current Denominational Statements on Frequency 82
B. Non-Reformed Traditions & Weekly Communion 84
C. Matthison‘s Assertions …………………………… 86
D. Use of the Ceremonial Law………………………… 87
E. Helpful Charts……………………………………….. 89
Bibliography…………………………………………….. 90
Click to expand...

Shawn, I was not aware of your work until I saw it referenced in this thread. I read it this week and I would highly recommend it to anyone as a thoughtful work on the frequency of communion. Anyone who feels strongly that the Lord's Supper should be celebrated weekly should try to work through your book to understand the reasoning from the other side. Thanks for your efforts!
Click to expand...

With all these excellent resources, I am very much looking forward to our discussion, Pastor!
 
We take it monthly, I am not against weekly per se, however I believe that the argument that frequency of the other elements of worship does not diminish their effectiveness and necessity is somewhat flawed in this respect; I am unaware that warnings are specifically given of sickness and even death as a consequence for careless singing, prayer and listening to preaching, whereas those warnings are given in relation to the Lord's Supper. This I believe necessitates a more careful preparation and attendance unto the sacrament that in one sense is not necessary for the others. In keeping with some previous comments I believe the Larger Catechism to be the the most excellent treatment of this subject available (in short form) and is best achieved in practice by a little less frequently than weekly.

I also believe that where there is memorialist position on the Lord's Supper weekly becomes more usual, likewise where the position is ex opera operate weekly is a must. History would seem to support that the Calvinist real spiritual presence avoided both those doctrinal positions and that this was a major factor in decidiing the feature. I have no evidence for that as such, perhaps Andre you can provide such after your study, or indeed Shawn perhaps has.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

tantely
  • Locked
Frequency of the Lord's supper
Replies
23
Views
7K
Mr. Bultitude
Mr. Bultitude
Backwoods Presbyterian
  • Locked
Matthew Henry On the Frequency of the Lord's Supper
Replies
0
Views
2K
Backwoods Presbyterian
Backwoods Presbyterian
R
  • Locked
The Lord's Supper: Frequency or Intensity?
2
Replies
53
Views
10K
Reformed Christian
R
Backwoods Presbyterian
  • Locked
John Owen on Lord's Supper Frequency
Replies
0
Views
1K
Backwoods Presbyterian
Backwoods Presbyterian
D
  • Locked
Calvin on the actual frequency of the Lord's Supper in Geneva
Replies
3
Views
3K
SRoper
SRoper
Back
Top