Bulletin Articles
EATING THE LORD’S SUPPER AT HOME
EATING THE LORD’S SUPPER AT HOME
Since churches have temporarily stopped meeting because of the coronavirus, taking the Lord’s Supper at home (in a private capacity) has become an “issue” with some brethren. I have written about this before, but I feel that more needs to be said. While I believe that this practice is authorized under certain circumstances, I also believe there are times it would be wrong to eat at home. Hopefully, this article can shed some more light on this matter.
First, I am only defending the rights of Christians under circumstances in which they are unable to assemble. I realize that local saints must assemble (Hb.10:25); and when assembled, they must do certain things (Ac.20:7; 1Cor.14:26). Deliberately absenting oneself from such activities without just cause is sinful, and I do not defend anyone who does so! “Fishing-boat communion,” when you are fully capable of assembling with the church, is WRONG! But there are circumstances in which one may be unable to assemble: sicknesses (including pandemics!), essential work (e.g. doctor, soldier), travel (e.g. business trip), weather-related issues (e.g. snowstorm, tornado, hurricane), or disasters (e.g. earthquake, fire). It is to these kinds of situations that I offer the remarks that follow.
There is no specified location for the Supper. Our tradition of meeting in church buildings has somewhat colored our thinking here. There is NO requirement to eat the Supper in a church building! The particular location for worship is irrelevant (Jn.4:20-24; 1Tm.2:8). The early church often met in homes, not church buildings (cf. Ac.12:5,12). So, the issue is NOT about the location! (As an aside, an “assembly” is NOT a “location;” it is a “circumstance.”)
There is no specified number who must be assembled to take the Lord’s Supper. It is true that “the disciples came together to break bread” (Ac.20:7; 1Cor.11:17-18,20,33). But there is no “quorum” or “minimum number” who must be present before we can eat the Supper. There is nothing that says “the whole church” must take the Supper at the same time and place. In fact, it is common to have less than the whole meeting on Sunday, because of work, travel, sickness, or some other reason. I have assembled after snowstorms, when only five or ten out of a hundred members could get to the building. We ate the Supper anyway!
The presence or absence of others is irrelevant to my communion with the Lord. “Therefore, whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body” (1Cor.11:27-29). Even though we are gathered together, we each approach God as individuals; and our worship is accepted or rejected on an individual basis. Hence, in a congregation of one-hundred, ninety-nine might eat the Supper acceptably, and one might eat in an unworthy manner. But it is also possible that one might eat acceptably, while ninety-nine eat unworthily! This clearly means that the presence or absence of others is irrelevant to my communion with the Lord.
These are the same arguments used to defend the practice of “Sunday night communion.” Those who oppose Sunday night communion make much ado about “the assembly” and our need to “eat together.” Interestingly, these are the same arguments against eating the Supper at home in a private capacity. What I am getting at is this: The issues of Sunday night communion and eating the Supper at home in a private capacity stand or fall together! If we can let one sister eat the Supper alone in the nursery on Sunday morning, or let one brother eat alone on Sunday night, then one brother can eat in his home! If not, why not? Conversely, if a brother can’t eat the Supper at home during this crisis, then a sister can’t eat the Supper alone in the nursery on Sunday morning, and a brother can’t eat the Supper on Sunday night for the very same reason! This does not “prove” all these practices are right; but it does show that they are inextricably linked. Consistency demands that if we deny one of them, we must deny them all.
I realize that not all brethren will “see eye to eye” on these matters. So, I will close with an appeal to be respectful to one another’s consciences during this time (Rm.14). Let each one act in keeping with his own convictions.
--Lanny Smith
