Abstract
Baptists and other evangelical Christians have some unique challenges in Table worship. They are essentially alone in insisting that the Lord's Supper is not a sacrament — “a visible sign instituted by Christ to symbolize or confer grace.” They are more comfortable calling it an “ordinance,” which acknowledges Christ's institution of the act and their own obedience, but hesitates to claim any spiritual benefit. Their fears of “sacramental heresy” were confirmed in pre-Reformation abuses by Roman Catholics, especially those connected with transubstantiation and the concept of ex opere operato.
In the sixteenth-century Reformation, the new Baptists and others in England, and Anabaptists on the Continent, were more radical than the magisterial denominations in “policing” table participation and limiting its meaning. Basically, they were followers of the Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli, who heralded communion as remembrance and Christian education, with no expectation of special grace. From the beginning, their table service was limited to brief prayers of thanks for the bread and the cup, improvised by deacons.
The passing centuries contributed little to a meaningful Lord's Supper for Baptists. What we need now is a full, complete service of actions and words, with full remembrance of our Lord from eternity to eternity; full thanksgiving for all we remember; full awareness of our eating and drinking symbols of Christ's body and blood, which, by faith, can nourish us as he promised; and full recommitment of believers to love God completely and neighbors as themselves. The total result could be the spiritual maturation of believers through worship, and repetition of the full Gospel story for the uncommitted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.