BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
Articles

A Clarification of My Comments about Communion by Francis Chan

sermonindex Feb 20, 2020

From what I hear through the grapevine (I don’t spend a lot of time online), one of my recent sermons has stirred quite a bit of debate and accusation. This is hard for me to hear, especially because my sermon was about Holy Communion””the sacrament that is supposed to bring believers together. Sadly, over the past 500 years it has caused more division in the Church than possibly any other topic. This is no small victory for the enemy. For this reason, I thought it might be wise to explain some of my statements and the reasoning behind them.

In my sermon, I spoke about the importance of Holy Communion, teaching from 1 Cor 11:28-30:

"Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.”

I confessed to my church that I have not been severe enough in my warning against taking Communion improperly. So often in the evangelical church we let people partake with little to no warning. If we really believe this passage to be true, the consequences for that negligence could be dire. God warns that He strikes people dead for partaking of the elements improperly. If an outsider looked in on a communion service in the average evangelical church, do you think they would see the kind of reverence that befits something so sacred?

As I have meditated on this, I have become more and more convicted that my view of Communion has been far too low for much of my life. Due to the severe warnings in Scripture, we cannot afford to continue on in this way. We need to take time to pray and study deeply, and to repent and make changes where necessary.

In my message, I mentioned that I have been taking a closer look at what it means to "discern the body.” I brought up the fact that for the first 1500 years of Christianity, virtually no one considered communion to be a mere symbol void of Christ’s presence.

Martin Luther who started the Reformation states:

"Who ever read in the scriptures, that ‘my body’ is the same as ‘this is a sign of my body’?... Not one of the Fathers, though so numerous...ever said, "It is only bread and wine”; or, "the body and blood of Christ is not there present.” Surely it is not credible ...that they should never...so much as once, say... "It is bread only” or "the body of Christ is not there,” especially it being of great importance, that men should not be deceived. Certainly in so many Fathers, and in so many writings, the negative might at least be found in one of them had they thought the body and blood of Christ were not really present: but they are all of them unanimous.” (Luther’s Collected Works, Wittenburg Edition, no. &, p. 391)

Even John Calvin, whom some Protestants quote more than Jesus, had a much different understanding of Communion than I held.

Calvin- "We are quickened by the true partaking of him, which he designated by the terms eating and drinking, lest anyone suppose that the life which we obtain from him is obtained by simple knowledge.”

"The rule which the pious ought always to observe is, whenever they see the symbols instituted by the Lord, to think and feel surely persuaded that the truth of the thing signified is also present. For why does the Lord put the symbol of his body into your hands, but just to assure you that you truly partake of him? If this is true let us feel as much assured that the visible sign is given us in seal of an invisible gift as that his body itself is given to us.”

Calvin and Luther (two of the leading voices of the Reformation) had vastly different views of the Eucharist. Both of them, however, held a far more mystical understanding of Communion than I held. Neither of them saw the bread and cup as a mere symbol, but believed in a real presence of Christ in Communion. Luther seemed to have a more mystical approach, yet both believed in His unique presence in the Eucharist. My view of Communion was much lower than theirs. I saw it and taught it as a mere symbol with no real presence of Christ. Those who believe that may be right, but it’s worth considering that your view was not held by any believers for 1500 years. A man named Ulrich Zwingli was the first to popularize that view in the 1500’s.

Over the past few months, I have read about a dozen books on the subject. Though I have learned a lot, I still have not landed on a specific position. I’m not sure when I will land or if I will ever be 100% sure of a view, but the experience of taking Communion with my church body has become more meaningful to me than ever. I did wrestle with the wisdom of speaking about Communion when I hadn’t landed on a position, but I ultimately felt like I was not loving my church well by remaining silent. I believe I have been wrong, so I needed to warn the church and encourage them toward deeper study and prayer.

My questions have resulted in many negative emails and comments from my Reformed friends. On the flip side, I have received much encouragement from Anglican, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox believers.

Some argue that it was negligent of me to enter the pastorate without a careful examination of such an important topic. Shouldn’t I have studied it more carefully rather than just accepting the teachings of my particular seminary? I have two answers to that question:

1. Yes. I want to apologize to anyone who has sat under my teaching and formed a view of the Eucharist based upon my limited understanding. I have sought forgiveness from God and would ask for yours as well.

2. But. As I take time to pray and study, it doesn’t guarantee that I will ever be 100% convinced of one particular view. Like Paul, "I know in part and prophesy in part.” I can’t tell you how many times I have prayed "Lord, please show me the truth.” Please pray that God would have grace on me to show me truth.

Something to keep in mind.... God promises to give grace to the humble and to oppose the proud. You might want to pay attention to the spirit in which people address sacred topics. Intellect is not the only variable in finding truth. Character matters. If God opposes the proud, does it make sense that those who are most proud are the ones that God has graced with truth?

I know this article will cause many more to be written in response. For this reason, I hesitate in even posting this. I could spend the rest of my life going back and forth debating the issue. I doubt this article will bring any more clarity to the actual issue. My hope was only to encourage humility as the discussions continue, and to remind all believers that God wanted Communion to be an experience that brought His children closer to the perfect oneness that He prayed for (John 17). As we discuss, let’s be careful of our words but even more so of our hearts. Just because you disagree with another believer, it doesn’t excuse you from the biblical command to love that brother or sister as Christ loved the Church. Also keep in mind all of the unbelievers who look at our interactions, and the effect that must have on their view of Christ. When there is pride and unkindness in the conversations between people who supposedly believe that the Son of God died on the cross to make us one, it’s bound to have an adverse effect on those we are trying to reach.

Having said all of that, I will be praying about how involved I will be in future public discussions on this topic. While some may genuinely be called to write articles and blog, I have never seen that as my specific calling. In other words, expect me to pray and study but don’t hold your breath waiting for a dissertation from me on the topic.

Last week, I was in a remote village where there was not a single believer in Christ. I can’t tell you how exhilarating it was to explain the Cross to this group of people for the first time. I felt so much peace that I was doing what God created me for. 1 Corinthians 1:17 kept coming to mind "For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” During this next season of life, I am going to look for more opportunities to share the simple truths of the gospel with those who have never even heard of Jesus. I appreciate your prayers.

from: http://crazylove.org/blog

G
Gloryandgrace Feb 20, 2020


I heartily agree with Francis on this issue.

In my times leading groups or even the whole congregation I was always lead (especially the whole congregation) to warn of taking communion by those who are unbelievers, skeptics, or living in unrepentant sin.

A woman came to me later after the service, she was shocked I meant that her unbelieving husband couldn't take communion with her. I said he should not. She was grieved...and I don't really think this was about me giving the warning, it was about the danger her husband was facing in her ignorance or maybe avoidance of the subject.

As to the real presence being transformed into the elements?...Transubstantiation is a No, No, No.

But a real presence of God while taking communion and a real sacredness to the communion sacrament...Yes, Yes, Yes.

I really like Francis when he deals with topics like this.

A
ArthurRosh Feb 20, 2020

"For a lot of people, coming to the Lord's table has a lot of strange meanings and ideas. But as we travel back in time, all we can hear that night, Jesus sitting with His disciples, He simply says, love one another, as I have loved you. This body that is broken because of love, this blood of mine is spilled out because of love, remember Me, don't forget Me."
- K.P. Yohannan (Love of God - Part 1)
www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=17099

A
AbideinHim Apr 20, 2023

"Calvin and Luther (two of the leading voices of the Reformation) had vastly different views of the Eucharist. Both of them, however, held a far more mystical understanding of Communion than I held. Neither of them saw the bread and cup as a mere symbol, but believed in a real presence of Christ in Communion. Luther seemed to have a more mystical approach, yet both believed in His unique presence in the Eucharist. My view of Communion was much lower than theirs. I saw it and taught it as a mere symbol with no real presence of Christ. Those who believe that may be right, but it’s worth considering that your view was not held by any believers for 1500 years. A man named Ulrich Zwingli was the first to popularize that view in the 1500’s.”

I was raised Catholic, and while I don’t believe that the bread and the wine becomes the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ, there is more to communion than what the Protestant church has made it out to be. There is a real communion, fellowship with the body and blood of Christ. When we take communion as the Lord intended we can be blessed, even healed in our soul and bodies, but as the scripture says that if we do not discern the Lord’s Body, it can be to our detriment.

sermonindex Apr 20, 2023


I was raised Catholic, and while I don’t believe that the bread and the wine becomes the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ, there is more to communion than what the Protestant church has made it out to be. There is a real communion, fellowship with the body and blood of Christ. When we take communion as the Lord intended we can be blessed, even healed in our soul and bodies, but as the scripture says that if we do not discern the Lord’s Body, it can be to our detriment.

Well said dear brother, I agree fully. Let us make sure that communion really points to as a symbol to the work of Christ on the cross. Without this we will make an idol of it.

C
ccchhhrrriiisss Apr 20, 2023

Interesting and informative!

During a recent conversation with a brother about this same topic, we spoke about everything that the Bible mentions on communion. Most protestant churches consider communion as an "ordinance" alongside water baptism.

I pointed out that much of church nomenclature -- our very old and traditional vernacular -- is either purely non-biblical or merely an ancient nomenclature tradition of biblical concepts. In fact, the Koine Greek word "ordinance" or "decree" ("dogma" in Greek) appears but three in the New Testament -- and twice (Ephesians 2:15 and Colossians 2:14) it refers to the ending of them at the Cross and one other time (Acts 16:4) it refers to the conclusion that the apostles reached at the Council of Jerusalem in the previous chapter.

Thus, the word "sacrament" does not appear anywhere in Scripture (and "ordinances" appears infrequently and rarely connected to things that the church connect them to). This is especially true of high church vernacular -- terms like "Holy Communion."

Now, the word "communion" does appear in the New Testament. The Greek word is "koinōnia" -- and it appears a total of 20 times in the New Testament but only once in the direct context of the "Lord's supper" (I Corinthians 10:16). More often, this word is translated as "fellowship" in the King James Version or as "participation" or "sharing" (followed often by the word "in" or "with" as in "sharing in" or "participation with") in many other Bible versions.

The other times that this word ("koinōnia") appears in the New Testament has to do with communication or fellowship with other believers (or with God).

I do agree that much of the understanding of what "communion" (or the "Lord's supper" or whatever terms it is known by) is based upon the "Last Supper" in the Gospels. In fact, it was more the "Last Passover" -- because it was the last time that Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples.

I find it very interesting that Jews who celebrate the Passover refer to the actual supper itself as a "seder." The word "seder" comes from the Hebrew term "order" -- the very basis of the word "ordinance." This is likely because it was stipulated as a yearly order in the Law of Moses. Yet, also interestingly, the Hebrew word "seder" only appears once in the Old Testament -- Job 10:22. Yet, this refers to the place where Job would go (possibly the grave) that is "without order."

So, for me, the willing participation in this meal -- the bread and wine -- is an opportunity of fellowship with Christ within the deeper context and understanding that HE was the Passover lamb (more so than this being a ceremonious order).

When Jesus was on the cross, one of his final statements was "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani" (that is "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"). This is found in both Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34. I believe that many Bible teachers misunderstand this passage -- inferring that Jesus felt forsaken on the cross at a point in which the Father turned his back on the Son.

In truth, Jesus was quoting Psalm 22 (this statement was the first verse of the Psalm -- of which the first verse was often a reference to it like referring to Psalm 23 and "The Lord is my Shepherd"). In fact, Psalm 22 is a direct reference to the death of the Messiah.

This psalm refers to the death of the Messiah -- with the piercing of his hands and feet, being able to count his bones because his garments have been taken and divided (verses 16-17). So, Jesus was referring to his death as a fulfillment of his work on the Earth -- that the Messiah would first come as an atoning Passover lamb before returning again as a king who rules over the nations (verse 28). So, Jesus (just before his death) pointed out that the Son of God -- God in human flesh -- was the Passover Lamb. He has done it (the final verse of Psalm 22).

In fact, I've often pondered the New Testament meaning of the passage about those who were sick or died from eating and drinking (participation) in his "unworthily" (I Corinthians 11:30). I've pondered if it is more about those who are flippant about the sacrificial death of our Lord -- or those who don't truly know him and practice "commune" (or fellowship) with both light and darkness, Christ and Belial (2 Corinthians 6:14-15).

There are people who "believe" yet try to serve both God and the world -- a form of lukewarm belief that is impossible for true believers. This is akin to serving God and mammon (Luke 16:13). Yet, we know what it takes to be a true believer. You must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of those who diligently or earnestly seek him (Hebrews 11:6). To be a believer, you must believe and truly seek him. Thus, participation in the bread and wine is participating in his Passover death.

If a person doesn't truly believe or seek, then that person is flippantly engaging in what they consider little more than a ceremony. Yet, this is much deeper. This is fellowshipping in the sacrificial, atoning Passover death of the Son of God.

We participate in true remembrance of him (and his death) or we shouldn't participate at all. Otherwise, it becomes the worst form of idolatry -- similar to how Israel and Judah served both the LORD and idols before they were carried off in captivity (which is explained quite well by the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel).

D
dolfan Apr 21, 2023

Chan’s recent thoughts on Communion, together with recent prayer and Bible reading and ”” coincidentally? ”” reading Piper’s new book "Come, Lord Jesus” have caused me to examine myself and my love for Jesus. All I can say for sure is this: I want to have Communion more often, more deeply, more intentionally, more discerningly. I want to do so with more believers. I want to do so in anticipation of the Day of the Lord (taking Communion with an eye to His return) and the wonderful glorious gracious perfection of His people that all who love His appearance at His coming will enjoy as nothing has ever been enjoyed.

I do not understand the mystery of His presence at the Lord’s Table. I believe it surpasses symbolism. If I need to understand better, He will lead me there as He will all of His children. We have so much to look forward to between now and His return.

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 7 posts