May 6, 2016  1 Corinthians 11:17-24

The Lord’s Table, the Lord’s Supper, Holy Communion, the Eucharist, the Mass – the diversity of descriptions reflects the wide spectrum of practice associated with the sacrament (or the ordinance, or the memorial, or the sacrifice – we don’t even always agree about what it is).  Somehow from very early in the history of the church, this central display of Christ’s work has been distorted into a dividing point.  The Corinthian Christians may not have been the first to go wrong over the celebration of Communion (the term I will use here), but they certainly experienced divisions.  Paul’s response to the chaos that Communion had become might help us see what it ought to be for us.

The section does not start off well (for the first Corinthian readers):  “I do not praise you” (1 Corinthians 11:17a).  In fact, he says they are worse off after they meet (v. 17b), quite a serious criticism of a church gathering!  His first confrontation is over divisions, or “schisms” (schismata, σχίσματα, v. 18).  Apparently Paul is shocked; he only “partly” believes it.  Division in the church is bad enough, but (as we soon learn) the division is over Communion.  Paul can hardly believe how wrong they have gone.  But they have a decided tendency to find just about anything to differ about (cf. 1:10‑13; 3:4‑6, 21‑23; 4:6), so he needs to address this expression of their divisiveness.

One question that came up in our discussion related to the next thing Paul says:  “There must be factions among you” (v. 19).  Was he encouraging factions (lit. “heresies,” haireseis, αἱρέσεις)?  Or was he saying that factions were inevitable?  It seems unlikely that Paul would be stirring up the divisions he has been trying to eliminate in the church.  However, he does not want divisions to be ignored or covered over lightly.  The inevitability of disagreements has a potentially positive outcome:  “that those who are approved may become evident among you” (v. 19).  If A and B disagree, A may be right, or B may be right, or both may be wrong.  The benefit of open (but courteous and respectful) disagreement is to find truth.  Pretending we “all just get along” and ignoring differences blurs genuine truth.  When he mentions “those who are approved” he is not describing a popularity contest, but a test of genuineness.  “Approved” (dokimoi, δόκιμοι) means refined, tested and approved, proved to be genuine.  (We saw the negative form of this word earlier when Paul expressed concern about being “disqualified” in 1 Corinthians 9:27.)  The word group (noun, verb, adjective) is used thirty-nine times in the New Testament, suggesting that such proven genuineness is an important part of the Christian experience.  With that important goal in mind, if Paul was not encouraging disagreements, he was at least encouraging them to work out the truth.

The specific division in this instance was over the “Lord’s Supper” (v. 20).  He scolds them that the Supper is not the main reason they meet.  Instead of an atmosphere of fellowship with each other and communion with God, Paul describes a potluck where nobody waits in line.  Helping myself first with no thought of leaving something for others, even if it means overindulging (v. 21) seems to be the mindset.  The problem might have been about early arrivals not waiting for others (mentioned in v. 33).  There could have been cliques of friends who brought food but wouldn’t share.  There were likely economic divisions that would “shame those who have nothing” (v. 22b).  Our group was not certain if this was a first-century version of a potluck, where each family or individual brought food for themselves, or possibly to share.  Or maybe the homeowner (whose prosperity allowed him to have a house large enough to meet in) provided the food.  In any case, the problem of the rich having (or taking) special privileges at the expense of the poor (as in James 2:1-4) would squeeze out the believers of lower social rank.  They would be left hungry amid their stuffed and drunken brethren (v. 21).  No wonder Paul had no praise for them (v. 22b).  Their self-obsessed behavior even in a church gathering to remember the death of Jesus revealed not their genuineness but their scorn for the Body of Christ, the church, and their disdain for His people.  Earlier Paul had warned them about the danger of confusing or even blending pagan practices with Communion (10:21).  Now he warns of an equal danger of the relational sin of “despising” the assembled people of God (11:22).

In contrast, Paul reminded them of what “coming together to eat the Lord’s Supper” should look like (vv. 23-26).  In words that most Christians recognize and can probably repeat, Paul summarizes the actions and the significance of the Passover meal that Jesus celebrated with His disciples.  The details of that description were not a significant part of our limited discussion time.  What we did note was Paul’s introduction:  “I received from the Lord” (v. 23a).  When and how (at his conversion on the road to Damascus?  By a special revelation at some later time?  Some other means?) are not stated. What is clear is Paul’s emphatic authority for these instructions.  Several places in this letter he says puzzling things about his teaching (“I give instructions, not I, but the Lord” in 7:10;  “I say, not the Lord” a few verses later in 7:12; “judge for yourselves” in 11:13, just before the present passage).  Here there is no ambiguity.  Paul is telling them exactly what Jesus told him.  This is what Communion should look like, and this is what it should be about.  Our discussion about hair and head coverings in the previous passage raised questions about timeless and time-bound truth.  Paul seems clear that this topic, directly from Jesus, is not a cultural issue, but is timeless until Jesus returns (v. 26).

That brief but authoritative paragraph probably made some of the church members feel a bit awkward, maybe even ashamed of their behavior.  Paul doesn’t depend on their emotional response.  He continues forcefully (vv. 27-30).  What they are doing potentially makes them “guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord” (v. 27) and “drinking judgment” on themselves (v. 29) and even risking physical effects of sickness or death (v. 30).  Paul’s exhortation to avoid participating in Communion in “an unworthy manner) is self-examination (v. 28).  And here again we find the wording from verse 19 about those who are “approved.”  Here, using the verb form, each one is to “examine” himself (dokimazeto, δοκιμαζέτω) to test himself for genuineness, for authenticity.

That verse is often used as a part of a Communion service when each member thinks about their own life, perhaps confessing sin or repenting of behavior that needs to change.  That self-examination is a worthy exercise, but may not be exactly all Paul had in mind as he wrote this instruction to the Corinthians.  Specifically, he wants to ensure that they “judge the body rightly” (v. 29b) with the result that “if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged” (v. 31).  Our group discussed what “judge the body rightly” might mean.  One suggestion was that the “body” represented by the bread was the body of Jesus, so the verse means we need to examine our relationship with the Lord.  Or since the bread represents the body we should be sure we are remembering that symbolism as we eat the bread during Communion.

In the context of the divisions in the Corinthian church and the selfish behavior at church gatherings, Paul could be reminding them that they are the body of Christ.  They need to “judge accurately” (diakrinon, διακρίνων) or “recognize” (NIV) the true nature of the body of Christ in His church.  While the preceding context certainly is more about the bread representing the body, Paul is about to move into his extended discussion of the church as the body (1 Corinthians 12-14).  This double meaning of “body” might be a transition point in his teaching.  We would do well to think of our relationships with others in the body of Christ as our preparation for receiving Communion.

That kind of self-examination is reminiscent of a similar warning expressed by Jesus regarding worship in general:  “Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering” (Matthew 5:23-24).  Relationships affect the authenticity of our worship.  Relational sin always pollutes worship.  Even in the context of the old system of animal sacrifice Jesus put a priority on relationships that had been corrupted by anger or gossip or slander (Matthew 5:21-22).  Other types of sin may come to mind when we are exhorted to examine ourselves before Communion.  We should be particularly thorough in our self-examination regarding relationships when we celebrate and remember and share in the one true Sacrifice.