THE ANOINTED VESSEL (6)
[p. 201] THE ANOINTED VESSEL (6)
— The desire of the brethren is that we should have a reading. At Valence we were occupied with the first epistle to the Corinthians. I was thinking that it would be good to pursue the consideration of that book, and to speak of the Lord’s supper in chapter 11: we will read verses 17 to 34.
Yesterday, in our consideration of this subject, we referred to chapter 10, verse 15 and onwards, as treating of the fellowship. It speaks of the cup of the Lord’s supper as being the communion of the blood of the Christ, and it is said of the bread that it is the communion of the body of the Christ. The bearing of chapter 10 refers to our conduct every day of the week. Chapter 11 gives us light as being gathered together in assembly. In chapter 10, we are to be consistent with the fellowship. In our daily life we are responsible to be consistent with the death of the Lord; and the bread, in the Lord’s supper, represents not only Christ’s body, but all saints. We are therefore responsible towards all the saints, in our daily life. It says that, “we, being many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf” 1 Corinthians 10:17. So, as partaking of the bread, we are responsible to be consistent with the death of Christ; and we are responsible, not only to Him, but to all the saints. We must therefore be ready, if need be, to give account of our behaviour to the saints. To stress that principle, Paul says again, “Ye cannot drink the Lord’s cup, and the cup of demons: ye cannot partake of the Lord’s table, and of the table of demons” 1 Corinthians 10:21. If we make light of these instructions, the Lord will have something to say to us as to it. So it says, “Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?
are we stronger than he?” 1 Corinthians 10:22. We see therefore that Christendom, in general, in departing from these instructions, will have to do with the Lord, and those who do not observe His rights will see that the Lord is stronger than they.
— He has acquired His rights over us at such a price, that we can well understand the jealousy of His love which does not allow the presence of a rival.
— In the second epistle it is said that we have been espoused to one Man. “I am jealous as to you with a jealousy which is of God; for I have espoused you unto one man, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ” 2 Corinthians 11:2. The Lord Jesus Christ is jealous; He does not wish our affections to be divided. If therefore, whether in secret or otherwise, we are linked with the world, while partaking of the Lord’s supper, we shall be disciplined by the Lord. In the letter to the angel of the assembly in Thyatira, where the Lord’s rights had been denied, He speaks as “Son of God, he that has his eyes as a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass” Revelation 2:18. In that assembly, the rights that the Lord had over the affections of His own had been denied. As our brother has just said, the Lord has established His rights over our affections through death, and where His rights have been refused Him, He speaks as “The Son of God, he that has his eyes as a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass” (Revelation 2:18), which means that He will execute judgment.
— The jealousy of the Lord is what preserves us, that He may have no rival. “Set me as a seal upon thy heart, As a seal upon thine arm: For love is strong as death; Jealousy is cruel as Sheol: The flashes thereof are flashes of fire, Flames of Jah” Song Of Songs 8:6.
— [p. 203] The Lord will deal with the profession around us in the severest manner, because the rights of His love have been refused Him. But, as I said, we have also to do with the saints, because the fellowship is, so to speak, a partnership; those who are in partnership know very well that all the partners are responsible to one another. The brethren have therefore the right to ask us to give account of our conduct; they have also the right to exercise discipline if required. In chapter 5 we are enlightened as to the authority which the assembly possesses; in order to execute discipline, as being gathered together, they have the Lord with them. Paul said that he had judged already to deliver to Satan that person who had sinned, for destruction of the flesh, “that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” 1 Corinthians 5:5. We have not now the assembly as it existed at Corinth, for the public body has failed, nevertheless, the responsibility of exercising discipline rests upon us, and the Lord will always be with the twos or threes dealing with evil which manifests itself. Otherwise, all would be corrupted by the leaven of wickedness. And the apostle continues, “But now I have written to you, if any one called brother be fornicator, or avaricious, or idolater, or abusive, or a drunkard, or rapacious, not to mix with him; with such a one not even to eat” 1 Corinthians 5:11. With such, the saints are not even to eat. In that way, this epistle teaches us how we may remain pure and be rid of leaven. All these observations relate to the question of fellowship, and what this epistle says of it shows how that fellowship is worthy of being preserved from all evil. In the first chapter it says that we have been called into the fellowship of God’s Son. In chapter 10, we have part in the fellowship of the death of Christ - “the communion of the blood of the Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:16) and “the communion of the body of the Christ” 1 Corinthians 10:16. In the last chapter of the second epistle we have the communion [p. 204] of the Spirit of God. Those are infinitely precious things, dear brethren, things which it is absolutely necessary to preserve with the greatest vigilance on the part of us all. To lay stress on these thoughts we have, in chapter 5, the feast of unleavened bread. It says that “our passover, Christ, has been sacrificed” 1 Corinthians 5:7. That was His personal part, and what a part! It involved that He was forsaken by God. Our corresponding part is to provide the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. Thus the feast is celebrated which continues every day of the week; and it is in eating the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth that we are made fit to partake of the Lord’s supper. In Matthew and Mark, it says that it was while the disciples were eating the passover that the Lord’s supper was introduced. It says, “And as they were eating, Jesus, having taken bread” Mark 14:22. So these chapters 5 and 10 of the first epistle to the Corinthians are occupied with the celebration of the feast of unleavened bread.
— Is the unleavened bread the appropriation of Christ?
— In Christ, sincerity and truth have had their most complete expression. In the Lord’s walk there was nothing that was not absolutely true and sincere. So, in us, the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth corresponds to Christ.
— Would you say that the passover presents the objective side, while the unleavened bread the subjective side?
— Very good. We provide the unleavened bread now. From the outset, the believer begins to provide unleavened bread. All who desire fellowship with the saints should possess unleavened bread; they should show that they are sincere, and that what they desire to do is not with the object of imitating others. When the children of Judah and Benjamin came to David, David went out to meet them, and [p. 205] he throws out a challenge to their hearts. “If ye come peaceably to me to help me, my heart shall be knit unto you; but if to betray me to mine enemies, seeing there is no wrong in my hands, the God of our fathers see it and rebuke it” 1 Chronicles 12:17. If we do not come with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, we shall betray the Lord sooner or later. Unleavened bread tends to keep us humble and small. Unleavened bread would thus characterise all our readings and all our preachings and all our communications with one another. A person who eats unleavened bread will not vaunt himself. He will not wish to appear great in the eyes of others. The Lord’s model for the kingdom was “a little child”. We are to retain the character of the little child during our whole life down here.
— Perhaps it would be good if you would dwell further on the unleavened bread and its meaning for us.
— Leaven, in Scripture, is a figure of what inflates. It is what characterises men in the world. Men naturally have the desire to appear great in the eyes of others, and to attain their end, they sacrifice sincerity and truth. In this respect, there is much dishonesty among men; there is much flattery. All these things are leaven.
— And it is the world that produces it.
— The Lord said, speaking of His disciples, “They are not of the world, as I am not of the world” John 17:16. So the believer is maintained in correspondence to Christ by eating unleavened bread. He maintains sincerity and truth in all his circumstances and in all his relations. He does not cause trouble among his brethren because he is happy to be the least. The Lord said, “Whosoever would be great among you, shall be your minister; and whosoever would be first of you shall be bondman of all” Mark 10:43,44. It is after this manner that we are together to eat the Lord’s supper.
[p. 206] We are in correspondence with the Lord. So we are prepared to partake of that which shows His love for us.
— We are the little flock, and the Lord said, “Fear not, little flock” Luke 12:32.
— In chapter 53 of Isaiah, it speaks of the Lord; it says that there was no guile in His mouth, and immediately God salutes Him as “my righteous servant” Isaiah 53:11. One must be without guile, if one would serve according to God.
— And now, answering to that spirit of humility, the saints gather together. In those who are small God would display what He considers as being great and marked by dignity. So therefore, before the saints are viewed as met together, we have, in chapter 11, teaching which applies to the saints in their houses, that is to say, order according to God in creation, now that Christ has become Man. It says, “I wish you to know that the Christ is the head of every man, but the woman’s head is the man, and the Christ’s head God” 1 Corinthians 11:3. God preserves thus His public order, now that Christ has become Man. It is by observing this section of our chapter that we shall be preserved, in our houses, from the spirit that characterises the world at the present moment — the spirit that would set aside all authority that comes down from above.
— God, in the children of wisdom, vindicates Christ as the One who, at each step of His path, depended on His Head, God.
— We shall not be in the assembly as the body of Christ, unless there is in us correspondence with the teaching of the first part of this chapter. Sometimes a clerical spirit is shown among the saints; but we shall learn to live in subjection, if we see that the Christ is the Head of every man, and that the man is the head of the woman, and that God is the Head of Christ. This order will be seen in the millennium,
[p. 207] because God will have taken away all lawlessness; but at present, lawlessness remains in the world, and God desires to present now in the saints in testimony that which will be seen later, during the millennium. So, each brother, in his own house, takes the place of head; he confesses thus that Christ is his own Head, and that God is Christ’s Head. Wisdom comes down then from God through Christ, and through the man, who is head in his house. And the woman, recognising man as her head, herself also expresses this wisdom. The divine order is seen in the saints, although it is not yet seen in the world. The man ought to be uncovered when praying or prophesying, and the woman ought to be covered, as a sign of subjection, and that not only for the eyes of men, but for the eyes of angels.
— “On account of the angels” (1 Corinthians 11:10), it says.
— The testimony of God in us is not only for the world, but also for the angels.
— What is the sense of the expression, “the Lord’s supper”?
— The word is only used twice, the first time in this passage, and the second time in the Revelation, where we have “the Lord’s day” (Revelation 1:10) (or “the dominical or lordly day” — see note, Revelation 1:10). In each passage it is a question of the Lord’s authority. That expression is used here because the Corinthians had set aside the Lord’s authority in the way in which they were observing the Supper. They were coming together for the worse. It is a sad thing if, in gathering together, we lose, when we ought to gain much. And the apostle Paul observes that the cause of it was that there existed divisions among them. One of the evidences of division was that each was taking his own supper: one was hungry and another drank to excess. They considered the occasion of the Lord’s supper as an ordinary occasion of eating and drinking. They were eating and drinking to excess.
— [p. 208] It is evident that in our day the saints would not do anything so gross, but we might all the same meet together in a party spirit.
— A man who was eating his own supper before others was selfish; he was eating to excess and allowing his brother to be hungry. Although these gross things are not done now, we might nevertheless meet in a selfish way; if, for example, a brother takes the whole meeting into his own hands, he shuts out others. The basic principle of the Lord’s supper is mutuality.
— Nobody ought to be specially distinguished.
— When the saints met together at Troas, Paul was with them. It does not say, ‘Paul and his company being assembled’, but “We being assembled to break bread” Acts 20:7. Paul, among them, was as one of them. It is true that afterwards he made a discourse, but that was in his apostolic capacity, and that discourse had a prophetic bearing; but the brethren had met together, Paul among them, to break bread. It is a question therefore of mutuality, and each brother here present ought to be free to take part according to his measure. The sisters are to remain silent, according to this chapter; nevertheless, they partake of the Supper like the brothers.
— But we must not forget to eat the unleavened bread, in order to be suitable.
— We assemble “to break bread”. But in assembling thus, we are already eating, for we keep the feast of unleavened bread.
— Immediately before the passage that we were quoting from the Acts, it says, “after the days of unleavened bread” (Acts 20:6); each had partaken of unleavened bread; it is mutuality.
— I believe that what we have said as to unleavened bread helps us much when we meet together. No brother claims to be great, and in partaking of the Supper, he does not shut out others. At the end of the chapter it says, “When ye come together to eat, wait for one another”. There were other things which were to be adjusted; the apostle does not adjust them in writing; he will set them in order when he comes to them. It reminds us how great was the need of order in the assembly. The Lord’s supper has been the greatest cause of controversy among Christians, and all kinds of absurdities have enveloped it. In a great religious system, the Supper has been carried to such a point that it has become an object of idolatrous worship. In another, it has been so obscured by human innovations that it can no longer be recognised. Concerning all these observations, we can only say, “It is not to eat the Lord’s supper”. If the apostle had to say that to the Corinthians, how much more does that apply to the religious organisations of our day. But he says, “I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”. There was no addition. That which the Lord did in the room at Jerusalem is what He communicated to Paul. So it was with the ark of the covenant, when David set it at Jerusalem. The ark had passed through the hands of the Philistines, but nevertheless it contained the tables of the covenant; nothing had been added. It was preserved in its original simplicity, as a type of the Lord Jesus Christ. Likewise, the Lord’s supper was presented to the Corinthians as the Lord Himself had instituted it.
— As the ark had been preserved intact, although it had been in enemy hands, so the Lord’s supper is found in our hands in our day, freed from every human innovation.
— We have no hesitation in saying that we possess it as the Lord gave it to Paul. And how important it is for us to preserve it from every human innovation! It is a memorial that the Lord has Himself instituted; that is why the apostle Paul says, “I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the [p. 210] Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come”. There is the Supper in its simplicity as it was given to Paul! And I believe it is right to compare it to the ark as David established it at Zion. The ark had been in the house of a certain man, Obed-Edom, but it did not belong to a man’s house. Its place was in the holiest, in the tabernacle or the temple. So, in this chapter, Paul distinguishes between our houses and the assembly. He places the Lord’s supper in relation to the assembly; he separates it formally from ordinary meals in a believer’s house. The Lord’s supper therefore is not an ordinary meal; it is a memorial having a spiritual significance. Now, it is for us to consider if what has been given to us is kept and preserved from all local custom, from all routine, from all human innovation. Paul said, “And thus I ordain in all the assemblies” 1 Corinthians 7:17. Therefore, wherever I go, I ought to see the Lord’s supper entirely free from local customs; the same order, down to its smallest details, ought to characterise it in each locality. There should be only one loaf, and only one vessel containing what is to be drunk.
— The breaking of bread recalls to us our Lord Jesus Christ. He said, “This do in remembrance of me”.
— A piece of bread would not set out the thought of “one loaf”, would it?
— That seems to me quite clear. A piece of bread is a part of a thing. That would rather suggest a division. Several of the sects in Christendom pretend [p. 211] to be part of a whole; but in the face of such a suggestion the apostle says, “Is the Christ divided?” 1 Corinthians 1:13. So, a piece of bread reminds us rather of these divisions, instead of what is one whole. In these epistles the assembly is viewed as “one body”, and the human body is a figure. Every human body is an organism complete in itself. The assembly is a complete organism. Therefore a piece of bread could not correctly symbolise the body. For that, a whole loaf is necessary.
— What is the meaning of these words: “Not distinguishing the body”?
— I believe that refers to Christ’s body. In chapter 16 of Matthew, we have a reference to bread. The disciples reasoned among themselves saying, Because we have taken no bread. The Lord had warned them against the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, “and they reasoned among themselves, saying, Because we have taken no bread” Matthew 16:7. The Lord says to them, “Why reason ye among yourselves, O ye of little faith, because ye have taken no bread?” Matthew 16:8. The disciples were themselves the bread. On their part, it was unbelief to wish to carry material bread. The leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees would be in danger of inflating them. So the Lord speaks of “the five loaves” Matthew 16:9. He was not speaking at all of material bread, but He was speaking of them, and, pursuing the thought of the leaven, they themselves were to form the bread which was in danger of being inflated by the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. And we read in the tenth chapter of Corinthians: “We, being many, are one loaf, one body; for we all partake of that one loaf” 1 Corinthians 10:17.
— Would you tell us what is the difference between Luke and this epistle? In Luke, it says, “This is my body which is given for you” (Luke 22:19), and in Corinthians, “This is my body, which is for you”.
— I believe that in Luke, the Lord wished to bring [p. 212] out the thought that His body was sacrificed for them. There is another translation which says, This is my body which is broken for you; that is to say, that it is for our enjoyment, as it says again, “Take this: this is my body” Mark 14:22.
— If we have the thought of the Lord, there are no divisions in the body of Christ.
— Why are there so many Christians, in our meetings, who abstain from the Supper?
— Do you ask them sometimes why they do not break bread? They ought to be able to answer that question.
— Do you not think that the first part of the tenth chapter is not realised? The state of soul is not suitable.
— With persons whom I know to be Christians, I always seize the opportunity to put the question to them, Why? I sometimes ask them, Why should you be the last to bring king David back to his house? David had been rejected. Now the men of Judah are ready to bring him back, according him his place. The Lord has a right to my heart, and if others have opened their heart to Him, why should I be the last to open my heart to Christ? The Lord’s supper is the appointed way for calling Him to remembrance, in order that He may have His place in my heart. Do you not think that would help Christians who do not break bread, if one raised this question in their heart? Another thing: Why should I keep the Lord waiting? He says, “Behold, I stand at the door and am knocking” Revelation 3:20. Why should I leave the Lord at the door? Why not open the door? Why not let Him come in? “If any one hear my voice and open the door, I will come in unto him and sup with him, and he with me” Revelation 3:20. I think those who are outside the circle have shut the door to the Lord. It may be they have love for Him, but they do not give evidence of it. In the Song of Songs, the spouse says, “Why [p. 213] should I be as one veiled beside the flocks of thy companions?” Song Of Songs 1:7. Her love for the Lord was doubtful. Also He says, “If thou know not, thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, and feed thy kids beside the shepherds’ booths” Song Of Songs 1:8. She was to follow the footsteps of the flock. She wanted to know where the Lord was, because she wanted to be near Him. That is why she is told to take her place by the footsteps of the flock and to feed beside the shepherds’ booths. Then, she says, “While the king is at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth its fragrance. A bundle of myrrh is my beloved unto me; he shall pass the night between my breasts” Song Of Songs 1:12,13. The Lord is now her Object; and I think that those who have affection for the Lord, but who do not partake of the Lord’s supper, cause us to infer that they have doubts.
— They cannot testify to the reality of their affection in answering to His desires.
— “He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me” John 14:21. The Lord died for me, and He desires that I should remember Him in that way. If I do not announce His death, I am not observing His commandments, for it says, “As often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come”. It does not say merely that the death of the Lord is announced, but ye announce it. That must be carefully noticed: it is you who announce it. Those who do not break bread have no part in it. They may say that the Lord died for them, but they do not announce His death.
— In that the Lord loses something; and we also lose something. There is sometimes a little timidity, and in that case there would be need to encourage.
— The fault is perhaps with those who break bread, if they do not encourage their brethren.
— If I “go ... forth by the footsteps of the flock” (Song Of Songs 1:8),
[p. 214] I shall be encouraged by the fact that there are others. It is very sad that those who are Christians here, may not be included in the “we” and “ye” of this chapter.
— Partaking of the Supper may be regarded as answering to the Lord’s commandments.
Reading with J.T. at La Varenne (Haute-Loire), 14th May, 1926, afternoon.