THE LORD'S TABLE AND SUPPER

THE LORD’S TABLE AND SUPPER

1 Corinthians 10 and 1 Corinthians 11

Ques Why “flee from idolatry”?

FER Because of the exclusive character of Christianity. He might as well have told them to flee from Judaism. If they went on with Christianity, they must separate from the things of this world. Idolatry is a much wider thing than we think. Christianity is intensely exclusive. It is the temple of God and it is therefore holy and so it excludes all that is not holy, and certainly idolatry is not holy. There is a vast amount of idolatry all around us, for there is the universal acknowledgement of the god of this world in the Christianity of the present day. With these Corinthians there was not absolute separation from idolatry.

Ques Why does he use the word “flee”?

FER Flee is a very strong word, you flee from what you are afraid of.

GB The principle would be the same today and you must not tamper with these things; by doing so you involve others. What you do in that way you cannot ignore, because of the effect upon others.

Ques Suppose you go into Westminster Abbey, would that be bad? would it involve others?

FER I will tell you the effect that it would have upon me. It would be that I should think you did not consider the thing so very bad after all. All these cathedrals are relics of popery and idolatry.

Rem Fleeing is our only safety.

FER Yes, you must not tamper with them.

Ques What is the meaning of verse 7: “The people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play”?

FER It is most solemn; it is in the absence of Moses they did this; with us it is the indulgence of ourselves in the absence of Christ, as if it did not matter whether He is absent or not, “They sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play”.

Rem It is a sacramental system without separation; they ruled as kings “without us”.

FER Exactly and in system everything is neutralised because there is no separation.

JSA This separation would lead up to the assembly.

FER Yes. Chapter 10 is separation; chapter 11 is seclusion. We come to the Lord’s supper through the Lord’s table.

Ques What is the Lord’s table?

FER It is the fellowship of the death of Christ morally. The apostle takes up the Supper to set it forth, but he might just as well have used baptism: only baptism is the act of another, whereas the partaking of the Supper is your own act. You commit yourself to His death. It is your own act and deed. The Lord’s table is not only for the Lord’s day morning, but always. The bread is the table. He might have taken them up on the ground of their baptism and if the Corinthians had been true to their baptism they would not have needed this tenth chapter. He takes them up on the ground of the Supper because it is their own act to partake of that. Where people are content to go on with the world you will find there is a great element of idolatry.

Ques. What is an idol?

FER Anything that usurps the proper place of God in the heart. Children may be: anything may be.

EHC We may say that the normal thought of the Lord’s table takes in all Christians.

FER Yes, it undoubtedly takes in the whole. I never heard of the table when I was in the Church of England, because they had no idea of fellowship. Here the apostle brings in chapter 10 because there must be separation before you can have seclusion in chapter 11.

Ques Why is the cup prominent in chapter 10?

FER I do not know unless he takes up the sacrificial order.

^[p. 12] Ques What connection is there between the passover and the Supper?

FER You should always be keeping the passover — the feast. I am always in the fellowship of His death, but in the fellowship I am bound to regard others. The feast of unleavened bread is always going on for us.

Ques Was the blood significant of the intensity of their separation?

FER Yes, he takes them up on a ground with which they were familiar.

EHC Is “we bless” we eulogise?

FER Blessing the cup is like the Lord’s doing it, we all break the bread, it is one act in fellowship.

Ques The meeting does not begin properly till after the breaking of the bread?

FER No. I always break the bread and pour out the wine together, for people look upon it as a dual service. You must have the figure of death in their separation. It is better that the wine should be poured out already and in the cup when we come in.

Ques You do not look upon the breaking of the bread and the pouring out of the wine as if it were the Lord doing it?

FER No.

GB It is not a ministerial act; one does it as representing the rest.

FER There is no pre-eminence in the body. In 1 Corinthians 12 the head is not pre-eminent, all the members are inter-dependent. I utterly repudiate the idea of any pre-eminence in the body, every member is dependent upon the other.

Ques If it is all one service why do we have a giving of thanks between the bread and the wine?

FER I should not like to pass over the word “The cup which we bless”.

JBD What is the fellowship of the body of Christ?

FER You must take it up in connection with His body — death. Verse 17 is the mere fact that by our own ^[p. 13] showing we are one body and so we partake of one loaf. By the fact of our partaking of the one loaf we become one company — one body. When the fellowship of Christ’s death is recognised we are in one fellowship — one body, and we must be careful not to do anything to compromise the fellowship. I cannot say, ‘I will go to that mission or this chapel or church’. It is a partnership and we must not compromise that partnership.

Ques What are the deeds of the partnership?

FER The bond is the death of Christ. We all form one company by partaking of one loaf — one body. The priests were all of one company, one family by partaking of the one altar.

Ques Does the loaf represent Christ’s own body?

FER Yes. He says, “This is my body”.

Ques Is the unity — the fellowship — expressed in our each partaking of it?

FER Yes, by your own act and deed.

WW There is a question which it seems to us would involve the fellowship greatly exercising the saints here just now, it is as regards marriage.

FER Oh! better there were none!

WW But this is the difficulty. Suppose someone in fellowship were to marry an unconverted man, would that act involve the fellowship?

FER Well, it would be a thing done without the fellowship of the saints.

Ques Should such be put out?

FER No, but she subjects herself to rebuke because of doing in self-will what she did not do with the fellowship of the saints.

Ques Who should rebuke her?

FER Some one with the needed amount of moral power.

JB The very naming of it in the meeting would be a rebuke.

Ques Must the subject of the rebuke ^[p. 14] be present?

FER You could not make that compulsory, but I should take good care she would know she had been rebuked. I have a great horror of defiling the temple of the Lord. The ceremony of marriage is simple in itself, but it is most serious not to have the fellowship of the assembly in it.

Ques As to marriage what do you think about it?

FER There should be none. It is not the time for it.

To return to our subject, the Supper is intended to call the Lord into presence. “He was known of them in breaking of bread”. It is in the Supper we get into company with Him; it brings Him into presence, John 20: “He showed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord”. The Lord Himself was present the first time. We touch Him in affection, in the Supper. He was going to be present in a new way. In 1 Corinthians everything is presented in a very elementary way. It begins with “the same night in which he was betrayed”. In John 13 we find treachery comes in and breaks the company. Twelve is a significant number; it is complete. When treachery has broken all up He gives a new way in which He will be present with them.

EHC What is the form of the word “remembrance”?

FER It is Himself who is remembered. He was dead, and is alive again. You call Himself into presence. You could not do that with regard to anyone else who had died — they are not alive again — say the Duke of Wellington, you could not call him into presence for he is not alive again. “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and behold, I am alive for evermore”. We call Him to mind in His death, that is in the greatest act of His love.

Rem If it is in the breaking of bread He is called into presence, it is a long time in our meeting before that takes place, for it is put off so late.

FER We do things better in England. You ^[p. 15] notice how heavy the meeting is when it is deferred, and hymns and prayers take its place. The Supper is introductory, it would produce in the hearts of the saints that which they try to bring about by prayers and hymns. The four chapters in 1 Corinthians which treat of the subject are continuous, 11 - 14 and the Supper is the first thing touched.

Ques When should the box be introduced?

FER I think immediately after the breaking of bread in order that everything of a formal nature might be done together. I would give out the notices after the box has gone round in the early part of the meeting. You then have freedom for the Lord to act on His own line; no one has any authority to close the meeting. I think it is presumption for any one to take upon himself to close the meeting. It is wonderful what an effect the Supper has on people. They come to the Supper meeting often from pressure at home, and where things must be seen to before they can start, and they come in a bustle, but after the Supper has been partaken of there is a calm.

Ques Would it not be better to have the box at the door going out?

FER No. I connect it in my mind with what is an expression of fellowship and in going round I would connect it with that part of the meeting which expresses fellowship.

Ques Why introduce it into the morning meeting at all?

FER What then would you do? It is a necessity, and a thing which should be done in fellowship and consequently connected with the meeting, which is of that character, and as we are speaking of it, I would take the opportunity of remarking that there is not enough liberality in putting into the box, for if it is a thing done in fellowship it should be done liberally You say we bring the Lord into presence in partaking of the Supper, does that bring ^[p. 16] Him into the midst No. He touches the affections as you call Him to mind, and gives an impulse to the whole thing. The object of the Supper is to put everything into place. No one should break up the meeting, but we would all have a sense of the spiritual power declining.

Ques Would you pray for the gospel at the end of the meeting?

FER We find that done because people in fellowship imitate instead of setting an example. We are good theorists, but we are improving in our practice. Faith will not help you in the assembly — only love will do that, that is why at the end of 1 Corinthians 12 the apostle breaks off his subject and brings in affection — love.

Ques We need not meditate upon a subject before taking part?

FER No. We do not go there to speak. J.B.S. used to say he went like a blank sheet of paper. Worship is better than speaking, but the Lord may perhaps make use of the opportunity in that way to help the saints.

Ques What about ministry before the breaking of bread?

FER You have not given the Lord what is due to Him in the Supper and I think it is very objectionable to read, minister, or do anything of the kind before the breaking of bread has taken place.

Rem The breaking of bread itself should do that in the soul which reading and ministry, etc., has been resorted to, to effect.

FER Yes, the Supper has a great effect upon people in quieting them and putting them in touch with the Lord and it would do it at once only that hymns are given out and spoil it.