So as I mentioned last week, the elders are revisiting or visiting again this topic of the Lord's Supper, of communion. And as we reconsider our approach here as a church and would look to make some changes in the future, our goal is to lead us through a study of the doctrine, of the practice, Pictures behind communion of the why and the what of communion. If this is going to be a normal part of our church worship here, it's every month it's an ordinance given to us by our Lord Jesus Christ. We simply cannot afford to not understand this element of our worship. It's too precious. It's too valuable. We cannot be ignorant of what the Lord and His Word has for us. in the ordinance of communion. I mentioned last week, I'll mention it again because I think it bears repeating. Our Lord Jesus Christ took precious hours on the night which He died to lay out for us the elements of this aspect of our worship. to take that time to institute a new ordinance, a new covenant in His blood. And so we just can't afford to miss this, to be negligent in these things. So we'll keep that in mind. I will confess that as I've begun studying, communion has been a topic of study for me for several years now, and as I continue to read on it, I am continually, again even this week more than I expected, continually amazed at how many aspects there are to the Lord's Supper. I wouldn't hesitate to say it is And now I'm hesitating to say it. I want to say the most complex, multifaceted area of theology I've ever studied. There might be an objection to that, but it's at least one of, I cannot hesitate when I say, one of the most complex, multifaceted aspects of Christian theology I've ever taken time to consider. There are so many things going on at the communion table that it's hard to even try to wrestle them onto a handout and order them in order to teach through them. So this is a rich study. There's more meat on the bone, you could say, than we really even have time to look at. So we'll just pick up a few in our study. The first or the second thing you'll see, I guess it is the first thing you'll see, We mentioned, and this will be a little bit of review from last week, but I want to kind of parachute into the middle of the conversation. We talked about the differing aspects of communion. We looked at, it is a remembrance of past redemption. It is a celebration of a present means of grace. And it is in anticipation of a future deliverance. And so three different aspects of redemption are and ought to be captured. in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. We remember what He has done looking backward to when redemption was accomplished for us at the cross. There are memorial aspects where we look back to our Savior upon the cross, suffering and dying for us, having his body broken and his blood shed, that we might be saved from our sins. There is a past memorial or a memorial looking back to what has already been accomplished. That's basically all we got to last week. We got sidetracked a little bit on looking at the memorial view and didn't get into the spiritual presence view, which I tie to this aspect of it. There's also a present aspect to communion. What God is doing redemptively in the lives of each and every one of his saints who participate by faith in the table. There is a real exchange, there is a real benefit, a real nourishment going on in that moment and around the Lord's table. So there's present realities. I won't wax too eloquent on this right now, but if you want to make a middle note, that's where we're going to speak of the table as a means of God's grace. We'll explain what we mean by that, what we don't mean by that. But when I talk about present celebration, in my mind I'm thinking of the means of grace and also the means of grace that flow through the spiritual presence of Christ at the supper. So there's past, there's present, and then there's future where we look ahead to the wedding supper of the Lamb. We look forward with hope, with confidence of things not yet seen. where we anticipate He will come back, He will take His bride to be with Him, we will sit at His table, we will eat bread and drink wine in His presence, and we will forever be with Him. So those are the three aspects of our celebration with regards to redemptive history. So if you want to look at, if you want to think of this as aspects of redemption or being redeemed, those remembrances and celebrations take place in those three. You'll remember that one of my critiques of the memorial view, and we'll get into that in a minute, is that it does this well, but it often doesn't push beyond that, doesn't push past celebration. So keep that in mind as we walk through all this material that there's past, present, and future aspects to this. Number two, let's look at the different names that are used of the Lord's Table. You should see that on point two on your outline. Also remind me if we have questions in the midst of this to repeat it for the sake and benefit of our listening audience or folks. I went back and listened to the audio and you can't hear anybody but me. So I'm giving answers that to questions that no one knows what I'm talking about. So if I don't repeat your question, just flag me down and say, hey, could you remember to repeat that? And I'll try to get better at that. The scripture uses a variety of names to refer to this celebration of the Lord's table. Probably the one we use the least is the one that's used the most, ironically. More times it's called the giving of thanks. You can see the references there in Matthew and Mark and 1 Corinthians. So the Lord's Supper is to be a time of thanksgiving, a time, you could say, of celebration. a time where we remember what our God has, is, and will do. There's your past, present, and future. We remember what our God has, is, and will do for His people. We thank Him and praise Him and rejoice in what He's doing in redemption. So there shouldn't be a celebration of the table that isn't thankful, that isn't celebratory, that isn't joyful. It's in its very name we have captured for us a time of thanksgiving. You'll see secondly there it's called a breaking of bread. That's the kind of the shorthand way of referring to the table. In Acts chapter 2 it says that every week on the first day of the week the apostles and those gathered with the apostles would gather and devote themselves to the apostles' teaching, to prayer, and to fellowship, and to the breaking of bread. So the first summary of what we see happening weekly in the church. There's devotion to the Word of God in the Apostles teaching, there's the church actively fellowshipping, there's the church calling on God in prayer, and there's the church celebrating what he has done for them in communion or the breaking of bread as it's called in Acts. You'll see under letter C there it's called a sharing in the blood and the body of Christ. This is where we get our word communion. The word used in 1 Corinthians there is the word for fellowship, for koinonia, Yeah, a sharing or communion in the body and the blood of Christ. And so that picture is so prominent through the Lord's Supper that we've actually, I think it's at the top of the board here for what our series is called, a communion. An inherent, even in this name, is a transaction, a transfer. You can't commune with someone, or say you have communed with someone if there is no interactions with that person. So this is, you'll see already, I'll be driving at means of grace through that text in 1 Corinthians. It's a sharing, it's a participation, it's a fellowship with Christ. That's what the table is. Letter D there, it's called the Cup and the Table of the Lord. You'll often hear us refer to it as the Lord's Table. That's, I think, one of Pastor Ray's favorite ways of referring to it. He always asks, whose table is this? This is the Lord's Table. He's the host, and he's the one who invites us to his table. And then lastly, it's called the Lord's Supper there from 1 Corinthians 11. So there's a variety of names used in scripture, and those names show us that there is not a singular emphasis within this sacrament. There are multiple facets, multiple things going on all at once in the Lord's table, and you can even see scripture using a variety of names to help us see the facets on that diamond. to show us that there are so many elements at play all at once. So those are the names that scripture used for the sacrament of the Lord's table or of communion. Look at number three. We'll quickly review communion systems. I promise I won't reteach all of this. I know it was so stirring you did your devotions out of what we talked about on transubstantiation last time and it, I'm sure, just enriched your soul. But one thing all of these systems have in common, at least in the way that we refer to them in these titles, is that they are a reference, not entirely, But they do speak to the means or the presence of Christ at the table. So transubstantiation we talked about last time is the Roman Catholic false view of communion that sees him as being physically present. I think you have that in your notes. That he is physically there. And they would view the signs and the symbols of communion, the bread and the cup, as, in my estimation, no longer becoming a sign. A sign, by definition, points to a what? An object. Well, in transubstantiation, is there any difference between the sign, the bread and the wine, and the object? No, there's not. They would view that the sign becomes the object itself. And so they fall off the bus on that side of things, as well as many other areas where they are misunderstanding the Lord's Supper. So they would say, how is Christ present in the Supper? He's here physically and bodily. So we reject that. consubstantiation, or kind of the way the early Reformation or restating of this position would be from Luther, and he viewed again a physical presence, but the physical presence wasn't the bread and the wine itself but it's kind of hard to understand exactly what he was trying to drive at but it was in and around and under and beneath and not specifically the bread and wine but all around and there but Luther still held to a physical presence and we reject that on a number number of bases, but one of them is, and again we won't get way off the deep end on this, but where is Christ physically now? He's in heaven. So he's at the right hand of the power of glory. He was raised bodily. So where is his physical presence? It's in heaven. And we don't believe that his body, his physical body is present in all places at all times. So he's in heaven, he's not at the communion table. So we would rule out both of these as wrong false views of communion. Then we looked at memorial. And while there can be variations of this degree in general, especially as those who would follow Zwingli have summarized this view, this view does not see Christ as being present in any particular special way. So they don't hold to a physical presence. They don't hold to a spiritual presence. It's a memorial. These are signs that point us to remember back. And so we think on Him. We look back to what He's done. Those are good aspects of communion, good and proper aspects of communion. But they would say that there's no presence, no special presence. They would still say God is omnipresent in all places, all ways, and all of that. But they wouldn't hold to a special presence. The fourth view, and you can see under number four in your handout, would be Calvin's view. It would be the comprehensive view of Reformed confessions. catechisms, and really the predominant view of the Reformation and beyond in Reformed circles, this would be the spiritual presence of Christ. This view says, yes, there's an aspect of communion that is memorial, where we look back and we remember what He has done. All of that granted. But they would say that the presence of Christ spiritually is manifested in the observance of the Lord's table. So Christ is there by means and ministry of His Holy Spirit. That in the ministry of the Holy Spirit, He comes to His people in a special way at the Lord's Supper. And these two would disagree over on this side of things, particularly with how they interpret the communion, and the elements are often referred to as signs and symbols. You'll see that through all of the Reformed confessions we'll look at today. They're called signs and symbols. So a sign, as we just drew up here a little bit ago, a sign points to an object. A sign teaches something. A sign shows something. A sign is to be distinguished from the object, but not entirely divorced or separated from that object. In a memorial view, now again, there might be differences here, but in a memorial view, the elements, the bread and the cup, they point to the Lord Jesus Christ, His body broken, His blood shed. But one aspect of them is that they declare His absence. He's not here. And again, this is from their writings on the topic. They would view that he isn't here and we celebrate him. I would disagree with that use of signs and symbols of the communion table. The spiritual presence view says, yes, the symbols of communion, the bread and the wine, point to the Lord Jesus Christ, but they do not point to his absence. They point to his presence. they point to His presence. And so there's a sense in which, in a Reformed understanding of the table, in our understanding of the table here at the church, that when we see the bread and we see the cup, there is a sense in which we recognize them as symbols. They're not the real object. They're not the object. They're pointing to the object. But what they declare on behalf of our Lord is that while you cannot see me, I have not left you. that while you may not see my body with your eyes, and here's the aspect of communion as a pledge, I pledge to you I'm with you to the end of the age, he says. So every time we take communion and we see the elements, you'll see this as we look at how the Heidelberg says it, as certainly or as surely as we take from the hand of the one who serves and we take the bread and we drink the cup, so surely, even more so, is he pledging and oathing to us his presence. So far from the elements saying that Christ is absent from his church, We agree that he is bodily, but he is present with his church spiritually. And I think that that is one aspect of communion that is incredibly rich, incredibly encouraging. That every time we take the supper, we say by the actions that we are following the Lord in obedience of the supper, though we cannot see him, he is here. He has not left us. Our husband has not left his bride. He's here by ministry of his Holy Spirit and he communes, he fellowships with his people. So that is one of the present aspects of communion. That He is here and He is communing with His people. He is not away from them, but He is here with us. He would never leave us. What we mean by means of grace And the reason I would put these two side by side is I really don't know how to fully, I don't think we should, fully separate His presence from His grace. If He is spiritually present at the supper, He's there for a reason. He's there to impart blessing and grace to His people. If he's absent from the table, if he's absent from any special presence or any presence whatsoever, speaking of a means of grace really doesn't make sense if his presence is gone. So means of grace and spiritual presence, as I read and study, are inextricably tied together in how we think through and explain the supper. What we mean by means of grace, let's first consider what it's not. I think there's a lot of confusion and misinformation on what we mean by means of grace. When we speak of the sacraments and the word as a means of grace, those are the two traditional Reformed items that always make the list of objective means of grace. What we do not mean is that these are saving ordinances. Who can think of an illustration of how a sacrament is a saving ordinance? Liz. Oh, OK, that's a slightly different, you're right, they did sell those means of grace, which are very different from what we as Protestants would think of. But think of baptism and think of saving grace. Who believes in that, right? Baptismal regeneration, they would hold to the sacrament as a, what's that? Yeah, well, baptismal regeneration would be Church of Christ, as I'm thinking of. Lots of folks have fallen off the wagon on this side of things, yeah. So they would say that by the application of the sacrament, there is inherent value and grace in the sacrament itself. And when applied to someone, they receive its saving benefits. We don't believe that the bread or the wine or the water of communion has inherently any value or grace or power or magical effect in and of itself. It's plain water. unleavened bread, it's regular wine, but it's by the way in which the Spirit uses that celebration and that observance where grace comes. So what we do not mean is saving grace. We don't mean that That is the way in which redeeming grace comes to God's people is through those aspects. We also don't mean, let me see what I have here. Yeah, I guess I covered both of them. We don't mean that saving grace comes and we don't mean that there's inherent value endowed into the items or elements themselves. There's nothing special about the water. Depending on I mean, whether it's in the baptismal tank or river or the ocean, it's just water. It's just bread. It's just communion. There's nothing special or holy about it. We don't venerate the bread in the cup. We don't worship the bread in the cup. We don't call the water baptism holy water. These are regular elements, regular means. So when you hear someone in the reform camp speaking of means of grace, do not be thinking that they mean either of those two things. Here's what we do mean, or here's what it is. The means of grace, and I'll read you a definition from people far smarter and accomplished than I am. Mr. Burkoff says, a fallen man receives, I believe you have this in your handout, yes. Fallen man receives all the blessings of salvation out of the eternal fountain of the grace of God. In virtue of the merits of Christ, and here we see the means, and through the operation of the Holy Spirit. Richard Barcellas, who used to be Pastor Kelly's pastor a while ago, said that the means of grace are the delivery system God has instituted to bring grace. That is spiritual, what do you mean by grace? Spiritual power, spiritual change, spiritual help, spiritual fortitude, spiritual blessings to needy souls on the earth. One of the ways in which we would see this is you're all familiar with this verse. Ephesians 1 verse 3. Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Why is He ever blessed? The rest of the verse answers that. Who has blessed us, so He has poured blessing into His church in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places. So the way in which, if I could erase a little bit here, the flow of blessing, of grace, if I can spell right this morning, It is the Father who blesses or decrees the blessing is through the ministry, the mediation of the Son. Our blessings come and only ever come through the work and the life of the Lord Jesus Christ and the benefits of the Lord Jesus Christ only and ever come to us through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is one who binds us to the saving benefits of Christ, unites us to the saving benefits of Christ, and brings those spiritual blessings to bear in our life. And as we read through the Scriptures, we see that He uses means to accomplish this. Now, there's times where when we think in, now, hold on, we're not gonna get too, we won't stay in the theological deep water for too long, I promise. When we speak of Him uniting us to the Lord Jesus Christ and binding to us all of the saving, redemptive benefits of Christ, we speak of His regeneration, where He comes in and makes us alive in the Lord Jesus Christ. That's how he does it. We don't quite understand how he does it. It's a miracle. But he makes us alive in Christ. And now that we are alive, this stream of blessing continues to flow into the life of each and every saint. And the Spirit uses means to bring that grace to bear in the life of his folks. we mentioned are the primary would be Word and Sacrament. Are there other means of grace? That's a whole other theological argument and discussion all together between objective means of grace and subjective means of grace. And if prayer is an object or subjective means of grace, beyond the scope. Here's what everyone agrees on. The sacraments are a means of grace. And for our discussion, that's where we're going to camp out. The Spirit has determined and decreed that He uses the sacraments of baptism and the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to bless and nourish His people. Now, maybe you're thinking, I haven't really thought in those terms. I haven't heard that taught. Maybe Pastor Cory's out to lunch and is reading some weird people. Both of those are within their own possibility. I'll grant you that. But turn your handout over. We find ourselves with very good friends. Really good friends. In fact, what I've just stated here is the confessional position of our church. This is the confessional position of the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689. I want to read to you, with all of this in your minds, Now look and see how the Second London says exactly what we've said, and then we'll show you how the Second London wasn't off on their own, but that they stood in a long line of folks. This has been the view of the Reformed Church for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years. Stretching back all the way, if you look and compare Calvin's view with Augustine's view, there's really no difference at all. A Second London Baptist Confession Chapter 30, Article 1 says of the Lord's Supper, the supper of the Lord Jesus was instituted by him the same night wherein he was betrayed, and to be observed in his churches until the end of the world. For the perpetual remembrance, there's our past aspect, and the showing forth of the sacrifice of himself and his death, confirmation of the faith of believers, in all the benefits thereof." There and here we get to the means of grace and nourishing of His people. Their spiritual nourishment and growth in Him. That's grace. and the supper is the means of that grace. Their nourishment and growth in Him, their further engagement in it, and to all duties which they owe to Him, and to be a bond and pledge, sign and seal, of their communion with Him and with each other. We could just spend a few weeks unpacking all of the details there, but you see front and center pushed into the middle of this statement on the Lord's Supper. This is a means by which the Lord Jesus Christ nourishes and grows His people in faith and grace. Chapter 30, section 7 says, worthy receivers, again speaking of the supper, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really, and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified. and all the benefits of his death. The body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, not physically and fleshly, but spiritually present to the faith of believers in the ordinance as the elements themselves are to their outward senses. So 2nd London, Again and again repeats this very same thing that we've been saying. The Lord is spiritually present at the supper and that spiritual presence has implications and effects on his people. It is the means by which his spirit brings grace, nourishment, strengthening, growth, fortification into the lives of weak people like you and like me. Only those who receive the supper by faith, certainly. So that's a brief. We could have read more from the Second London, but those two paragraphs in particular I think state it very clearly. Look down and see how the Second London is in perfect agreement with other doctrinal standards. The Heidelberg. Question 75, how does the Lord's Supper signify and seal, they're using sign and seal language, that you share or commune or fellowship with Christ's sacrifice on the cross and all his gifts? How does this show you that you participate actively, presently, with the gifts and the graces of God? The Heidelberg says, in this way Christ has commanded me and all believers to eat of the broken bread and to drink of this cup in remembrance of Him. With this command He gave His promises. First, as surely as I see with my eyes the bread of the Lord broken for me and the cup given to me, so surely was His body offered for me and His blood poured out for me on the cross. Second, as surely as I receive from the hand of the minister and taste with my mouth the bread and the cup of the Lord as sure signs of Christ's body and blood, so surely does He Himself nourish and refresh my soul to everlasting life with His crucified body, and shed blood. You look down and see the Westminster Larger Catechism. I think I've put it in bold for you that it is a spiritual nourishment and growth of grace. Go down to the Westminster Larger Catechism, question 170. Look at the bold in the middle of the paragraph. Yet Christ is spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to the outward senses. You can see in the Belgic Confession that this sacrament is to nourish and strengthen our faith. And look at the last underlined and bolded section. For they are visible signs and seals of inward and invisible things, by means whereof God works in us by the power of the Holy Spirit. Is there anything innately special or powerful about bread and wine? No. Is there anything special about the Lord's Supper? Yes. Why? Because the Holy Spirit uses these things in the life of those who have faith. They are ineffectual in the life of those who have no faith. If you don't believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you take the supper, not only will it not be a benefit, but what does Paul say? It's drinking judgment. Same with baptism. You can be baptized as a non-believer. It does you no good. It probably does you bad because you are saying things that are not true and confusing yourself and others. Both sacraments are absolutely ineffectual in the life of those who have no faith. But in the lives of those who have faith, they are the means by which the Spirit brings and commutes grace into our life to encourage and build up what is weak. Any questions on what we mean by spiritual presence, means of grace, or anything else we've talked about with our few remaining minutes? Michael. Okay. about Christ's sacrifice for us. And so if that is the case, then it's only valuable to the extent that it does a good job of reminding us. And so therefore, anything else that reminds us is just as valuable. So if that's the case, then maybe watching the Jesus film or the Passion of the Christ or something is a better memorial than the Lord's Supper. And that's one of the reasons that we think, but we're saying that no, there's actually something special about this. It is not just a matter of, it is more I would try to summarize that for the folks listening to the audio. I'm trying to figure out how to summarize that. The memorial view is only as good as it stirs up our memory to remember him and beneficial. Therefore, it's not unique in the sense of other things that can be equally as beneficial, maybe even more beneficial to remembering. Again, we're not negating memorial aspects. We're saying it's more than that, which is why the title of one of my favorite books on communion is More Than a Memory. It's not less than a memory, but it's more than a memory. Excellent point, Michael. Thank you. Kim. That's a great question, Kim. Thank you. Kim just asked a brilliant question for those listening. Why don't we do it weekly? That's what we're going to answer. Yep. Yep, and so I would agree with lots of folks, Richard Phillips, Michael Horton, and others who have said that your doctrine and view of the supper will be the primary driver in your decisions to frequency. So I think, again, we'll get to all this. I'm going to tackle that specifically in a study itself. But if it is a memorial, there's nothing about it that demands weekly. If it is spiritual presence, means of grace, spiritual nourishment, I think it tends towards weekly, absolutely. It's a good question. Heather? So my question for Max, too, is if it's daily. Does it say weekly? Is it daily? We could do it daily. Uh-huh. Yeah, I think that if you look at the pattern in Acts and you see the specific references to them gathering on the first day of the week, the special references throughout the whole of the book of Acts, where it keeps mentioning the first day of the week, the first day of the week, they're referring to the Lord's Day and the Lord's Day celebration. Now, I think that their fellowship and their interactions and their gathering together, their community, was a daily thing. Whether they observed communion every single day, I don't believe so and I don't know if Acts says. But certainly it was a frequent thing, that's for sure. Patty? Well, it seems like in the early days of the church in Acts, there was a lot of persecution going on and there was a lot of people before, and they were having communal meals, maybe because that's the only food that people had to eat. And their circumstances were different, and we don't necessarily see that in all the going on continually as we see the church emerging in Satan or other... I'm not saying that it couldn't be done daily, but I think their situation was unique, and that's possibly why things were unique in that time frame. To summarize, Patty's statement would be that maybe there are uniquenesses about the situation in Acts 2 that necessitated or encouraged more frequency that isn't present with other situations and institutions. My argument would be that when we find communion in good company in the book of Acts, because it seems to always be set beside the giving attention to the reading of God's Word or preaching, the prayers of the saints, the gathering together of the saints, you always find communion right there. Now it isn't Again, I don't want to get into all of this. It isn't prescribed, thou shalt do this weekly, but neither is preaching, neither is singing. Neither is praying with regards to the service. So there is a degree of...it's in our bylaws that the frequency is up to the discretion of the elders. There are faithful churches who celebrate it at different intervals, and that's up for them to decide and for them to determine. I think, looking back in history, that there are those who've done it. They were godly, great men. I just don't understand why they did what they did. I love the Scottish Reformation. Love, love, love, love the Scottish Reformation. They did it yearly. In heaven, I'm going to have questions for them boys. But let's pray, and then we'll head upstairs. Our Father, You are forever blessed. You bless us in Christ with every spiritual blessing. You have withheld no good thing. And we praise you for that. We thank you for the gift that communion is to your church, Lord. You gave it as a parting gift to your bride. To nourish and encourage her in difficult days. to stir up her faith and fortify what was weak, to build up what is broken, to stir up zeal where hearts are cold. Lord, thank you for this gift. We pray that we as a church would be faithful in it, would enjoy and celebrate what our Savior has done, is doing, and will do in the life of his people. We pray as we head upstairs and call on you as our God that you would hear our prayers, that you would bless your people through your word, that you would be pleased as we sing our praises to you. Oh God, would you be the center of our affections today and every day until we go to be with you. We pray in our Savior's name, amen.