1 Corinthians chapter 11 is where we get to turn this morning, and we'll see how far we get along. This is a rather important text. It is a familiar text, and so that kind of maybe breeds a little bit of, oh, we know this text, and yet do we? Do we understand it and appreciate it to the degree that we ought to? And so given that, we may save some things for next time, but I do want to get one thing communicated along the way as we go. Let me read the text for us. It begins at verse 23 through verse 26. And he says, as we studied last time, For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was being betrayed, took bread. And when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me. In the same way, he took the cup also after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me. For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes." 1 Corinthians 11, 23 through 26. This is one of the few places where Paul quotes even words of the Lord, revelation spoken by the Lord Jesus Christ himself in his earthly ministry. It's not to say that, well, what about Deuteronomy? Was that Jesus' revelation? Yes, it was. Proverbs and Daniel was all a revelation through the triune Godhead, and yet quoting the Lord Jesus Christ himself in his earthly ministry when Paul wasn't even there, right? Because Paul was not a believer at the time of the Last Supper, what we're referring to here, the Lord's Supper as we have come to know it. And yet he received it by the revelation of Christ himself. He says back in verse 23, I received from the Lord that which I also delivered or gave to you. And so he is quoting here the Lord Jesus Christ himself. He does it, as I mentioned, infrequently. He did it earlier in chapter 7, referring to Christ's teaching on marriage. He referred to it a little bit later in 1 Timothy. chapter 5, quoting the laborers worthy of his master. He does quote him on different occasions, but does not often do that. It's not to say that Paul and Jesus, as some would say, are antagonistic to each other or opposite to each other. No, Paul is right in line. He has received commission from Jesus Christ himself. There's no daylight, if you don't mind, between Jesus and Paul in terms of their personality and hood, in terms of their communication, their revelation, their sharing. And so Paul says, you know, I received and I gave. I'm just a channel, a conduit of what Christ is is sharing or revealing to you. And so we looked at that length last time, this continuity of revelation brought through the apostles and the prophets and now carried forward as we have opportunity to speak the Word of God to each other. But now he says, OK, what is it we're talking about? What are we getting after? And again, the context of this nugget, as someone described, kind of a pearl or a diamond in kind of a rough environment, is selfishness, self-indulgence, pride, arrogance, condescension, looking down on each other as people would come into the meal, this agape, a feast that they would have, whether every week or whatever their regularity was. And some of the well-to-do people kind of looked down on those less-to-do people, and they took all the good things for themselves, the food and the drink, and didn't have anything for the other people. Some were drunk and some were hungry. So it's just the dichotomy that was not at all to be part and parcel of this celebration of the Lord's deliverance of himself. He suffered and sacrificed himself for the benefit of not just not well-to-do people, but enemies. These people who were not believers. These people who were not, you know, enemies for the sake of the gospel. These who were not even Christians, not even saved. They were unregenerate people. And yet Christ laid down his life. So can't you guys in the church, can't you get along? And so he couches this presentation of Christ's self-sacrifice in the context of, you guys, you know, I'm not going to praise you in anything that you're doing with this this false celebration of the Lord's table. What you're doing is totally opposite of what you're celebrating. It's just absolutely wrong. And he reiterates it. This is what the Lord Jesus did. And notice how very carefully, very historically, very realistically, he portrays it. This is what the Lord Jesus did in the night in which he was being betrayed. Which is to say, he doesn't begin his tale saying, you know, long long time ago on a land far far away or once upon a time or there happened to be this this he he says this is what happened remember when Jesus was being betrayed when he was being delivered and this is the word here translated being betrayed it's the same word as what he said just earlier what I delivered to you there is the idea of delivering teaching bringing the word of God to people and communicating that. But there's also this idea of here, translated betrayed, which is to be treacherously or deceptively handed over to somebody. Whether handed over to a situation that you didn't realize, like an ambush kind of situation, or like Judas who betrayed Jesus, who delivered him secretly or brought the authorities to where Jesus was. And even if you trace through how Jesus I wouldn't say manipulate, but certainly directed the events of the Passion Week, he took pains, the Lord Jesus did, to keep the place of their Passover meal secret from especially Judas. Because what would Judas have done? And I could rehearse the history of that. What would Judas have done? He would have brought the authorities to that upper room, and Jesus would have been arrested there. Instead, Jesus went to the Garden of Gethsemane, and Judas knew that was going to happen. But Judas delivered Jesus over, betrayed him treacherously and deceptively. And even Jesus said, is it with a kiss that you betray the Son of Man? And this horrible thing. But Paul is referring to the historical event, that night in which he was being betrayed. And so there's that idea of deceptively or treacherously handed over to. But there's also this idea of being delivered as one who is not in Jesus' case, but what the people thought, a criminal handed over to judgment. In the case of when Jesus was handed over by the religious leaders to Pilate and was judged by him and then Pilate delivered him over to be crucified. So there's that idea of entrusting to judgment or punishment. Which even the Lord Jesus does and the God himself does this delivering his people over to judgment because of their wicked deeds. But here Jesus is delivering over himself. He's being betrayed. Yes, but Jesus knew. It's not like Jesus was surprised. Oh, Judas, what are you doing? No, he told the disciples earlier, he said, this is what's going to happen. You know, being in Matthew 16, he starts telling the son of man is going to Jerusalem, he's going to be betrayed or delivered into the hands of the so and so and be crucified. And three days later, he'll rise again. They didn't hear that three days later, rise again part. They heard the delivered over and the crucifixion. They said, no, Lord. That's what Peter said to him. So this is what is going on. This is a historical event that Jesus is, or Paul is referring to regarding our Lord Jesus. Now, he gets into this idea of taking bread and then taking the cup and celebrating what we refer to as the Lord's table, the Lord's supper, communion. Some would refer to it more in a high church, like an Anglican or Orthodox or Catholic context would call it the Eucharist, which is not wrong to say. It's not an evil term because Eucharist just is from the Greek word that means to give thanks. We saw it even in the context here. When he had given thanks, Jesus always gave thanks for the food before he shared it with others or whatever. But that idea of giving thanks is the Eucharist. And they have put some other ideas into it that we'll refer here. refer to here in just a moment. But Eucharist, a communion, we'd also refer to it as, which is to emphasize the communion that we have as believers, sharing a common table, a common bread, common cup, and the communion we have with our Lord Jesus Christ. And so all these different names could be given to this. But there's another historical development that I want to focus on, maybe we'll just focus on that for today. And it gets kind of deep, and maybe there's some historical things that are just overwhelming to you, but it is helpful to realize the the diversion, that's not the right word, the change, I suppose, of how this memorial service, how this remembrance service has been recognized, particularly in the Roman Catholic Church. Now go back to the year 1521. This is when Martin Luther was feeding on worms. No, he wasn't eating worms. He went to a diat, a council, a synod, just a gathering of people, Roman Catholic scholars and the Holy Roman Empire emperor guy and some other, you know, the princes in Saxony and different folks, asking, they asked him, will you recant? They didn't want any conversation about his teaching, right? This is 1521. you know, four years, excuse me, four years, there we go, after he submitted his 95 Theses for discussion, which was, and then he began writing a lot of books and pamphlets and all kinds of things, which were finding fault with the Catholic Church at the time. And so in 1521, they brought him before themselves and said, will you recant of all these books? And there's a whole history that went on there, and Luther went away and thought about it, but then he came back. And then the conversation resumed. 1521, you know, he is what's referred to as here I stand speech. Let me just read a portion of it. The conclusion of his of his argument. Martin Luther said, I cannot submit my faith either to the Pope or to the council, the deit, the synod that had come before him, because it is clear that they have fallen into error and even into inconsistency with themselves. If then I am not convinced by proof from holy scripture or by cogent reasons, if I am not satisfied by the very text I've cited, and if my judgment is not in this way brought into subjection to God's word, here it is, I neither can nor will retract anything. For I cannot be either safe or honest for a Christian disponsance. Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen." Martin Luther is responding to the abuses, to the particularly the heresies of justification, or the rejection of justification by grace through faith of the Roman Catholic Church, had acknowledged to a certain degree, but then said, no, if anyone says, and they're going to come back and say, if anyone says that you're justified by faith, let that person be anathema. And you think, well, good grief, what's that mean? And this is what happened in the Council of Trent, which happened in the, well, I'm gonna show you when it was held. Here it was, here we go, 1545 to 1563. So a few years after the Dead of Worms, a few years after the 95 Theses in 1517, this council was held. Now, there had been other councils. In fact, this is the 19th Ecumenical Council, and we think ecumenical. is often, you know, different churches gathering together and doing different things. In that context, ecumenical means a council that has been gathered together for the good of the church worldwide, a general statement that is being acknowledged or thought through on behalf of the whole church, the ecumenical, the worldwide church. And so this is the 19th. You think of some other ones that have happened, Nicaea, Constantinople, some other councils that happened earlier, You know, in the first millennium AD, this is one that happened in the second. And so here we have this 19th Ecumenical Council. It's the last one that happened outside of Rome. You think, why is that important? Because the next ones that come after that are Vatican I and Vatican II. Vatican I in the late 1800s, and then Vatican II in the mid-1960s. And there's only been two councils after the Council of Trent, in which case everything that the Council of Trent affirmed was reaffirmed, confirmed, and not changed at all in the first and second Vatican councils. So what we read, and I'll read some portions of the Council of Trent documents, teachings about this stuff, the Lord's Table, communion, the Eucharist, and to say, hmm, That's what Martin Luther was referring to. That's what he was trying to correct, or at least to reform in that Roman Catholic Church. This is an important aspect. You can see some other things there that I won't bring into, but this is the 13th session over that period of what was it, 15, 16, 17 years, as the Council was meeting, this was the 13th of, was it 21, I think, sessions, where they met specifically to address this issue or the practice of communion. And their introductory statements, this is the statement from the 13th session, Council Trent, 1551, which was 30 years after the Diet of Worms. So there you go, 30 years after. And they said, the sacred and holy ecumenical, there's that, worldwide general synod of Trent assembled that it might set forth the true and ancient doctrine touching faith in the sacraments, it might apply a remedy to all the heresies, now they're talking about Martin Luther, and the other most grievous troubles with which the church of God is now miserably agitated and rent into many and various parts. So you can see their attitude toward Martin Luther and John Calvin and others, and the implication of that synod here is that it might pluck up by the roots those tears of execrable which is cursed, not just hateful errors and schisms with which the enemy hath in these are calamitous times oversewn the doctrine of the faith in the use and worship of the sacred and holy Eucharist, now we're getting to the meat of the business, which our Savior left in his church as a symbol of that unity and charity with which he would feign have all Christians be mentally joined and united together. So they're acknowledging, you know, we have all these issues and errors, and they won't even mention my name, but Martin Luther and John Calvin and Zwingli and others that have risen up to reform the Catholic Church, and they say, no, these are calamitous times which the enemy, which would be really referring to Satan behind all this teaching, where Christ gave this for unity and charity, and he would have us all be united together under, if you don't mind, under the Roman Catholic Church, under the the Roman bishop and so forth. And so here's what they were doing going forward, reading the text here. Wherefore, this sacred and holy synod, delivering here on this venerable and divine sacrament of the Eucharist, that sound and genuine doctrine, which the Catholic Church, instructed by our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and by his apostles, and taught by the Holy Ghost, who day by day brings to her mind all truth, has always retained, and will preserve, even to the end of the world, and here's the main verb, forbids, this sacred and holy synod, forbids all the faithful of Christ to presume to believe, teach, or preach henceforth concerning the Holy Eucharist, otherwise than as explained and defied in this present decree." So they're giving, this is the proper understanding of the Lord's Supper. What we say, and anybody that disagrees, and they'll make it very clear, anathema. Let them be accursed, let them be excommunicated, cast away from the church. This is a serious issue. And again, it's middle 1500s, and yet the Roman Catholic Church has done nothing but to reaffirm this particular issue, arguing somewhat out of the text that we have before us, but making some improper implications and conclusions regarding it. So they have different chapters and then some different canons or conclusions about this. But here's what they say, and this gets right to the heart of the issue. In the first place, what do we teach? The Holy Synod teaches and openly and simply professes that in the august sacrament, and we don't use that word sacrament, by the way. Sacrament has the idea of conveying grace, of There's another phrase that the Roman Catholic Church uses, it's ex opera, ex operae operato, out of the work it is worked. Or even ex opera, ex operae operantis, by the worker, by the one who does the work, it's done. So even baptism takes away original sin. Well, just by doing the work, now it has to be approved by whatever, and they process through it, but by the work it's done. And even by the profession, by the presentation of this meal, it's done. And so it's a grace act, it's a sacrament, it's something that in the work itself, it's done. Now we would say, if there's any sacrament, it's Christ's death. Christ accomplishes everything that we need, and the blessings that we have in our lives are through Christ's work, Christ's action. And they wouldn't deny that, but they would say, well, yes, that and all the treasure of merit that Mary and the other saints have gathered and contributed that we poor sinners can benefit from. So this is the idea of sacrament. So what are they doing? They're saying, quoting again, after the consecration of the bread and the wine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and man, is truly, really, and substantially contained under the species of those sensible things. What are they saying? Well, it goes on, you can read that, but it is to say that Christ himself is present really, truly, and substantially in the bread and the cup, in the bread and the wine, as they would recognize. And they refer to this here in the next part here as transubstantiation. You've heard that term perhaps. This is the changing of And does it say here, says it here in just a moment, how did they explain this? Because Christ our Redeemer declared that which He offered unto the species of bread, that looks like bread but it's really Christ's body, to be truly His own body. Therefore has it ever been a firm belief in the Church of God? And this Holy Synod doth now declare it anew. that by the consecration, what the priest does in saying, you know, presenting the bread to the Lord and the wine, a conversion is made of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood, which conversion is, by the Holy Catholic Church, suitably and properly called transubstantiation. So changing the substance into something, still looks and tastes and feels like bread, but it's truly and really the body of Christ and the blood of Christ, transubstantiation. Now, at the end of this document, the end of the 13th session of the Council of Trent, they had various canons. I think this is the first canon of 11, where each of them has the conclusion, let him be anathema. If somebody teaches this, He has no part in the Catholic Church. He's excommunicated until he comes back to his senses, if you don't mind, and agrees with us. And so here, they really put the meat into it, if you don't mind the pun. If anyone denieth that in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist are contained truly, really, and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ, But saith that he is only there as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue, let him be anathema." So if you disagree with us, you're accursed, and truly condemned, and you're a heretic. And you need to repent, recant, and come back to what we teach. And they have 10 other canons about, again, contradicting, if anyone contradicts what they're teaching about the Lord's table, about Christ himself being present in this bread and in the cup, then you have no part with us. You're out of the picture, as it were, salvifically. Salvation does not extend to you because you're not agreeing with the Church, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and agreeing with the apostolic succession that we celebrate. Wow. Now, if you read further, and I don't remember if I had it on the screen, but they would say, we don't really understand how this can be so, because there's Christ in heaven, and then we're saying that Christ is down here. We don't understand how it can be so, but it must be, because that's what the scripture teaches. Does it teach it, though? When we get back into this text, realizing that the Lord Jesus took bread, now we get back into 1 Corinthians 11.23, He took bread in that night. Now, the context of that night was the celebration of the Passover, an annual celebration where the Jews would gather together, and it happened, and this is interesting how we do it differently now. well, for a variety of reasons, but the Passover was a family-based, a house-based celebration, whereas other things, come to the temple and do your stuff there, come to the temple, sacrifice your lamb, but then go home and roast it and stay there with your family and eat it and don't come out until it's all done kind of thing. We do it differently now, that's fine, but for a variety of reasons, again, but Jesus took that bread, took the cup, ate the paschal, the Passover lamb with his disciples in the upper room, that part of this bread is not a good big loaf of bread, it's something that is unleavened. Which is to say, not just that it didn't have yeast added to the mixture or fermented dough, you know, a bit of leaven that would be kneaded together into a new batch of dough. This is something that would be cooked quickly. It was not allowed time to rise or ferment. It was something that even from the original Exodus, you know, Exodus 12 context, you've got to hurry up. You don't have time to let your bread rise. You cook it quickly so you can eat it, but don't be dawdling because we're going to be heading out bright and early. this morrow, leaving Egypt behind and going into the promised land as God directs us. And so this bread that he took is unleavened bread. And we have a, you know, when we celebrate Passover now, we have matzah. Matzah is a very specifically specific recipe for contents, but also the means by which it's cooked or baked. And it is just It verified kosher for Passover and useful for that. So Jesus took that unleavened bread. He took it from the table. It was part of the preparation of the meal. And always, verse 24, when he had given thanks, Christ, if you trace through his gospel ministry, He is always, when he's bringing meal for himself, but usually for other people, you can always see him giving thanks. When he broke the bread and gave it to the thousands, the two different multitudes that gathered, he always gave thanks to the Lord, and then he distributed it to those who were eating. So when he had given thanks to God, always recognizing that God himself is our daily bread. God is the one who gives us everything, even Jesus Christ himself would acknowledge. God the Father is the great giver. And so when he'd given thanks, he broke it, which is simply the idea of taking that one common loaf and then breaking it so it can be distributed and given to those around. Which again, undercuts this idea of the Corinthians, you know, they broke the bread, but they kept it from themselves. They had no intention of sharing with others. This is, you know, maybe pass it around to our other cronies or family members who are nearby in our little room. But those people out there, you know, they should have brought their own bread. What are they thinking about? Jesus broke it and he gave it to his disciples. You can read about it. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record this event. John does not record the actual event of the meal, the sharing of the bread and the cup and the eating of the stuff, but we see Christ and John, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, so much teaching that Jesus did. The other gospel writers don't, they record a little bit of it, but not a whole lot of the teaching that Jesus gave in that upper room. But Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record this event, and there's some variations and and differences of how they present it. The meat of it, again, the stuff of the substance of it, is the same between them. They all talk about the bread. They talk about the blessing. Matthew and Mark talk about a blessing rather than giving thanks. And generally, we talk about blessing the food, which we do. We say, God, please bless this food to our bodies and all the whatever we can say, which we do find example of in scripture. Usually, when we see a blessing over food, it's not directed toward the food, it's blessing to God. Even in the Jewish prayer, the Passover prayer about receiving the bread, receiving the cup and the lamb and the other stuff, their blessing is to God. Blessed be you. Yahweh our God, Savior of the world, King of the ages, forgiving us this bread from the earth or the fruit from the vine or whatever it might be. It's a blessing directed toward God. Matthew and Mark say that this was a blessing to God, a blessing of the food perhaps, but recognizing God as the one who gave it. And then he said to his disciples, this is my body, which is for you. This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me. Christ himself changed, if you don't mind, this whole celebration. Notice he didn't, Paul does not bring out the idea of Christ referring to the Passover lamb. You'd think that, well, it's the lamb really, because Jesus is that lamb who died. And Paul did talk about that. Remember back in chapter five, Christ, our Passover lamb has been slain. Therefore, let us keep the feast. not with the leaven bread of this and that and everything, but the unleavened bread of grace and truth, or peace and truth, I forget how it says there. 1 Corinthians 5. He doesn't refer to the lamb. He's already referred to the lamb. He talks about the bread. This is what Christ even had talked about back in John chapter six, this unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood. Your forefathers had manna from heaven, but I am the true and living bread that comes from heaven, and you've got to partner or participate in me. So he says, we're not just celebrating or remembering this exodus of Israel out of Egypt 1,500 years ago or so. He's giving new meaning to this. In fact, if we could call this Jesus' last supper, it is also the last Passover, because Jesus himself is going to be crucified. The greatest event of redemption in the Old Testament history, everything from Genesis to Malachi, the greatest redemption event, redemptive event, is the Exodus. Always referring to that. Psalm 78, just so many different times, saying this is what God did in the Exodus. This is how he brought us out of Egypt. This is what he did in the wilderness. That is the high mark, high water mark of God's redemptive work until it is eclipsed by Jesus Christ himself. And so he is saying, you know, you used to celebrate Passover remembering what God did to bring you out of Egypt. Let me tell you what I'm gonna do. I am going to give my body and give my blood, he's about to say in verse 25, for you, this is for you. And you think, well, we're already out of Egypt. We're not slaves anymore. Well, I know the Romans are. You're going to give us redemption. Are the Romans? No. Jesus has already talked about that. Although the disciples are still concerned about that by the time you get back into Acts chapter 1. Jesus has been raised. He's been with them for 40 days. And he says, is it this time that you're going to restore the kingdom in Israel? Still thinking, hey, we're going to kick Rome off. After all, once Jesus is here, things are going well. It's the golden age of Israel and so Rome's gonna go away, right? No, it's not for you to know. those seasons, those times. It'll happen. I'm gonna leave you. You stay in Jerusalem until the Holy Spirit comes upon you. Then you'll be my witnesses. This is your work for right now. It's not deliverance from oppressive government. It is the freedom from sin. You be my witnesses. You bring my gospel forward. It's a different entirely of what they're thinking about the Exodus and the rising up. There's a reason, by the way, when you get back into that time period, why Pilate himself is in Jerusalem. Pilate, he preferred to be down in the Riviera, if you don't mind, of the ancient first century Israel world. That was Caesarea on the sea, just a beautiful, very Greek, very Roman city that Herod the Great built. in honor of Augustus and said, you know, I'd rather be down there. But because of the Passover, because all these patriotic emotions are being stirred up and the feelings of revolt and, you know, rising up against Rome, Pilate himself came to Jerusalem to keep a, you know, heavy hand on the people. And there's a whole drama of why that happened and why Pilate was doing this. But this patriotic kind of exodus fervor is always rekindled at Passover time. Jesus is saying, It's about what I'm gonna do. It's about what I'm gonna do right now, teaching you what he's already done by laying down, washing his disciples' feet, and teaching them in that regard. If I've loved you in this way, you ought to love one another in this way. And it's the change, the new heart that Christ provides to his people. And so he gives a new meaning. The last supper of Christ is the last Passover. We can, and we will, in a few months, we'll remember a Messiah in the Passover, not because we're doing it By command, we do it in honor of our Lord Jesus Christ. We honor how is Messiah, how is Christ present even in the Exodus events? And then how does this Last Supper then tie into what Christ has done? So he says, this is my body. And the benefit of his body, which is given, perhaps, given for you, he says, King James has, which is broken for you. King James and some other translations have that word broken. That word is not in the best texts of the scripture, and there's a reason even why it should be Not there. Christ's body was not broken. Now it was it was tortured and abused. But he was not there was not a bone of his body was broken. Right. And that is a statement both in terms of the Passover lamb was to be unblemished. It was supposed to be perfect, it should have no broken bones at all, it should be entirely intact, and so Christ's body was like that as well. He was not, he was again tortured and beaten, he had, he suffered a lot, and yet his body was not broken. So back in Exodus 12, you know, take an unblemished lamb, male lamb, and so forth, that's also repeated in Numbers, and Psalm 34, a Messianic Psalm, talking about this phrase which John quotes when the Roman soldiers came to break the legs of the crucified people. They didn't break Jesus' legs because he was already dead, and why they did it. And he says, John 19.36, for these things came to pass in order that the scripture be fulfilled. Not a bone of him shall be broken. So Jesus took that bread, he broke it, but he says, it's not my body which is broken, but my body is being presented for you. This is what you need to find the nourishment of. This is what you should find as the staff or the stuff of life. This is what gives life. This is God himself sending down this bread from heaven. And so he says, this is for your benefit. This is not because I need to do it, it's because you need me to die in your place. You need me to suffer as this one willing sacrifice, a willing victim to die in the place of these disciples. And so he says, do this in remembrance of me. He's quoting, Paul rather is quoting what Jesus had said back and recorded in Luke chapter 22. do this in remembrance of me. The other disciples do not record that phrase, but this idea of remembrance is a key idea that I think we should probably look at next time, because it's a key idea of what this whole thing is about, and coming back to what the Roman Catholics would teach, is more than a remembrance. In fact, it is a, and they wouldn't say it's a re-sacrifice, not a sacrifice of Christ, but they are saying we are, and they would use this term, presenting, it's not really re-presenting or representing, but making present again in our day the sacrifice that Christ himself accomplished for us in that crucifixion event. We just keep it alive. This idea of doing in remembrance of me, it's remembering his sacrifice before God. And you think, wait a minute, is that what Jesus is talking about? We're actually re-presenting the sacrifice to God and saying that we have our identity in that event And that event is being restored here. There's a reason, by the way, one of the key differences, so many key differences between a Protestant or Reformation church versus a Roman Catholic church is churches that have a cross on the wall or a cross on the necklace or something like that. A Protestant church will have an empty cross. Roman Catholic Church has a crucifix. It has Christ himself still on a cross because that's how they view the Eucharist. Jesus is still there. He's still offering, or we make present again this idea of Christ offering himself. Is that what Jesus thought? I don't think so. We'll get into it next time about this idea of how do we do this? What should we be doing when we come to this table? And how do we do it in a worthy manner? We'll see later in this text of chapter 11. But again, Paul's main concern here is don't act so selfishly. Christ himself emptied himself for the benefit of sinners, enemies. He became sin for us so that we could become the righteousness of God in him. He is the one who emptied himself. And here you are taking all the food to yourself, just thinking of how can you can be served first? How can you get the best seats? And how can you look the best? And how can you forget about that? Christ himself abandoned his privileges of heaven, come down on earth, to live a good and godly, righteous life, and then to suffer at the hands of people he's trying to save. And not trying to save. Those whom Jesus calls will come to him. It's not an attempt and he's somehow interrupted or frustrated by those who would not come to faith. Whoever God calls, the effectual call, will come. And yet, the process. It's like the person who says, it's not that I mind death so much, it's just I don't want to be there when it happens. That kind of thing. Jesus knows the end result. He knows he's going to be crucified. He knows he's going to be resurrected. He knows he's going to accomplish redemption. It's just that process, getting to there. Remember, before this betrayal in that night, he went to the garden and he prayed, Father, if there's another way, Let this cup, not this particular cup, but the cup of suffering, the cup that he's about to drink and drink right down to the dregs, if there's any other way for salvation to be accomplished, can we do that? And it wasn't just one time or two times, three times he went and prayed that. So he knew what was gonna go on. but just going through that horrible, horrific, shameful event, both of the mismanagement, that's really putting it mildly, the hatred and the animosity of the people, but then God the Father himself turning his back, separating, because Christ became sin. And the tremendous weight that Jesus had in that moment, and then Paul views these Corinthians coming together and You're doing what at the Lord's Supper? You're being all selfish and rude and arrogant and just full of your own selves. It has nothing to do, you may be going through the motions, you may be doing the formalities of the Lord's Supper, but that has nothing to do with what Christ accomplished in that Last Supper through his death and burial and resurrection and his justification of sinners. So we want to make sure that we're right with the Lord as we do the works, if you don't mind, as we remember Christ in the bread and in the cup, and we share that regularly, to recognize, wow, Christ died for us. He offered his life as a sacrifice for my sin. Why should I continue to live in sin? Why should I continue to be unrighteous? What kind of glory, what kind of benefit is that? The sins for which Christ died. Oh, it's fine, I'm gonna do this. No, whatever we do, we do it in remembrance and honor to the glory of Christ. We live, we're purchased with a price, As he said back in chapter six, therefore glorify God in your body, everything you are, your mind, soul, heart, strength, everything you are, you do for God's glory. Well, that's what Paul is getting at here. The context, he'll enlarge that as we go further in this passage, but tremendous. offering gift that we have through our Lord Jesus Christ. Celebrate and remember Christ. Our Father in heaven, we're so grateful for the gift of life, the gift of Christ that we have for our own selves, for our own benefit, the salvation we have, the righteousness by grace through faith, a gift righteousness, not that we could ever Accomplish it on our own strength, our own goodness, or, you know, we don't do those things or don't do that things, but we do do other stuff that doesn't matter. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? Do you find your whole identity in Him? Do you live for His honor and glory? Are you totally oriented toward Him as your Savior, as your Lord? That's what you judge by. We pray that you would save and sanctify us. We pray that we would be your people and that we would represent this kingdom that is coming on earth, led by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that he would come in his rule and reign, even as he says in verse 26, as often you do this, you do this, and we proclaim his death until he comes. We pray that that day would be soon. Even today would be a good day for Christ to return. Please help us to be ready, to be found faithful at your return, to show love toward you and to show love toward one another. Not be so full of ourselves, but be full of the Holy Spirit. We thank you. Please help. We pray in Christ's name. Amen.