Thousand Acre Church

We hardly ever (if ever) eat a full meal when we observe the Lord’s Supper a.k.a. the Eucharist.  The best we can do is guess at what significance the meal would have in connection with this sacremental observance.  As part of this ongoing meal-sharing dialogue, I’ve received more than one comment about the observance of the Eucharist as a special, community-defining event that should happen only with believers in Jesus present (i.e. paganless, Phariseeless, postituteless, tax-collectorless).  The result is a distintction in church practice between the Lord’s Supper and a “Jesus-style” meal (complete with unobservant Jews or pagans).  I understand that position, and so any disagreeing that I do with an is done in humility and in fear.  That said, I think I’ve gone far enough in previous posts to begin blurring the lines drawn around the Eucharist celebration.  Once the lines are blurred, I think we can begin to feel more freedom to invoke and expect Jesus’ missional and accepting presence at our meals, and coffees, and snack-times, and cook-outs with followers and non-followers and not-even-curious-non-followers alike.  So… here are some thoughts:

1. I hate getting “all Bible” on you (for fear that somebody I care about might feel unwelcome in this discussion because they aren’t familiar with the text or the stories), but I think that’s the place where most church folks want to start when it comes to big stuff like sacraments.  So, I’m gonna drop some verses for anyone who wants to explore this word “eucharist” (Gr. eucharisteo) in the Big Book (proof-text style with apologies).  Its translated into English as a form of “giving thanks”.  Here are some examples of the use of this word in the context of a meal:
   • Three accounts of the Last Supper (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:17,19).
   • Three accounts of crowd feedings (Matt. 12:36; Mark 8:6; John 6:11, 23)
   • A reference by Paul to meals eaten within a community of believers, which gave rise to “quarreling over opinions” in Rome (Rom. 14:6)
   • Paul’s address to the church in Corinth regarding their community meals (1 Cor. 10:30; 11:24)
   • Paul giving thanks before breaking bread with PAGANS (Acts 27:35)  This one is interesting.  The same phrasology is used in this account of a shared meal as in the previous ones listed here.  The context is, however, definitely not the same.
2. Just about all of us would agree that Jesus had a thing for sharing meals with outsiders.  There is every reason to think that the meal practices of the early church and the apostles started as a continuation of what they had been taught as disciples of the Meal Master.  These meals, sacramental practices and all, would have included at least a few fringe folks that we probably wouldn’t categorize as “believers”.  Some physically impoverished non-believers may have just been at the meal because food was available to them.  The meal served as a community event and as an opportunity to serve the poor while upholding their dignity.  The Christians were praised for taking care of outsiders; the context for this care and sharing is probably the community meal time.
3. They didn’t have fenced in yards in Jerusalem.  There were courtyards, but they were shared.  And, neighbors lived right on top of you.  The limitations of space in the city made daily (Acts 2- style) private ritual observances impractical (if not impossible).  Church was practiced joy-filled community meal sharing under the eyes of observing neighbors.  That was part of the way the church grew.  Joyous celebration and meal sharing were attractive in the face of difficult life situations and subsistence living.  People were called toward progressively deeper commitments in this joy-filled community, but the proclamation of the King’s reign was definitely “seeker-sensitive” and available to people who needed a meal and some hope.  It was “good news” to the poor.  An invitation to a meal might sound like this:  “We have a new King.  Come celebrate with us and learn about his reign.”
4. Baptism was used as the sign of entry into the Jesus-community (much like we use the “Sinner’s Prayer” and as a means to publicly identify oneself with the death of Jesus and the life of his community.  We would like to know if baptism preceeded participation in these meals, but the scriptures are silent on this point.  John Koenig, in Soul Banquets: How Meals Become Mission in the Local Congregation, suggests that “we should imagine inconsistency of practice since full ’sacramental’ understandings were only beginning to emerge.” (p.8)   In other words, don’t assume that membership in the community of the people of God consistently precedes sharing meals (or other resources) with the people of God.

Any of those points by itself would not be sufficient to convince anyone that the practice of the Eucharist should be open.  All of them taken together may not be enough.  But, AT LEAST, I hope that these thoughts might be enough to free some of us from feeling bound to exclusively ”Christian” meal practices.  (I say “Christian” in quotes because I wonder if Christ himself would have had the opportunity to eat meals without some sceptics or critics present with him at the table.  That’s right… Even the Last Supper was shared with some not-so-faithful disciples.)  I hope that I can encourage you to experiment with meals as a context for your calling and mission.  I hope that I can color outside of the traditional Eucharist boundaries without suffering too much wrath.  I have experienced the presence of Christ and spiritual harmony in the sharing of a meal with neighbors (who don’t know where pre-Christian stops and new life begins).  We should start thinking more about our meals and church life.  How do our meals express the love and acceptance that Jesus expressed?  How does our sharing testify to our confidence in the faithfulness of a Creator who loves us and provides for us?  How can we share a meal… Jesus-style?