A Question on the Communion.
A CORRESPONDENT writes: “We read in 1 Cor. xi, 33, that when we eat (referring to the Lord’s supper), we should tarry one for the other. I have thought we should wait while the bread is being passed among the members of the church till all are served, and when the leader takes his piece and eats it, we should all do likewise. If I am wrong, please give me light on the subject.” REPLY. We do not think the point our correspondent has on his mind is that to which Paul refers. The disorders which he has in view, and the abuses which he would correct, are brought to view in the preceding verses of the chapter, 17-22. It appears that the Corinthians had connected with the Lord’s supper a disgraceful feast and drunken carousal. First of all, there were divisions among them, the church separating themselves into different parties. And commentators assert that these different parties would bring provisions from their homes, of such as they were able, to have a feast in connection with the Lord’s supper. These cliques would partake by themselves, some before others had arrived at the place of meeting, the more wealthy bringing costly viands, to the mortification of the poorer brethren, who were not able to make so sumptuous provision. So some were drunken while others were hungry; and the communion was turned into a scene of confusion, and made an occasion of scandal. Paul reproves them because they did not come together to partake of the Lord’s supper exclusively, verse 20, and tells them that they have houses in which they should do the eating and drinking of their ordinary meals, verse 22; and the conclusion to be derived from his instruction is, that they should put away their divisions, no longer communing in cliques, and when they came together, they should come for the Lord’s supper only, waiting one for another till all had assembled at the place of meeting, and then commune together in a sober and worthy manner.