We now turn to that part of the Epistle which takes up order in the Assembly.
Verse 17. In the second verse, the apostle could praise; but as to the subject upon which he now enters, he did not praise, because the Corinthian saints came together not for the better, but for the worse. For, first, when they came together in Assembly, Paul tells them that he hears there exist divisions among them. This was party making, which at first, as it seems, drew a line between the rich and the poor, but easily led into other distinctions, forming the basis of sects. The apostle tells the Corinthians that he partly believes, gives credit to, what he has heard.
“For there must also be sects” (schools or parties after a man’s own opinion) “among you, that the approved may become manifest among you” (verse 19 N. T.).
It is painful to the spiritual Christian to consider how widespread is, sectarianism today.
In the 22nd chapter of Luke, the Lord, on the night of His betrayal by Judas Iscariot, laid before the apostles His desire that He should be remembered in the time of His absence in the loaf and cup-memorials of His body and His shed blood. The second chapter of Acts, verse 42, shows that at the Church’s beginning the breaking of bread (the Lord’s supper) had a prominent place; and in Acts 20:7, the central purpose of gathering is briefly stated: “And the first day of the week, we being assembled to break bread, Paul, etc.” (N. T.)
The believers at Corinth had lost sight of the spiritual character of the Lord’s supper, and the apostle tells them that their coming together into one place was not to eat it, but for each to eat his own supper. Instead of occupation of mind and heart with the Lord in His death, there was a disgraceful and dishonorable display of greediness as each of them tried to satisfy his hunger and thirst in disregard of the rest of the company. One was hungry, and another drank to excess.
Though they were, as appears likely, in the habit of coming together, first to partake of what was called a love feast- a meal eaten together socially- and afterward, to break the bread in remembrance of Christ in death, they were wrong in combining a social time with that solemn memorial. But, beside this grave error, there was the shameful misconduct of verse 21, with the rich seeking their own gain at the expense of the poor. Did the well-to-do not have houses for eating and drinking, asks the apostle in the 22nd verse, or did they despise the assembly of God, and put to shame those who had not such accommodations? What should he say to them? Should he praise them in this as he had praised them at the beginning of this chapter? “I praise you not”, is the apostle’s word, and then he proceeds to tell of the revelation the Lord had given him concerning the breaking of bread in remembrance of Him.
How important this is in the eyes of the Lord may be judged by the fact that only twice in the Epistles does the apostle speak as he does here of a special revelation made to himself to be delivered to the saints: here and in 1 Thess. 4:15-17; the one passage referring to the Lord’s supper, and the other to the manner of His coming for His heavenly people, and their going to be with Him forever.
Paul, of course, was not present at that meeting in the upper room on the night of the betrayal; no follower of Christ was he then, and when his name first appears in the Scriptures (Acts 7:58; 8:1,3), he is an open enemy of Him in Whom alone is salvation. Turned about from his mad course, he learns in time that he is the once hated Christ’s apostle to the Gentiles, while the twelve continue to minister among the Jews. Is it not then particularly fitting that the revelation of the Lord here spoken of should be made to that apostle through whom was made known the truth of the Church, the one body composed of those who had been Jews and Gentiles, and the heavenly calling?
And what communication could the heavenly saints- those of the children of men who have been brought to own the risen Christ as Savior, and to wait for His promised return to bring them to their heavenly home- have been given that could bring before them as this does His unchanged and unchangeable tender love for them, His desire for their love, His knowledge of their needs, as exposed to the rude blasts of this world? for nothing short of communion with Him can sustain the Christian here below.
How quickly the Corinthians had forgotten, or let slip what the apostle had taught them only a few years before! Now, however, they were given it in writing; the very words that you and I have to direct us at the end of the day of grace, were sent to them nearly nineteen hundred years ago. And they produced an effect in those Christians at Corinth, as the 2nd Epistle, Chapter 7, indicates at its close.
What then of yourself, young Christian? What is your response to the Lord’s, “This do in remembrance of Me”? Can you say, I do Lord?
There is a divine object in view in the different names that are used in the Scriptures for Him; at the beginning of the chapter we had “Christ”, but in the eleventh verse, and afterward, it is “the Lord”. He is both, and “the Lord Jesus”, and “Christ Jesus”, and on occasion simply “Jesus”; to the spiritual mind it is generally plain why one of these names and not another is used.
“I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed, etc.”, brings before our minds Himself as the One who having died for us, now has authority over us.
Perhaps you have compared Luke 22 with 1 Cor. 11, noticing that these are the fullest accounts of the institution of the Lord’s supper, Matthew’s and Mark’s being shorter. All of course, were penned under the inspiration of God, but only one of the four writers (Matthew) was present on the occasion of which they wrote; and Paul expressly says that he received his account from the Lord.
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in their accounts of what took place in the upper room that night, all show that the thought of His betrayal was before our blessed Lord there; in none is this more marked than in John 13:21-30 where the Lord’s supper is not mentioned. A deep sorrow it must have been to Him, though far deeper and more intense was the soul agony that lay just beyond, on the morrow. But the Lord would have His people recall the particular circumstance in connection with the institution of the supper of remembrance, that it was “the same night in which He was betrayed.”
“He took bread, and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said,... This is My body which is... for you; this do in remembrance of Me. After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament (or covenant) in My blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink its in remembrance of Me.”
How simple is the account, and how touching to the believer’s heart! We remember Him in death, recalling to our hearts what brought Him there-our sins, our guilt; His love, His grace, obedience as the sent One; the depth of His sufferings as the Sinbearer; His sufferings too at the hands of His creature, man. Of that scene a Christian poet has written,
“O, what a load was Thine to bear
Alone in that dark hour;
Our sins in all their terror there;
God’s wrath, and Satan’s power.”
“Broken” for you in verse 24 is not correct; the word seems to have crept in through an early copyist’s or translator’s assumption that the breaking of the loaf referred to a “breaking” of the Lord’s body. John 19:36 is explicit that a bone of His was not broken, and in our chapter the verse should be read “... My body which is for you.”
“New testament” in verse 25 is really new covenant, referring to the promise in Jer. 31:31-34, quoted in Heb. 8:6-13. It will be made with Israel in the coming day, but we who believe are in the good of it without being under it.
“As oft as ye drink it” (verse 25): At the beginning, the Lord’s supper was evidently partaken of daily (Acts 2:46), but Acts 20:7 points to the Lord’s day as the weekly day of remembrance; no word of Scripture warrants a less frequent observance of the memorial supper. Should we who have been won to Christ, who are united to Him in the glory, ever avoidably miss this most privileged remembrance of Him?
“For as often as ye shall eat the bread and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until He come” (N. T.). We show His death until He, rejected here, shall return to receive us to Himself; and in so doing we in substance declare that the blood of the new covenant has been shed.
Verses 7 to 32 solemnly state that the exercise of the high and holy privilege we have been considering, involves self-judgment, or we shall come under God’s hand in discipline. To treat with disrespect this ordinance, to partake unworthily, is to be guilty in respect of the body and blood of the Lord.
“But let a man prove himself, and thus eat of the bread, and drink of the cup. For the eater and drinker eats and drinks judgment to himself, not distinguishing the body. On this account many among you are weak and infirm, and a good many are fallen asleep. But if we judged ourselves, so were we not judged. But being judged, we are disciplined of the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world” (verses 28-32 N. T.).