Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
I think it is error to be too concerned so as to be technically right, too, though. The message is the point. It's only remembrance. But I think I would enjoy a full meal instead. Good point. 
|
Seriously, the Catholics instituted our wafer snack called "Communion". The original deal was the "Lord's Supper". If we see it beyond the realm of "sacrament" we realize that the supper was essentially what was talked about when the Bible says that they "broke bread". Eating together in biblical times established a very deep bond and generated a "household of faith" mentality. The words of Paul in
I Corinthians 11 indicates that this "supper" was not only a full meal, but very symbolic. There was "one loaf" signifying the single body of our Lord. As it was passed from hand to hand, it was torn apart to provide sustenance, as was the body of our Lord to provide our spiritual life and salvation. There was also a singular cup from which the wine, real wine, was poured signifying that only the blood of the Holy One of Israel could provide salvation. In it they looked back to the last supper of our Lord with the disciples and his sacrifice...in it they also looked forward to the day when they would attend the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. Much of the full meaning of the "Lord's Supper" has been lost to us through the sacramentalism of the Catholic "communion" that we observe.
There is the Catholic "communion"...and there is the biblical "Lord's Supper". Our anti-Christmas ranting brethren don't realize it...but unless they observe the Lord's Supper as did the Apostles...they have Catholicized perhaps one of the sacred elements of our faith. So I find it detestable that they judge a man over a day and a tree...but much on wafers and grape juice, completely missing what was ordained by the Apostles.