THE NEW PASSOVER:
Rethinking the Lord’s Supper for Today
By Nigel Scotland
Cascade Books. 184 pages. £20
ISBN 978 1 498 218 139
This plea to rethink the Lord’s Supper argues that it should, ideally, be a ‘a sit-down evening meal for small groups of Christian believers.’ (p.184).
Something happened, it is claimed, by the mid-fourth century, that changed a home-based fellowship meal for real believers, into a priest-led, complicated ritual to which nominal believers were invited (p.18). Scotland attributes this change to the reaction to abuses which arose, Corinthian-like, in the fellowship meal. This meant there was a need to separate out and preserve the ‘Eucharist’ element which focussed on the remembrance of Christ’s death.
It is always good to re-think every aspect of what we do in church. Is it truly biblical or simply a tradition, albeit an evangelical tradition?
Strengths of the book
• Remembrance underlined as the heart of the Lord’s Supper – the book rides above slurs that such thinking is ‘mere memorial-ism’ and simply expounds Scripture in the face of semi-Catholic overlays found in so many ostensibly evangelical churches. to restore a note of joyful
• The call celebration in the Lord’s Supper – ‘In too many churches the atmosphere at the Lord’s Supper is more akin to a funeral than a festival’ (p.135).
• The assertion that there is nothing in Scripture which requires any qualification other than being a Christian in order to preside at the Lord’s Supper (similar to who is biblically qualified to baptise; answer, any Christian). suggestion that we call it ‘The
• The Thanksgiving’, following Cranmer & Joye (p.161) – a useful point since most of us baulk, for reasons of guilt by association, at calling it the ‘Eucharist’ despite that merely being the Greek for thanksgiving!
• Some fascinating historical revelations: e.g. that the common cup so beloved by some is almost certainly a misunderstanding of the Passover meal (p.171); and that many Protestants in the 16th and 17th centuries refused to kneel when receiving the elements, since it implied adoration of the elements (pp.142-148).
Weaknesses of the book
• Yes, the Lord’s Supper was clearly instituted during a Passover meal, and the origins of the Passover meal were family celebrations in the home. Yet it is not entirely clear that the Last Supper was a ‘biological family’ Passover meal. On the contrary it seems that Jesus was establishing a ‘spiritual family’ celebration which brought together his followers from at least ten different families. Scotland makes the case for this well. But then he imports the ‘biological family’ into his argument (p.177ff) in a way that confuses the issue, saying that ideally the Lord’s Supper should be celebrated within the biological family. This is a confusing blurring of the distinctions between the Old and New Covenant communities.
• A bit too much is read into various quotes from the early fathers e.g. pp. 22–24.
• John 6 is taken as primarily about the Lord’s Supper, which is debatable exegesis.
• The concept of partaking in the Lord’s Supper as ‘sealing’ the New Covenant (p.65) is another confusion between the Old and New Covenants. The language of sealing in the NT is used, historically, of circumcision in relation to Abraham’s faith (Romans 4.11) and, experientially, of Christians being sealed by the Spirit in the new covenant (Ephesians 1.13) as the confirmation of their faith. At the Lord’s Supper we simply remember and celebrate a finished work. This confusion is akin to the increasingly common confusion among evangelicals that ‘covenant renewal’ happens at the Lord’s Supper. The New Covenant is in Christ’s blood and does not need renewing or repeating. It needs remembering, as our Lord made clear; which is the point of the Lord’s Supper. That we renew our faith in Christ and his death for us when we take part in the Lord’s Supper is a separate issue, though vital to happen, and enabled by the Spirit who lives within.
In summary
The book is an excellent catalyst to rigorous re-examination of our church practices in relation to the Lord’s Supper. Some things worth considering are: ensuring that there is always a note of joyful celebration when we have the Lord’s Supper; encouraging home groups to celebrate the Lord’s Supper from time to time, and why not as part of a sit-down evening meal; having non-ministers preside from time to time to contradict implicit clericalism; and perhaps placing the table in the middle of the congregation in order to remind people better that this is supposed to be a shared meal.
But this book does not in my view make an incontrovertible case for the replacement of most existing methods of celebrating the Lord’s Supper. It is one thing to say that there is a case, ideally, for the Lord’s Supper to be a ‘a sit-down evening meal for small groups of Christian believers.’ It is another thing to say that the simple, meaningful, albeit token meal of remembrance enjoyed by so many evangelical churches week in, week out, around the world, must be discontinued.
For a more broad and balanced read on the subject I recommend The Lord’s Supper: remembering and proclaiming Christ until he comes, edited by Thomas R. Schreiner & Matthew R. Crawford (NAC Studies in Bible & Theology, B & H Publishing, 2010).
