Psalm 119:105 — Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.
In this meditation, we want briefly to consider some of the reasons that are given for celebrating the Lord's Supper less, rather than more, frequently.
Perhaps the most common reason that is given is that "familiarity breeds contempt." A too frequent participation in the meal, it is said, will make it less special for us and what is holy will come to be less meaningful.
It is certainly true that our fallen natures quickly grow tired of things and what should be very special can become routine for us. However, let's reflect on the substance of the argument for a moment. First, note that it is not derived from Scripture, but from an assumption based on a knowledge of human nature. Second, if we were to extend that argument to the other means of grace (as logically we should), then we would (and should) counsel against reading the Bible too often, listening to the Word preached once, twice or even three times a week, praying every day, and having too much fellowship with brothers and sisters in the Lord, because these are means of grace that we could come to treat as matters of routine rather than very special blessings. Soon we would have a religion that we did not practice at all for fear that we would become too familiar with it! It cannot be safe or right to adjust our practice of the means of grace to accommodate our fallen nature!
There is no fault with the means of grace God has given; the fault is entirely in our hearts. Furthermore, it is the grace available through the means that may affect our hearts to help avoid wrong attitudes. So if we are beginning to treat the Lord's Supper as a routine thing, it is our hearts we must deal with, rather than our frequency of observing the meal. We might add that we are just as capable of over-familiarity if we celebrate the meal once a month or once a year as if we celebrate it once a week. Who will decide (and on what basis?) how infrequently we should partake of the Supper to avoid all danger of us treating it as a routine thing?
Another reason that often lies at the root of our practice as churches (whether we say it or not) is tradition - "we have always done it this way". Traditions can be fine things - and can preserve us from drifting into error through thoughtlessness. However, not all traditions can be defended from the Scriptures and some traditions actually contradict the weight of Scripture testimony. The Lord's Supper seems to be an instance where there is little if any support in the Bible for an infrequent observance, as we have seen - all the evidence is to the contrary. While a single fellowship or denomination may "always" have had the practice of infrequent celebration of the Supper, it seems that the early church had a very different approach, so that no church can say, "We, the New Testament Church, have always done it this way."
We should all be very willing to be persuaded to change our practice to bring it more fully into line with the teaching of Scripture - it is not safe to have a different approach. We should also be willing to throw out any tradition or practice, however dear to our hearts, which is contradicted by the weight of Scripture evidence. An infrequent celebration of the Supper seems to be just such a case.
Finally, some argue against a more frequent celebration of the Supper because it is not required in Scripture. In this series, though, we have seen that the Lord did indeed command the meal to be eaten, and in the last few meditations we have built arguments from Scripture that do strongly support frequent obedience of this command. Little more seems to be needed to be able to discount this approach.
To sum up, there is a significant body of evidence in Scripture to support a frequent celebration of the Lord's Supper, whereas the arguments that are advanced against such a practice are not Biblical at all and would be ruinous to a church if the principles that underpin them were extended into other areas of church life.
