Communion here, there, or both (Part II): Form, Content, and Consecration

Referring to the admonition in 1 Cor. 11:29 E Rice said: "this is a very, very stern warning to not treat the sacred as the profane." Great point!

Even if one, when partaking of the Lord's Supper, treats as "common" these consecrated (read: sacred) elements set apart by the Lord for "sacred" use they are partaking "in an unworthy manner" and therefore are "guilty of the body and blood of the Lord" (v.27).

It is important to note the significance of both the consecration of these common elements for the Lord's use and the reading--and explaining--of the words of institution. After all, Paul received these instructions "from the Lord" himself (v.23). Notice he doesn't say he received these instructions from the eleven who were with Christ in the upper room, or even from his quiet time on Wednesday morning. I do believe the words of institution can be read from one of Evangelists' accounts as well. However, personal testimonies or stories, etc. are never okay during this sacred rite.

I contend that it is not just through the partaking of the elements that God blesses his people, though the greatest admonitions are certainly found there. I think a biblical case can be made that the form and content of the entire covenant renewal ceremony and meal is a vital and ordinary means of grace that God uses to bless his people. After all, in His Word the Lord Himself has given most of the form and content that we are to follow when administering the sacrament of the Lord's Supper.

The sacraments have been called "visible signs of the gospel" and places where the "clearest promises" are evident. After all, they are promises to the eye. Therefore, I believe the Lord's Supper ordinarily should only be administered after the preaching of God's Word (the Gospel) within the context of a corporate Lord's Day worship service, and even then, only if they are going to be properly administered.