A LOOK AT COMMUNION

5/26/26 COPIED FROM: SERMON AND SONGS (This was done in 2023)

A look at communion using an 1889 book from my Granddad’s (Oscar Henderson) library,

By Don Henderson, A member of the Westfield Church of Christ Congregation in Spring, Texas
JOHN BURNS BOOK COMPANY

SERMONS AND SONGS, BY ALANSON WILCOX By J.V. UPDIKE AND L.E. HAWES

Even though this sermon is 137 years old it still holds true today because the author is right on with the Bible and I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. Since Alanson Wilcox mentions Church of Christ in his text it strongly indicates that he was a member of the Church of Christ. One thing he mentions I do not altogether agree. He seems to think since the words “The Lord’s Supper” is not used in bible text, it should not be used, but after all, Christ is Lord and the communion we take is for the Lord, it seems to me “The Lord’s Supper” is appropriate. He does say that The word Diepnon, translated “supper’ ” signified a full meal, which I agree with him on. We are not eating a full meal. I believe he gives an excellent explanation as to why the bread is NOT literally Christ’s body, nor the wine his blood. In each case these are representing our communion with his death, burial, and resurrection.

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889 Page 134

SERMON VII

COMMUNION.

Text — I Cor. 11:23-26.

This is the author’s writing from the book Sermons and Songs 1889

I want to talk to you to-day about the grandest institution in the Church of Christ. It is a monumental institution, set up over 1800 years ago, and stands in the Church of Christ to-day, unmoved. It was set up by Christ and his apostles. I never knew of an infidel that could give an account of its origin. If it did not originate as the Bible teaches, and to commemorate the event it was intended to commemorate, how, and for what purpose did it originate? Will some smart infidel tell? (All think they are smart, but that is very seriously doubted by the best people of the world.)

The older members of the Church understand the teachings of the scriptures upon this subject, but it is necessary to present the subject occasionally to the Church for the benefit of the younger members, that they may have a proper understanding of the sacredness and importance of the institution. For the Church to attend to this ordinance as directed by the Scriptures, it will give encouragement and strength. It will encourage punctuality, and that will give strength to the members. I have always found the churches that were most careful about this to be the most prosperous. We believe and teach that it is:

A divine institution. Paul says in our text, “For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered.” Page 134, Sermons and Songs 1889

COMMUNION.                                   Page 135, Sermons and Songs

Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles. He did not require them to attend to it because the Lord had observed it previous to His crucifixion, but because the Lord required it of them. This is not an institution placed in the Church by human authority, by John Wesley, Wm. Rogers, or Alex. Campbell, but by Jesus Christ, the author of our salvation. It is sometimes called a Sacrament, that is, a sign and an oath, from the Latin Sacramentum, signifying an oath, taken by the Roman soldiers. It was applied to this institution by our Catholic friends. You will not find the word “sacrament ” in the Bible. It should not be applied to this ordinance. I have been astonished to hear old Disciples talk about “taking sacrament.” We should speak as the Bible speaks. If we find sacrament, say sacrament, if not, then we should desist from calling this institution a sacrament.

2. It is sometimes called the “eucharist,” a thanksgiving, because in the instituting of it Christ gave thanks. This is improper and unscriptural. Never call it the “eucharist.”

It is sometimes called the Lord’s Supper, because it was instituted in the evening. Our ” Church of God ” friends, (Winbrenarians) seem to think it essential to the validity of the ordinance that it be taken in the evening, no matter what evening in the week, so it is in the evening, but when we come to Bible terms it is nowhere called the Lord’s supper. Luke xxii, 19, 20, ” And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, this is my body which is given for you, this do in remembrance of me. Likewise, also the cup after supper, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood which is shed for you. ” From this we learn that it was after supper that Christ instituted this ordinance. COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

Page 136                                SERMONS AND SONGS.

Christ did not eat two suppers at the same time, before rising from the table. The word Diepnon, translated “supper’ ” signified a full meal. We are nowhere commanded to take a supper. Jesus Christ did not say you are to eat a supper in remembrance of me. We nowhere read of the apostles or first Christians coming together to eat supper. There is no account in the Acts of the Apostles, where the Disciples came together to eat a supper and to wash one another’s feet. Why people will be such sticklers for unscriptural ceremonies, I cannot understand. But so it is. God help all to see the truth in these things.

Jesus says, ” This is My body. ” From this the Catholics get what is called transubstantiation, i.e., the literal flesh and the literal blood of Christ. ” This is my flesh, this is my blood. ” Do they mean the natural body, or the glorified body? If glorified body, flesh and blood cannot inherit eternal life. They could not partake of the glorified body. If the natural body, how do they get the wafer converted into the real flesh and blood of Christ? They have been eating of it — millions of them—for hundreds of years and are still eating and expect to continue to eat until the end of time, of that one body. What a stupendous miracle! Can any thoughtful person believe for a moment that Christ meant that his language was then to be taken literally? This style of passage in dispute, is very common in both old and new testament.

We read, “The seven good kine are seven years; and the seven good ears are seven years.” Gen. 41:26. Joseph interpreting Pharaoh’s dream.

Jesus said, ” Destroy this temple (pointing to his body) and in three days I will raise it up.” John 2:19. Again

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889 Page 137

COMMUNION.                                   137

Jesus says, ” The field is the world,” Matt. 13:38. Verse 39, “the reapers are the angels.”

” That rock was Christ,” 1 Cor.10:4, says Paul, speaking of Horeb. ” This is my body.”

The priests claim that through certain maneuvers of theirs that they can change that little wafer into the real flesh and blood of Christ. Some time ago I was talking with a good old Catholic lady and she was talking about the Catholics believing in transubstantiation and the Lutherans believing in consubstantiation; I asked her what she meant by the term transubstantiation and she could not tell me but said that her priest could tell me.

I remember hearing of a lady who had married a Catholic, and they were all anxious to have her join the Catholic Church, but she refused, telling them that she could not be­lieve their doctrine of transubstantiation. Finally, she made a proposition to the priest that if he would allow her to make the wafer, and then convert it into the real flesh and blood of Christ and take it himself in her presence, she would believe the doctrine and join their Church. The priest agreed to her proposition, and she went to work and put arsenic in the wafer enough to kill him if he didn’t get it changed. The time came, the priest went through the motions and said his prayers, and when through he told her he was ready. She said to him, ” now father, there is enough arsenic in that to kill you if it is not changed, but if you have it changed it cannot hurt you, and if you can take it without injury, I will believe your doctrine; but if you will not take it I will not believe your doctrine, and will not believe you believe it yourself.” The priest would not swallow the dose, and she was not converted to Catholicism.

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

Page 138                     SERMONS AND SONGS.

How true the story is I cannot tell, but there is something in it that will show the thinness of that foolishness called transubstantiation.

We have said we should not call this ordinance sacrament, eucharist, nor the Lord’s supper, you may ask what is the Scriptural name? Well, let Paul name this ordinance.

4. He calls it “the communion;” 1 Cor.10:16. ” The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ.” Here is the bible name. It is nowhere said the partaking of the ” bread and cup ” is the supper, sacrament, eucharist, nor to be taken in the evening. I want you to keep that in your minds, dear friends. It is the communion with Christ and with His people. We all partake of the same loaf and drink of the same cup. We do not pass before you a plate with little pieces of bread. Why not? Because we do not believe that the body of Christ should be torn into fragments, no, we believe in the unity. of the body of Christ. That God’s people should be one. We believe ” there is one body.” Eph. iv. 4; not many bodies. NOTE: PER DON HENDERSON, I am not sure about this. It sounds like “ONE CUP CHURCH” My Granddad always told me, “If you should go to a “ONE CUP CHURCH” always sit up front. I am of the belief that it is NOT sanitary to have only one cup.

Again, it is a symbolical ordinance. “Took bread,” the symbols are bread and wine. The one referring to the Savior’s body, and the other to His precious blood.

1. The breaking of bread refers to the giving of His sacred person. We see Him dying on the cross. It brings Calvary fresh to the mind. We say when we break this loaf, ” He died for us. ” When I partake of it myself, I say, ” I believe that Jesus died for me. ” What a blessed truth. Jesus died for me!
2. When we pour out the ” fruit of the vine” into the cup, we say that Jesus shed His precious blood for us.  

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

COMMUNION.                                   Page  139

Poured out His life for us. When I partake of the cup, I say that ” I believe that Jesus shed His blood for me. “

“Alas, and did my Savior bleed,
And did my Savior die:

Would He devote that sacred head, For such a worm as I?

” Was it for crimes that I had done,
He groaned upon the tree;
Amazing pity, grace unknown,
And love beyond degree. “

Let us ever remember when partaking of these emblems, the eating of the loaf and partaking of the cup refers to our actual participation of the benefits of the Savior’s death. When we were immersed we were immersed into death. Rom. vi.3

3. ” THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME. ” It is a
4. commemorative ordinance. When we partake of it we are to remember His person, His love, His sufferings, and death. Sometimes we are asked if we have a command to attend to this? We answer, most assuredly, a very positive one. ” This do in remembrance of Me. ” There it is in the imperative mode. If it was said in the Acts of the Apostles or Epistolary writings in reference to feet washing, or the taking of the full meal (as our German Baptist friends do) “This do in remembrance of Me ” how soon we would submit. Feet washing is not in the imperative mode, and hence not a command of God, to be observed in the public assembly of the saints. We say the communion is a command. My father died before I was born and I have often thought that I would be glad if I could have had his picture or something

Page 140                     SERMONS AND SONGS.

of his to remember him by, but I have nothing ; all I know is what friends tell me.

I have been at places where death had entered the family circle and taken away a loved one and they have brought me a picture, or a lock of hair, or one of the garments and showed me and have said ” this is what I keep to remember our loved one by.”

One of my dear children, a loved little boy, was taken away by death when he was eleven months old. One day when at home six or seven years after his death, my wife brought out a nice little roll of clothes, and there were the little shoes, and stockings, and dress, and she asked, ” do you know these?” I said ” yes, they are dear little Harry’s.” How fresh he came to my mind. I remembered him.

We keep the first day of the week in commemoration of the resurrection of our Lord from the dead, and in connection with that we break the loaf. We do not think the day is properly observed without attending to the communion. The two go together. You need not think that you are observing the Lord’s day by staying at home and reading your book as some do ; Christ was delivered for our sins and raised for our justification. Hence, in this ordinance we say He died for us, shed His blood for us, and in the keeping of the day we say, He was raised for us. One event is just as important as the other, and both are to be kept together. Both are commemorative. During the late civil war a man of Massachusetts hired a substitute. The substitute was killed and buried. The place was marked, and after the War was over, the man went down and erected a monument at that grave inscribed with large letters, ” He died for me”.

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

COMMUNION.                                 Page 141

So, we come to this monument and say of Jesus, ” He died for me.”

4. This is a Confessing ordinance. We hereby profess our esteem for Christ, our faith in Christ and our dependence upon Christ for salvation. Salvation is in Christ Jesus. We are sinful, needy, dependent creatures. Sometimes some say they cannot partake of it because they are unworthy, for Paul says, ” Whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” 1 Cor.11: 27-29.

Now, my brother, did you ever study that Scripture care­fully? What do you mean by being worthy? Do you think you must be perfectly pure before you can do what God commands you? Peter says, ” seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth.” 1 Pet.1: 22.

You cannot fit yourself by refusing to obey. Let me call your attention to the clause (of the 29th verse of 1 Cor. xi.) ” not discerning the Lord’s body.” If you partake of the loaf without remembering that Jesus died for you, or do not believe that He died for you, you partake unworthily. If you partake of the cup without remembering He shed His blood for you, or do not believe that His blood was shed for the remission of your sins, you partake of the cup unworthily. You must discern the Lord’s body; if you do and partake with faith, God’s blessing will be upon you. We have many weak and sickly Christians to-day, because they do not appreciate and attend to this Institution as they ought.

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889 Page 142

If all the churches would keep this ordinance as they should, they could live better, and prosper more than they do, preacher or no preacher.

5. WE BELIEVE IT TO BE A COVENANTING ORDINANCE. God in and by this ordinance, as it were, declares that He is ours and by it declares we are His. We say we believe Christ died for us, and we will try, by God’s grace assisting, to live for Him.
6. IT IS A PROFESSIONAL ORDINANCE. In this we do show the Lord’s death, I. e., we keep up the remembrance of the event in the world. We show,
7. Our faith. ” Without faith it is impossible to please Him.” (Heb. 11: 6.) ” Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Acts xvi, 31.)

Faith is unavailing unless followed by acts of obedience. “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. * * * Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith, without works is dead, also.” (James 2: 17, 24, 26.)

2. Our hope through it. We have but ” one hope.” (Eph. 4:4.) Christ is our hope, He is my only hope. If I get to Heaven, it will be through the merits of Christ.
3. Our separation and distinction from those who disbe­lieve, despise, or neglect it. The line is drawn, when the emblems are passed, we may be sitting by the side of the unbeliever, we say we believe in Christ by partaking of the emblems, and he passes them by and says by the act, that he does not believe in Christ.
4. We believe it is the Christian’s social ordinance. It is the family ordinance, for all the household of faith, for the kindred of the Savior.

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889 Page 143

COMMUNION.                                 Page 143

We come around our Father’s table. We are at home; it is not my business to invite you to the table or your business to invite me. When I am at home, I do-not go and invite Cora, and then tell Emma to get to her place, and then go and get Perry and tell him where to sit and coax them all to come and eat. Each one in the family knows his place and takes it. When a stranger, or one that does not belong to the family comes, he expects to be invited and told where to sit. When we come to the Lord’s table, we say this is the Lord’s table and that all Christians, or all the Lord’s children have a right to that table, and should not wait to be invited by man, but each one in order partake of the emblems when passed.

• It is a perpetual ordinance. ” Ye do show the Lord’s death till He comes. ” From Pentecost till Christ comes the Gospel is to be preached. Salvation’s stream is to flow. Prayer is to be continued. The death of Christ is to be per­petuated. Christ is coming again. This is a consoling doctrine of the gospel. He is coming to receive His disciples unto Himself; to take vengeance upon them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. In this institution we say that we believe Christ died for us, shed His blood for us, and that He will come again and receive us, if we are faithful to Him. Dare any of you go away and say we do not believe in the blood of Christ, that we do not believe in the second advent of Christ. You dare not. We believe these truths with all our heart. This monument was erected in Jerusalem A. D. 34 and has stood for nearly 1900 years and is to stand till Hie comes, thank God. Infidels cannot overthrow it. Quakers or Swedenborgians can neither overthrow it. It will remain ” till He comes. “
• Page 144

” 0, I wonder when Jesus is coming again, His waiting believers to bless;

And gather to heaven His faithful ones then, And give them sweet, heavenly rest?

Many loved ones will meet us and cheer our glad souls,

Our joys will be full then, I know;

Hallelujahs will ring when we enter the goal,

0 Christian, be ready to go

9. THE TIME. When should it be observed by all Christians? Once a year, once a quarter, once a month? When did the Disciples come together to break bread, or commune?

Does the New Testament tell us? Would it be safe to follow the apostolic Church in this? Is there one passage of Scripture that will make this plain to an honest hearted inquirer? Let us see. Will you turn to Acts 20:7? And upon the first day of the year, does it read? No. The first of each quarter? No. When they had quarterly meeting? No. The first day of the month? No. A first day of A week? No. How then does it read? You look, now, and read closely and take your pencil and underscore that definite article, ” And upon the first day of the week when the Disciples came to­gether to have prayer meeting? No. To have Sunday School? No. To hear Paul preach? No. “To break bread. ” How does that sound? Here we learn:

1. The Disciples ” came together. “
2. The object of their coming together is stated, ” to break bread. “
3. The time a given, ” the first day of the week. “

Is it not safe for the Disciples of Christ to follow the example of the first Christians in this important institution?

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

COMMUNION.                                      Page 145

We meet some professors that tell us, that ” Luke did not say every first day 1 Did he not say the first day? If it had not been their custom to meet regularly upon that day, to commemorate the death of Christ, would it not have been recorded? The sects generally object to weekly communion. They say ” it is too frequent, and becomes too common. That by partaking of it so often, it will become only a matter of form, and that it destroys its sacredness and the solemnity of the occasion, ” etc.

Why not stop praying so much? Pray only once in three months? I don’t know, it may be the reason some make such long prayers. They don’t pray very often and it takes them a good while to get through with it. Let us have a little talk with a presiding elder:

Disciple. — Well, Elder, what do you think of weekly communion?

Elder. — I think it “isn’t best to commune so often. It is a very important sacrament and people may partake of it in a very formal way by partaking of it so often.

D —. Then your people do not partake of the communion ” the first day of the week? “

E —. Yes, we generally attend to this sacrament or eucharist the first day of the week when we have our quar­terly meetings.

D —. Do you read in the Bible where the Disciples came together the first day of the week when they had quarterly meeting to commune?

E —. No, sir, I don’t know that I do, but it is the way our church does.

D —. Have you a very large district, Elder?

E —. Yes, sir, I have my time all taken. I have a quarterly meeting for every Sunday.

10

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

146                    SERMONS AND SONGS.

D —. That keeps you, pretty busy looking after the churches. Do you commune, or have what you call ” sac­rament services,” at all ‘your quarterly meetings?

E —. Yes, sir.

D —. Do you partake of the emblems each time, yourself

?

E—. Yes, sir, of course.

D —. Does it do you good to thus meet with your brethren

and commemorate the death and sufferings of Jesus?

E—. Indeed it does. It brings to my mind afresh the sufferings of Jesus, and makes me love Him more.

D      I should think if it was too often for your brethren
to partake of it weekly, that it would be too Often for you. Elder, if some of your brethren would go from quarterly meeting to quarterly meeting, after you, the year through, would they be permitted to attend to this institution each Lord’s day?

E —. Of course.

Now, anyone can see the inconsistency of that position against weekly communion. Can we think too often of the death of Christ? I remember of seeing a man whose wife died after they had been married about a year, go Lord’s day after Lord’s day, rain or shine, to the cemetery and there bow at the grave of his loved wife. I never heard any one say that that man thought too much of his wife, or that he went too often to that grave.

Let us look at history for a moment. What does it say on the subject?

1. Dr. Neander says: ” As we have already remarked, the celebration of the Lord’s supper was still held to constitute an ‘essential part of divine worship on every Sunday, as appears from Justyn Martyr A. D. 150, and the whole

COMMUNION.                               Page 147

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

church partook of the communion after they had joined in the amen of the preceding prayer. The deacons carried the bread and wine to every one present in order.” History of the Christian Religion and Church. Vol. 1, p. 332.

During the first two centuries the practice of weekly comm­union was universal, and it was continued in the Greek Church until the seventh century. Such as neglected it three weeks in succession, were excommunicated.

Wm. King, Archbishop of Dublin, speaks of the disciples coming together to break bread ” at least every Lord’s day.”

Dr. Scott says, ” it was constantly administered every Lord’s day.”

Dr. Mason says: ” The Lord’s supper was observed by the first Christians every Lord’s day, nor will this be denied by any man who has candidly investigated the subject. Weekly communion did not die with apostles and their con­temporaries.”

Dr. Dodridge says: “It is well known that the primitive Christians administered the eucharist every Lord’s day.”

Matthew Henry says: ” In the primitive times it was the custom of Churches to receive the Lord’s supper every Lord’s day.”

Dr. J. M. Cramp, president of the Arcadia College, says: ” It is well known that the Lord’s supper was observed by the primitive Churches every Lord’s day.”

Alexander Carson says, ” it was observed every first day of the week.”

Alexander Campbell, in the Christian Baptist, page 174, says, ” that the primitive Disciples did in all their meetings on the first day of the week, attend to the breaking of bread an essential part of the worship due their Lord, we are rally persuaded.”

COPIED FROM THE BOOK: SERMONS AND SONGS, 1889

Page 148                     SERMONS AND SONGS.

We might call Adam Clark, John Wesley, and John Calvin to testify, but this is enough on this point. We are sure that the first Church established at Jerusalem ” continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread’ and in prayers.” Acts ii, 42.

10. LET US NOTICE TABlE POSTURE. Dr. Dodridge Says: ” A table posture seems most eligible, as having been used ‘by Christ and His apostles and being peculiarly suitable to the notion of a sacred feast and kneeling which was never introduced into the Church till transubstantiation was re­ceived, may prove an occasion of superstition.” for my part I think we should be humble, but in attending to those institutions try and do as near like the first Christians did, as you can. We have no idea that the Disciples were in a kneeling posture when Christ administered this, the night in which He was betrayed. Neither do we believe that it was ever so observed in the Apostolic Church.

CONCLUSION.

We must now leave this subject with you, and before doing so, let us exhort you to never neglect this sacred institution, to never forget it. I will illustrate this and then I am done. During the ” gold fever ” in California some years ago, an only son of a widow went from this vicinity to California. Every little while he would send his earnings home to his mother. After a while his health failed, and when the last dime he possessed had been spent, he found himself dying, sickness and want destroying his life. But just before he died, he took his knife and cut a lock of hair, had it put in a letter and sent home, saying, ” I thought maybe you would want something to think of when I am gone. I send you this lock of hair as a token of my dying love.” After

COMMUNION.         Page 149

A while the mother became burdened with debt; and her things were to be sold. When the officer took up the Bible, she grasped it, and took out the lock of hair and pressed it to her lips. She said, ” You may sell my home, take my Bible, but let me keep this lock of hair.” ” Why, yes, poor woman,” said the sheriff, ” but why do you prize this simple curl?” ” Ah,” said the weeping mother, ” it is worth more to me than all else; it is the last token of love of my dying boy. I will keep it, watch it, as long as I live.”

So, this is the last token of our dying Savior and we must keep it, watch it as long as we are here, or ” till He comes.” “This do in remembrance of me.”