Jesus was instituting the lord's supper

JESUS WAS INSTITUTING THE LORD'S SUPPER
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1 Corinthians11:23-2523ForI received from the
LORD what I also passedon to you: The LORD Jesus,
on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when
he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my
body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of
me." 25In the same way, after supper he took the cup,
saying, "This cup is the new covenantin my blood; do
this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
The Old DispensationMerging In The New. -
Mark 14:12-17, 22-25.Parallelpassages:Matthew 26:17-19, 26-29;Luke 22:7-
13, 19, 20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-34
J.J. Given
I. THE PASSOVER AND THE INSTITUTION OF THE SUPPER.

1. Comparisonof the records. The memorial Passoverdiffered from the
Egyptian or original Passove
Biblical Illustrator
For I have receivedof the Lord Jesus that which also I delivered unto you.
1 Corinthians 11:23-26
Giving as we receive
At a sailors'meeting a seamanprayed, "Lord, make us ships with two
hatchways;one to take in cargo, and the other to give it out." A goodprayer;
Paul knew its answer, "Ihave receivedof the Lord that which, also I delivered
unto you" (1 Corinthians 11:23). We are not storehouses;we are ships
intended to trade with the heavenly country and bring supplies for a needy
world. Always loading ends in overloading;if we unload, we shall soonbe
reloaded. He who keeps his talent in a napkin, will lose both napkin and
talent; one will rot, and the other rust.

The Lord's Supper
D. Thomas, D.D.
Four things strike us with amazement: —
I. THAT ANY SHOULD DOUBT THE GENUINENESSOF
CHRISTIANITY. Here is an institution that was started the night previous to
our Saviour's crucifixion, and which from that to this hour, through eighteen
long centuries, has been attended to by all the branches of the true Church.
Since its origin thousands of generations have passedaway, many systems
have risen and disappeared, nations have been organised, flourished, and
broken up, but this ordinance continues. And what for? To commemorate the
greatcentral fact of the gospel, viz., that Christ died. Is there any other factin
history sustainedby evidence half so powerful as this?
II. THAT ANY SHOULD MISINTERPRETTHIS ORDINANCE. It is to
"show forth the Lord's death." There are three abuses of this institution
which imply the grossestmisinterpretation.
1. The gustatory. The Corinthians thus abused it. Hence, in the preceding
verses he says, "Whenye come together, therefore, into one place, this is not
to eat the Lord's supper," etc. They had been accustomed, in their heathen
festivals, to give way to gluttony and intemperance. Many of them, from the
force of old habits, were tempted to use the Lord's Supper in this way, hence
they were guilty of profaning the institution. Thus, they ate and drank
"unworthily," and by so doing ate and drank condemnation to themselves.
2. The superstitious. There are some who believe that after the words of
consecrationpronouncedby the priest over these elements, the elements
become carnally the "body and blood of the Lord." This is transubstantiation.

3. The formalistic. There are those who partake of the bread and wine merely
as a matter of ceremony. It is regarded as the proper thing to be done, and is
done mechanically. We evangelicalChristians are not guilty of the first nor
the second, but we may be of the third. Let us "examine ourselves";so let us
eat, etc.
III. THAT ANY SHOULD SAY THE INSTITUTION IS NOT PERMANENT
IN ITS OBLIGATION. The apostle tells us distinctly that it was to show forth
the Lord's death till He come. On to that distant point the obligation is
binding. There are some professing Christians who think themselves too
spiritual to observe such an ordinance. These very spiritual ones, to be
consistent, should avoid all scientific studies, for science has to do with
material forms. They should also avoid all Biblical studies, for Biblical truths
are, for the most part, embodied in material facts. Christ Himself was flesh
and blood.
IV. THAT ANY ACQUAINTED WITH THE BIOGRAPHY OF CHRIST
SHOULD NEGLECT IT. Consider—
1. That it is to commemorate the world's greatestBenefactorthat has served
the world —
(1)In the highestway, effectedits deliverance from sin and hell.
(2)By the most unparalleled sacrifice.
(3)With the most disinterestedlove.

2. It is enjoined by the world's greatestBenefactor, under the most touching
circumstances. How amazing it is that men should neglectit!Conclusion: The
excuses that men make for neglecting this are singularly absurd.
1. A man will sometimes say, "I canbe savedwithout it." We ask, who told
you so? What is damnation? What but disobedience to Christ? And he who
neglects this institution disobeys Him.
2. Another man will say, "I am unfit for it." We say, if you are unfit for this
you are unfit for any other religious observance;unfit to read the Bible, sing,
or pray, nor canyou ever become fit by neglecting your duty.
(D. Thomas, D.D.)
The sacramentof the Lord's Supper of Divine institution
Bp. Beveridge.
I. WHAT IS A SACRAMENT? In general, the visible sign of an invisible
grace.
1. As God hath used covenants, so also sacraments always.
2. They are part, not of His natural, but instituted worship.
3. They are all pledges of the covenant of grace.
4. They all represent Christ the Mediator —

(1)To suffer.
(2)Or having suffered.
5. In all sacraments there are two parts.(1)The thing signified.
II. WHAT IS THE LORD'S SUPPER? A sacrament, whereinthe outward
signs are bread and wine.
III. WHAT ARE WE TO UNDERSTANDBY DIVINE INSTITUTION? That
it was instituted of God, as the others were not, which the Church of Rome
maintains to be sacraments, viz., confirmation, orders, penance, matrimony,
and extreme unction.
IV. HOW DOES IT APPEAR TO BE OF DIVINE INSTITUTION (Luke
22:19, 20).
V. WHEREFOREWAS IT INSTITUTED BYGOD?
1. When God had made man, He entered into a covenantof works with him
(Leviticus 18:5).
2. This covenantman broke, and so became miserable.

3. Hence God, of His mercy, enters into a covenantof grace (Jeremiah31:33).
4. This covenantof grace was establishedin Christ (Hebrews 12:21; 2
Corinthians 1:20).
5. This covenantman is also apt to miscarry in; so as —
(1)To be forgetful of it.
(2)Notto believe in it.
(3)To receive no benefit from it.
6. Hence God instituted this sacrament.
(1)To make us mindful of this covenantand Christ (Luke 22:19).
(2)To confirm and sealit to us (Romans 4:11).
(3)To convey the benefits of it to us.Conclusion:
1. Be thankful for this sacrament.

2. Do not neglectthe use of it.
3. Prepare yourselves for it.
(1)Acquaint yourselves with the nature of it.
(2)Repent.
(3)Act faith in Christ.
(Bp. Beveridge.)
The doctrine of the Holy Communion
C. W. Furse, M.A.
I. It is A MEMORIAL OF THE SACRIFICE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST.
1. See how closelyit is connectedwith that death. Consider —(1) The time;
Christ and His apostles had met for the last time before He died.(2) The
action; the breaking being a sign of the dissolution of the body, the separation
of body and soul in death, and also that His death was an actof free-will. He
had powerover His life to take it up and lay it down, just as of His own accord
He took up from the table the bread, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples
to eat.
2. To this picture the three Evangelists and St. Paul all describe the Lord as
"blessing," or"giving thanks," as He brake the bread. And so this also

afterwards passedas a synonym for the sacrament. St. Paul calls it "the cup of
blessing," and among us it has the name of "Eucharist."
3. Since the sacrifice of the death of Christ is the cause ofour justification, our
chief concernmust be to make sure of our partaking of it. It is one thing to say
"Christ died for all"; another, "Christ died for me." Therefore everyman for
himself must stretchforth this hand of faith and take to himself, appropriate,
his part in the atoning sacrifice. The sacramentis an instrument for such an
appropriation.
II. A MEANS OF PRESENT COMMUNIONWITHCHRIST. As it was the
work of Christ of His own free-will and grace to offer His body upon the
Cross, so now every fruit of that sacrifice which we gather in His Church
comes fresh from His living hand, and His work, and is nothing less. "Lo, I am
with you always," is the secretof our life in the Church; and nowhere more
effectually than in the holy sacramentis His presence made real and true to
the eye of faith. The manner of our Lord's presence cannotbe explained, but
His presence in some supernatural form is there, or the text has no proper
sense.
III. THE HIGHEST ACT OF WORSHIP IN THE CHURCH.
1. The faithful Christian, in preparation for this holy act, examines himself,
and confesseshis unworthiness.
2. Then we make an offering of our stores, which, though small, is at leasta
symbol of homage.

3. Then the oblation of bread and wine is blessedand takeninto His service —
an offering of the first-fruits, in acknowledgmentthat life's bounties are His
gift.
4. Then comes an oblation of greatersignificance. The worshipperoffers
himself with a free heart to receive Christ, and in return gives himself to God.
5. Above all, we come nearestto the work of heavenitself, where the Church
worships God in the presence ofthe Lamb as it had been slain. So in the
Church below our highest actof worship is celebratedin that place, where the
Lamb of God and His sacrifice is brought most near to us.
(C. W. Furse, M.A.)
"This do in remembrance of Me
Lyman Abbott.
If Christ had said, "Build Me some fine cathedralthat shall stand as a
memorial to Me," how we would have poured out our contributions that
somewhere in this world there might stand some central temple, over which
the cross onwhich He hung should tower throughout the ages!But the
cathedralwould have passedinto hands of men corrupted by ambition. He
made His monument of loving hearts. Only this do: Sometimes sit down
together;sometimes remember that last occasionwhenI graspedthe hands of
those I loved, lookedinto their faces, and heard their voices. He longs to be
remembered as love always longs to be remembered. He wanted not His name
to be blotted out of human memory, nor His personality to be forgotten from
throbbing hearts. He commands and guides you in many things. He gives you
opportunity to serve His children, His poor, in many ways;but there is only
one personalrequest He makes of you, that now and again, at some supper

table, with simply bread and wine, you shall, as they that love Him have
throughout all ages, perpetuate His memory and show your love for Him.
(Lyman Abbott.)
The remembrance of Christ
H. W. Beecher.
I saw behind an hotel in Switzerland a fine garden, and I unexpectedly found
there American flowers, and being far awayfrom home, and half homesick,
they afforded me greatpleasure. Every one of them seemedlike a message to
me full of affection by association. So the remembrance of Christ in the Lord's
Supper rekindles our love to Him.
(H. W. Beecher.)
Expressive symbols
H. W. Beecher.
I cannot bring back my little child, but I cantake a locketand look at his face,
and he springs to life in my inward thought. There are scenes in my childhood
that I cannottread again, but a very simple memorial, a little dried flower, or
some little yellow faded note brings back again the sweetsense ofan early
experience. And so, by some such very simple symbol, we can bring again
before us the Saviour broken for us, His blood shed for us, His love so great,
dying to give us life.
(H. W. Beecher.)
The purpose of the Lord's Supper
DeanBradley.

We soonforgetobjects which are removed from our sight; and our Lord, who
knows and pities this weaknessofour nature, has given us an abiding
memorial of Himself. He has appointed an ordinance for this very purpose, to
remind us of His love. "All our fresh springs" are in our crucified Lord, and
therefore He brings Himself frequently before us as our crucified Lord that
we may go to Him as the greatsource of our mercies, and take of His
blessings.
(DeanBradley.)
The Lord's Supper, a simple memorial
We need not look for greatthings in order to discovergreattruths. To those
who reachafter God, He will revealHis deepestsecrets throughthings
insignificant in themselves, within the routine of common lives. No event
occurs more regularly than the daily meal, none, perhaps, gathers around it so
many pleasantassociations.Its simplest form, in Christ's time, consistedin
eating bread and drinking a cup of wine. Into this act, one evening, He
gatheredall the meaning of the ancient sacrifices, allsacred and tender
relation betweenHimself and His followers, and all the prophecies of His
perfectedkingdom.
That the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed took bread
Christ taking bread, and our taking it from Him
T. Fuller, D.D.
I. HE TOOK BREAD.
1. Why did Christ choose so cheapand common a thing to exhibit His body
in?(1) Herein He graciouslyprovided for the poor. Had He appointed some
costlyrecipe, the poor could not procure it for themselves, and the charity of
the rich would not purchase it for others.(2)Had He instituted it in some
precious element, people might have imputed the efficacythereof to its
natural worth and working, not to Christ's institution. Christ therefore
choosetha thing so mean in itself, that it cannoteclipse God of His glory; none

can be so mad as to attribute to plain bread itself such spiritual operation. Let
us take heed how we despise the simplicity of God's ordinance. Say not with
Naaman, "Are not Abana and Pharpar," etc. Is not the bread at the baker's,
and the wine at the vintner's, as goodas that in the sacrament? And far be it
from us to seek withour own inventions to beguard that which God will have
plain. Rather let us pray, that our eyes may be anointed with that eye-salve, to
see majestyin the meanness, and the state in the simplicity, of the sacraments.
2. But amongst such variety of cheap elements, why was bread preferred? To
show our bodies can as well subsist without bread, as our souls without a
Saviour. It is called"the staff of bread"; other meats are but as "pretty wands
to whisk in our hands. Without bread no feast; with bread no famine.
II. HE SAID UNTO THEM, TAKE, i.e., in their hands, and put it to their
mouth; not as the custom lately introduced in the Romish Church, for the
priest to put it in the mouth of every communicant. But it is pleaded, that it is
unmannerly for laymen to handle Christ's body; and therefore it is most
reverence to take it with their mouths.
1. There is no such clownin Christianity as he who will be more mannerly
than God will have him. It is most reverence for us to do as God commands
us. Ahaz tempted God in saying, be "would not tempt Him" (Isaiah 7:12).
Those do little better who, more nice than wise, strain courtesynot to take
Christ's body in their hands, when He reaches it.
2. Take it strictly, and our mouths are as unworthy as our hands to receive
Christ's body. But, seeing it is Christ's pleasure to come under the roof of our
mouth, let Him also pass through the porch of our hands. The rather because
it seemeththat we entertain Christ's body in more state, and with more

observance towards it, when the more servants attend it, the more members of
our body using their service in receiving it.
3. The Romish custom loseththe significancyof the hand of faith. The taking
Christ's body in our hands mindeth us spiritually by faith to apprehend and
lay hold on His mercies and merits.
(T. Fuller, D.D.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(23) ForI have receivedof the Lord.—Better, For I receivedfrom the Lord.
Do these words imply that St. Paul had a direct revelation from Christ of the
words and facts which he now recalls, ormerely that he knew from the
accounts givenhim by others who had been present, what took place on that
memorable and solemnoccasion?
The whole structure of the passageseems to imply that what follows had been
receivedby St. Paul directly from Christ, and that he is not appealing to a
well-knowntradition, in which case he would scarcelyhave used the singular,
“I received,” nor to something which he had learnt from the other Apostles, in
which case he would not have said “I” emphatically (the word being
emphasisedby expressionin the Greek), nor “from the Lord,” for the other
Apostles had not receivedtheir knowledge ofthese facts “from the Lord,” but
from their own observationand hearing. How Christ thus communicated
these truths to His new Apostle we are not told. The method of
communication (whether in a trance, or state of ecstasy, orany other
supernatural manner) does not appear to cause either doubt or difficulty to

those to whom the Apostle conveyed the information thus miraculously
bestowedupon him.
That which also I delivered unto you.—The Apostle was not now for the first
time communicating these solemn facts to the Corinthians. He had told them
all this before, and therefore they were sinning againstknowledge whenthey
degradeda feastwhich they knew to be so solemnto a purpose so unworthy.
There now follows an accountof the institution of the Lord’s Supper, which,
as compared with the accounts given in the Gospelnarratives (see Matthew
26:26-29;Mark 14:22-25;Luke 22:19-20), possessessome noteworthy
features. The Evangelists (St. Matthew and St. Mark)wrote their accounts
many years after the occurrence, andrecorded what they remembered to
have observedand heard. St. Paul writes here, within a very few years at all
events of his having receivedit, an accountof what had been directly
communicated by the Lord. This was also mostprobably the first written
record of what occurredon that solemn night.
The fact that St. Luke’s narrative agrees mostcloselywith St. Paul’s, would
imply, not as some rationalising critics insinuate, that St. Paul was indebted to
St. Luke; but that St. Luke attachedhigh value to an accountwhich his
companion had receiveddirectly from the glorified Christ. The only
differences of any importance betweenSt. Luke’s and St. Paul’s narrative
are—(1)St. Luke writes “givenfor you;” St. Paul omits the word “given” (see
Note on 1Corinthians 11:24). (2) St. Luke omits the words “this do ye as oft as
ye drink it,” after the giving of the cup; but he implies them by stating that the
cup was given “in like manner” to the bread, in connectionwith which he
records these words. The suggestionthat St. Luke copied his accountof the
Last Supper from this Epistle is a mere speculation, and in the highestdegree
improbable. If that Evangelisthad used this Epistle in writing his Gospel, is it
likely that he would have been content with giving the somewhatscanty

accountof our Lord’s appearances afterHis resurrection, when he had at
hand the much ampler recordof the appearance to the 500 brethren and to
James, which this Epistle contains? (1 Corinthians 15)
In all the narratives, however, the outlines of the scene are the same. There
can be no mistake as to their all being truthful and (as the minor
discrepancies prove)honestly independent records of an actualhistorical
scene. It is worthy of remark that in the heatedcontroversies whichhave
ragedaround the Eucharistic Feastas to its spiritual significance, its
evidential value has been frequently lost sight of. If the Betrayal and
Crucifixion are not historical facts, how can we accountfor the existence of
the Eucharistic Feast?Here is an Epistle whose authenticity the most
searching and ruthless criticism has never disputed. We have evidence of the
existence ofthis feastand its connectionwith events which occurredonly
twenty years before. If we bear in mind that the Apostles were Jews, and yet
spoke of that wine which they drank as “blood”—thatthey were lovingly
devoted to the personof Christ, and yet spake of that bread which they ate as
His “flesh”—canthe wildestimagination conceive of that practice having
originated with themselves as their most solemnreligious rite, and the
profoundest expressionof their love to their Lord? Could anything but the
record given in the Gospelnarrative possibly accountfor such a ceremony
holding such a place in a sectcomposedof ChristianisedJews? A dark
conspiracylike that of Catiline might have selectedthe tasting of human blood
as the symbol of the conspirators’sanguinary hate of all human order and
life; but such a band of men as the early Christians certainly could not of their
own thought have made such a choice, and publicly proclaimed it. And if this
be true—if Jesus, the night before an ignominious death, instituted this
strange and solemnrite, which has been handed down century after century
in unbroken continuity—can that foresightas to the future of His Church be
assignedto one who was less than what Christendom claims her Lord to be?
When Christ died His Apostles gave up all as lost, and went back sorrowfully
to their old work as fishermen; Christendom was not an afterthought of the
Apostles, but the forethought of the Lord.

The same night in which he was betrayed.—Thesewords imply that the
history of the Betrayal was familiar, and they also solemnly and touchingly
remind the Corinthians of the strange contrastbetweenthe events of that
night and the scenesin which they indulge now on the same night that they
partake of that supper.
BensonCommentary
1 Corinthians 11:23. For I have receivedof the Lord — Doubtless by special
revelation; that which also I delivered unto you — In my former preaching on
this subject, in which, as in all things else, I have been careful most exactly to
adhere to my original instructions. This epistle appears to have been written
before any of the gospels, andit is probable from Galatians 1:17, &c, that
when the apostle wrote it, he had seennone of the apostles. And that the
institution of this ordinance should make a part of that immediate revelation,
with which Christ honoured this apostle, is both very remarkable, and also
affords a strong argument for the perpetuity of it in the church. “Forhad
others of the apostles (as Barclayin his Apology for the Quakers presumes to
insinuate) mistakenwhat passedat the last passover, and founded the
observationof the euchariston that mistake, surely Christ would rather have
correctedthis error in his new revelationto Paul, than have administered
such an occasionof confirming Christians in it.” — Doddridge. That the Lord
Jesus — In his own person; the same night in which he was betrayed — That
is, in the night which precededhis crucifixion, which circumstance, with the
others that follow respecting the nature and design of the sacredordinance
here spokenof, with the appointed form of its administration, Macknight
thinks was made knownto Paul by Christ himself, as a matter which merited
particular attention, because itwas a strong proof of his innocence. He knew
he was to be crucified the next day as an impostor, for calling himself the Son
of God. Having so near a prospectof his punishment, would he, by instituting
his supper, have takencare that his punishment, as an impostor, should never
be forgotten, if he had really been an impostor? No: such a supposition

exceeds allrational belief. But knowing himself to be the Son of God, and
being absolutely certain that God would acknowledgehim as his Son, by
raising him from the dead on the third day, he instituted his supper, to be
preservedby his disciples till he should return to judge the world; because he
foresaw that his death could not be remembered by his disciples, without
recollecting his resurrection, and expecting his return. Further, if Christ did
not rise from the dead according to his express promise, frequently repeated,
can it be thought that his disciples, who thus must have known him to be a
deceiver, would have perpetuated the memory of his punishment as an
impostor, and of their own shame, by beginning a service, in which his death,
that is, his punishment, would be openly published to the world? Wherefore,
since the apostles, andthe other first disciples, who were eye-witnessesoftheir
Master’s deathand resurrection, by beginning this service, and their
successors by continuing it from age to age, have published to the world the
death and resurrectionof their Master, as matters of fact known and believed
by all Christians from the beginning; this certainly is an incontrovertible
proof of the reality of Christ’s death and resurrection, and consequently it
hath fully establishedhis claim to be God’s Son, the true Messiahand Saviour
of the world. Also, this ordinance hath been the source of unspeakable
consolationto his disciples in every age, by assuring them that all his doctrines
are true, and that all his promises shall be performed in their season;
particularly his promise of returning to raise the dead, and carry his people
into heaven. In this view the institution of the supper, in the night wherein he
was betrayed, was a great instance of Christ’s love to men. And we are bound
by continuing that excellentservice in the world, to hand down to them who
come after us those unspeakable consolations whichwe ourselves enjoy,
through the pious care of our fathers, who believed in Christ before us.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
11:23-34 The apostle describes the sacredordinance, of which he had the
knowledge by revelation from Christ. As to the visible signs, these are the
bread and wine. What is eatenis calledbread, though at the same time it is
said to be the body of the Lord, plainly showing that the apostle did not mean
that the bread was changedinto flesh. St. Matthew tells us, our Lord bid them
all drink of the cup, ch. Mt 26:27, as if he would, by this expression, provide

againstany believer being deprived of the cup. The things signified by these
outward signs, are Christ's body and blood, his body broken, his blood shed,
togetherwith all the benefits which flow from his death and sacrifice. Our
Saviour's actions were, taking the bread and cup, giving thanks, breaking the
bread, and giving both the one and the other. The actions ofthe
communicants were, to take the bread and eat, to take the cup and drink, and
to do both in remembrance of Christ. But the outward acts are not the whole,
or the principal part, of what is to be done at this holy ordinance. Those who
partake of it, are to take him as their Lord and Life, yield themselves up to
him, and live upon him. Here is an accountof the ends of this ordinance. It is
to be done in remembrance of Christ, to keepfresh in our minds his dying for
us, as well as to remember Christ pleading for us, in virtue of his death, at
God's right hand. It is not merely in remembrance of Christ, of what he has
done and suffered; but to celebrate his grace in our redemption. We declare
his death to be our life, the spring of all our comforts and hopes. And we glory
in such a declaration;we show forth his death, and plead it as our accepted
sacrifice and ransom. The Lord's supper is not an ordinance to be observed
merely for a time, but to be continued. The apostle lays before the Corinthians
the dangerof receiving it with an unsuitable temper of mind; or keeping up
the covenantwith sin and death, while professing to renew and confirm the
covenantwith God. No doubt such incur greatguilt, and so render themselves
liable to spiritual judgements. But fearful believers should not be discouraged
from attending at this holy ordinance. The Holy Spirit never causedthis
scripture to be written to deter serious Christians from their duty, though the
devil has often made this use of it. The apostle was addressing Christians, and
warning them to beware of the temporal judgements with which God
chastisedhis offending servants. And in the midst of judgement, God
remembers mercy: he many times punishes those whom he loves. It is better
to bear trouble in this world, than to be miserable for ever. The apostle points
our the duty of those who come to the Lord's table. Self-examinationis
necessaryto right attendance at this holy ordinance. If we would thoroughly
searchourselves, to condemn and setright what we find wrong, we should
stop Divine judgements. The apostle closesallwith a caution againstthe
irregularities of which the Corinthians were guilty at the Lord's table. Let all

look to it, that they do not come togetherto God's worship, so as to provoke
him, and bring down vengeance onthemselves.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
For ... - In order most effectually to check the evils which existed, and to bring
them to a proper mode of observing the Lord's Supper, the apostle proceeds
to state distinctly and particularly its design. They had mistakenits nature.
They supposed it might be a common festival. They had made it the occasion
of greatdisorder. He therefore adverts to the solemn circumstances in which
it was instituted; the particular objectwhich it had in view - the
commemorationof the death of the Redeemer, and the purpose which it was
designedto subserve, which was not that of a festival, but to keepbefore the
church and the world a constant remembrance of the Lord Jesus until he
should againreturn, 1 Corinthians 11:26. By this means the apostle evidently
hoped to recallthem from their irregularities, and to bring them to a just
mode of celebrating this holy ordinance. He did not, therefore, denounce them
even for their irregularity and gross disorder; he did not use harsh, violent,
vituperative language, but he expectedto reform the evil by a mild and tender
statementof the truth, and by an appealto their consciencesas the followers
of the Lord Jesus.
I have receivedof the Lord - This cannotrefer to tradition, or mean that it
had been communicated to him through the medium of the other apostles;but
the whole spirit and scope ofthe passageseems to mean that he had derived
the knowledge ofthe institution of the Lord's supper "directly" from the Lord
himself. This might have been when on the road to Damascus, thoughthat
does not seemprobable, or it may have been among the numerous revelations
which at various times had been made to him; compare 2 Corinthians 12:7.
The reasonwhy he here says that he had receivedit directly from the Lord is,
doubtless, that he might show them that it was of divine authority. "The
institution to which I refer is what I myself receivedan accountof "from
personaland direct communication with the Lord Jesus himself, who
appointed it." It is not, therefore, of human authority. It is not of my devising,
but is of divine warrant, and is holy in its nature, and is to be observed in the
exactmanner prescribed by the Lord himself."

That which also I delivered ... - Paul founded the church at Corinth; and of
course he first instituted the observance ofthe Lord's Supper there.
The same night in which he was betrayed - By Judas; see Matthew 26:23-25,
Matthew 26:48-50. Paulseems to have mentioned the fact that it was on the
very night on which he was betrayed, in order to throw around it the idea of
greatersolemnity. He wished evidently to bring before their minds the deeply
affecting circumstances ofhis death; and thus to show them the utter
impropriety of their celebrating the ordinance with riot and disorder, The
idea is, that in order to celebrate it in a proper manner, it was needful "to
throw themselves as much as possible into the very circumstances in which it
was instituted;" and one of these circumstances mostsuited to affectthe mind
deeply was the fact that he was betrayed by a professedfriend and follower. It
is also a circumstance the memory of which is eminently suited to prepare the
mind for a proper celebrationof the ordinance now.
Took bread - Evidently the bread which was used at the celebrationof the
paschalsupper. He took the bread which happened to be before him - such as
was commonly used. It was not a "wafer" suchas the papists now use; but
was the ordinary bread which was eatenon such occasions;see the note on
Matthew 26:26.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
23. His objectis to show the unworthiness of such conduct from the dignity of
the holy supper.
I—Emphatic in the Greek. It is not my own invention, but the Lord's
institution.

receivedof the Lord—by immediate revelation (Ga 1:12; compare Ac 22:17,
18; 2Co 12:1-4). The renewalof the institution of the Lord's Supper by special
revelation to Paul enhances its solemnity. The similarity betweenLuke's and
Paul's accountof the institution, favors the supposition that the former drew
his information from the apostle, whose companionin travel he was. Thus, the
undesigned coincidence is a proof of genuineness.
night—the time fixed for the Passover(Ex 12:6): though the time for the
Lord's Supper is not fixed.
betrayed—With the traitor at the table, and death present before His eyes, He
left this ordinance as His lastgift to us, to commemorate His death. Though
about to receive suchan injury from man, He gave this pledge of His amazing
love to man.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
About these love feasts preceding the Lord’s supper, I have receivednothing
from the Lord, you have takenthe practice up from the Jews orheathens: I
do not know that it is unlawful for you civilly to feast, and eatand drink in
your private houses;but to come to make such feasts immediately before you
religiously eatand drink at the Lord’s table, I have receivedno order from
the Lord for any such practice. I have told you what I receivedfrom the Lord,
which is no more than:
That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: see
this in the evangelists,Matthew 26:26 Mark 14:22 Luke 22:19; where all these
words are opened. Some think that Paul receivedthis from the Lord by
immediate revelation(as it is thought Moses receivedthe history we have in
Genesis and part of Exodus, which relates to a time before he was born, or
arrived at man’s estate). Others think that he receivedit from St. Luke’s

writings (for the words are quoted according to his Gospel). Others think he
receivedit from some other of the apostles. Certainit is, that he did receive it
from the Lord; how, is uncertain.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
For I have receivedof the Lord,.... The apostle observes unto them the rule,
use, and end of the Lord's supper; his view in it is, to correctthe disorders
among them, and to bring them to a strict regard to the rule which had such a
divine authority stamped upon it; and to observe to them, that in that supper
all equally ate and drank; and that the end of it was not a paschal
commemoration, but a remembrance of Christ, and a declarationof his
sufferings and death. The divine authority of the Lord's supper is here
expressed;it was not only instituted by him as Lord, having all powerand
authority in and over his churches, to appoint what ordinances he pleases;but
the plan and form of administration of it were receivedfrom him by the
apostle. This was not a device of his, nor an invention of any man's, nor did he
receive the accountfrom men, no not from the apostles;but he had it by
revelation from Christ, either when he appearedto him at his first conversion,
and made him a minister of the Gospel;or when he was caught up into the
third heaven, and heard things unspeakable and unutterable:
that which also I delivered unto you; for whateverhe receivedfrom Christ,
whether a doctrine or an ordinance, he faithfully delivered to the churches,
from whom he kept back nothing that was profitable, but declaredthe whole
counselof God unto them: now this he refers the Corinthians to, as a sure rule
to go by, and from which they should never swerve;and whatever stands on
divine record as receivedfrom Christ, and delivered by his apostles, shouldbe
the rule of our faith and practice, and such only;
that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed; or delivered; as
he was by the determinate counseland foreknowledgeofGod the Father, and
as he was by himself, who voluntarily gave himself up into the hands of men,
justice and death, for our offences;and so the Arabic version reads it here,
"in the night in which he delivered up himself"; as he did in the gardento

Judas and his company: it was in the night when he came in searchof him
with officers, and a band of soldiers, and when he betrayed him and delivered
him into their hands; and that same night, a little before, our Lord instituted
and celebratedthe ordinance of the supper with his disciples. The time is
mentioned partly with regard to the passoverit followed, which was killed in
the evening and ate the same night in commemorationof God's sparing the
firstborn of Israel, when at midnight he destroyedall the firstborn of Egypt,
and so was a night to be observedin all generations;and because this feast
was to be a supper, and therefore it is best to observe it in the evening, or
decline of the day. The circumstance ofJudas's betraying him is mentioned,
not only because it was in the night, and a work of darkness;but being in the
same night he instituted the supper, shows the knowledge he had of his death
by the means of the betrayer, and his greatlove to his disciples, his church
and people, in appointing such an ordinance in remembrance of him, and his
death, when he was just about to leave them:
took bread; from off the table, out of the dish, or from the hands of the master
of the house;an emblem of his body, and of his assumption of human nature;
of his taking upon him the nature of the seedof Abraham, of that body which
his Fatherprepared for him, in order to its being broken; or that he might in
it endure sufferings and death for his people.
Geneva Study Bible
{18} For I have receivedof the Lord that which also I delivered unto you,
That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
(18) We must take a true form of keeping the Lord's supper, out of the
institution of it, the parts of which are these:touching the pastors, to show
forth the Lord's death by preaching his word, to bless the bread and the wine
by calling upon the name of God, and togetherwith prayers to declare the
institution of it, and finally to deliver the bread brokento be eaten, and the
cup receivedto be drunk with thanksgiving. And touching the flock, that

every man examine himself, that is to say, to prove both his knowledge, and
also faith, and repentance:to show forth the Lord's death, that is, in true faith
to yield to his word and institution: and lastof all, to take the bread from the
minister's hand, and to eat it and to drink the wine, and give God thanks. This
was Paul's and the apostles'manner of ministering.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
1 Corinthians 11:23. Ground of the ἐν τούτῳ οὐκ ἐπαινῶ. For I, for my part,
have receivedthe following instructions from Christ touching the institution
of the Lord’s Supper,[1848]which I also delivered to you. How should it be
possible then that your disorder should meet with praise, so far as I am
concerned, at variance as it is with the knowledge ofthe matter obtained by
me from Christ and communicated to you?
ἀπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου] Had Paul written ΠΑΡᾺ Τ. Κ., this would have denoted that
he had receivedthe instructions directly from Christ (Galatians 1:12; 1
Thessalonians 2:13;1 Thessalonians 4:1;2 Timothy 3:14; Acts 10:22;John
6:45; John 8:40; John 10:18); ἀπὸ τ. κ., on the other hand, means forth from
the Lord, from the Lord’s side as the source, so that the preposition takenby
itself leaves the question open whether the relation referred to be an indirect
(so generally, including Galatians 3:2; Colossians3:24)or a direct one (as in
Colossians 1:7; 1 John 1:5; 3 John 1:7). And Hofmann does not go further
than this indefinite relation, holding the only idea expressedhero to be that of
origin from the Lord; comp also his Schriftbew. II. 2, p. 211. But seeing that,
if what Paul had in view had been an immediate reception, it would have been
natural for him, and of some importance for his argument, to express this
distinctly by using παρά, while yet in point of facthe uses only ἈΠΌ, we are
warranted in assuming that he means a reception, which issued indeed from
Christ as originator, but reachedhim only mediately through another
channel. This applies againstCalovius, Bengel, Flatt, and others, including

Heydenreich, Olshausen, de Wette (assuming a confirmation by special
revelation of what he had learned from report), Osiander, who all find here a
direct communication from Christ. The argument of Schulz and de Wette,
however, againstthis latter view, on the ground of the word παρέλαβ. being in
itself inappropriate, will not hold, especiallywhen we view it as correlative to
ΠΑΡΈΔΩΚΑ; comp 1 Corinthians 15:3.
[1848]Notmerely regarding its designand requirements (Weiss, bibl. Theol.
p. 353 f.); for the specialaccountof the institution itself, which follows, goes
beyond that.
The question now remains: Does Paul, in asserting that his accountof the
institution proceededfrom the Lord, mean to say simply that he receivedwhat
follows by a tradition descending from Christ,[1851]or by a revelationissuing
from Christ? The latter alternative, which Rückertalso adopts (Abendm. p.
194 f.), is not to be rejectedon the ground of the following narrative being
something with which all were familiar. For it is quite possible that it was
wholly unknown to the apostle at the time of his conversion;and even apart
from that, it was so important for his apostolic vocationthat he should have a
sure and accurate knowledgeofthese facts, and to receive it by way of special
revelation was so completelyin harmony with Paul’s peculiar position as an
apostle, since he had not personally been a witness of the first Lord’s Supper,
that there is nothing to forbid our assuming that he receivedhis accountof the
institution of this ordinance, like his gospelgenerally, in the way of authentic
revelation from Christ. As to the form of mediate communication through
which Christ had causedthese facts to reachPaul, not appearing to him for
this purpose Himself, we must leave that point undecided, since very various
kinds of media for divine revelations are possible and are historically attested.
It may have been by an utterance of the Spirit, by an angelappearing to him,
by seeing and hearing in an ecstatic state. Only the contents of the
revelation—from its essentialconnectionwith the gospel, and, in fact, with its
fundamental doctrine of the work of reconciliation—exclude, according to

Galatians 1:1; Galatians 1:12; Galatians 1:15, the possibility of human
intervention as regards the apostle in the matter; so that we should not be
justified in supposing that the revelation reachedhim through some man
(such as Ananias) commissionedto conveyit to him by the Lord. As to the
view that we have here a mere tradition, on the other hand, recounted by Paul
as originating with Christ, the apostle himself decides againstit both by his
use of the singular (comp 1 Corinthians 15:3), and also by the significant
prominence given to the ἘΓΏ, whereby he puts forward with the whole
strength of conscious apostolicauthority the communication made to himself,
to him personally, by the Lord, over-againstthe abuse, contrasting with it, of
the Holy Supper among the Corinthians. Had he meant simply to say: “I
know it through a tradition proceeding from Christ,” then his ἐγώ would have
been on the same level with every other, and the emphatic prominence which
he gives to the ἘΓΏ, as wellas the sing. ΠΑΡΈΛΑΒΟΝ, wouldbe quite
unsuitable, because without any specific historicalbasis;he would in that case
have written: ΠΑΡΕΛΆΒΟΜΕΝ ΓᾺΡ ἈΠῸ ΤΟῦ ΚΥΡΊΟΥ. We have
certainly therefore in this passage notmerely the oldestaccountof the Lord’s
Supper, but even “an authentic explanation given by the risen Christ
regarding His sacrament” (Olshausen);not one directly from His lips indeed,
but conveyedthrough some medium of revelation, the precise form of which it
is impossible for us now to determine, whereby we have a guarantee for the
essentialcontents ofthe narrative independently of the Gospels, althoughnot
necessarilyan absolute ultimate authority establishing the literal form of the
words of institution (even in oppositionto Matthew and Mark), since a
revelation of the history, nature, and meaning of the institution might be given
even without any verbal communication of the words spokenin connection
with it.
ὃ καὶ παρέδ.] which I (not only received, but) also delivered to you.
Converselyin 1 Corinthians 15:3. Instances ofπαραλαμβ. and
ΠΑΡΑΔΟῦΝΑΙ, in the sense of discere and tradere, may be seenin Kypke.

ὅτι] that, as in 1 Corinthians 15:3, not for, as Luther and Hofmann render it.
The latter translation would leave untold what Paul had receivedand
delivered, in spite of the importance of the matter in question; and it derives
no support from the repetition of the subject, ὁ Κύριος, since that, with the
addition of the sacredname Ἰησοῦς, gives a solemnemphasis to the statement.
It is the full doctrine of the Lord’s Supper, which they owe to him, that he is
now setting before his readers.
ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ᾗ παρεδίδοτο (imperfectum adumbrativum, see Kühner, II. p. 73):
in the night in which His betrayal was going on (hence not the aorist). It is a
deeply solemnand arresting thought, contrastedwith the frivolity displayed
among the Corinthians at the Agapae. The preposition is not repeatedbefore
the relative. Comp Xen. Anab. v. 7. 17, Mem. ii. 1. 32, with Kühner thereon;
Plato, Phaed. p. 76 D, with Heindorf and Stallbaum in loc[1854]
ἌΡΤΟΝ]bread (a cake ofbread), which lay on the table.
[1851]So Neanderand Keim in the Jahrb. für Deutsch. Theol. 1859, p. 69.
[1854]n loc. refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the
particular passage.
REMARK.
The agreementwhich prevails betweenPaul’s accountof the Supper and that
of Luke, is not to be explained by a dependence of Paul upon Luke (Grotius,
comp also Beza), but conversely. See onLuke 22:20, remark.
Expositor's Greek Testament

1 Corinthians 11:23-34. § 38. UNWORTHY PARTICIPANTS OF THE
LORD’S BREAD AND CUP. The behaviour of the wealthier Cor[1740]atthe
Church Supper is scandalous in itself; viewed in the light of the institution and
meaning of the Eucharistic ordinance, their culpability is extreme (1
Corinthians 11:23-27). The sense ofthis should setthe readers on self-
examination (1 Corinthians 11:28 f.). The sicknessand mortality rife amongst
them are a sign of the Lord’s displeasure in this very matter, and a loud call to
amendment (1 Corinthians 11:30-32). Two practicaldirections are finally
given: that the members of the Church should wait until all are gathered
before commencing supper; and that where hunger forbids delay, food should
first be takenat home (1 Corinthians 11:33 f.).
[1740]Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
23. For I have receivedof the Lord] Literally, ForI receivedof the Lord.
Reasonwhy St Paul could not praise the Corinthians. Their conduct was a
gross profanationof a rite which had been so solemnly instituted by Christ.
These words, especiallyif we notice the emphatic use of the pronoun, seemto
imply that St Paul had receivedfrom the RisenLord’s own lips (see ch. 1
Corinthians 9:1 and note) the accountof the institution of the Holy
Communion which he now gives the Corinthians. He does not say ‘from the
disciples of the Lord,’ but ‘from the Lord’ (“An authentic explanation given
by the RisenChrist concerning His Sacrament,”—Olshausen). And it is
remarkable that while it differs in some respects from that given by St
Matthew and St Mark, this accountby St Paul corresponds closelyto that
found in his friend and disciple St Luke’s narrative. This circumstance is a
strong corroborationofthe evidence for the authenticity of both Gospeland
Acts, for it confirms the evidence we have that both were written by one
closelyconnectedwith St Paul. Some have thought that we have here the
earliestaccountof the institution of the Lord’s Supper; but the Gospelof St
Matthew was possibly in existence by this time, and if we are to regard 2
Corinthians 8:18 (see Collectfor St Luke’s Day) as referring to the Gospelof

St Luke, that, too, must have been in existence before or about the time when
this Epistle was written.
Bengel's Gnomen
1 Corinthians 11:23. Ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον, for I received) by immediate
revelation. “We ought therefore with greatreverence to approachthat most
solemn mystery, which the Lord instituted, while He was yet upon the earth,
as we are distinctly informed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and which He
renewed, besides, whenHe ascendedinto heaven, by specialrevelationto the
Apostle Paul.”—Jac.FaberStapulensis.—ἀπὸτοῦ Κυρίου, from the Lord)
Jesus Christ.—παρέδωκα, Idelivered) in your presence.—ὁΚύριος Ἰησοῦς,
The Lord Jesus)This word Jesus is added with deliberate intention. He had
just said from the Lord.—ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ, on the night) Hence it is calledthe
Supper. Comp. Exodus 12:6; although in regard to the paschallamb, the time
of the day was expresslyappointed; not so in respectto the Eucharist.—ᾗ
παρεδίδοτο, onwhich He was betrayed) This is thus brought forward with
evident intention; for His being betrayed broke off the conversationof Jesus
with his disciples: comp. note at 1 Corinthians 11:26.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 23. - I have received;rather, I received. He thus refers the revelation to
some specialtime, and this seems to point to the conclusionthat he is not
referring to any accountof the institution of the Lord's Supper, which may
have been given him by St. Peter or one of the twelve, but to some immediate
revelation from Christ. The terms in which he describes the institution of the
Eucharistresemble most nearly those of St. Luke, who may very probably
have derived his information from St. Paul. This passageshould be compared
with Matthew 26:26-29;Mark 14:22-25;Luke 22:19, 20. Was betrayed;
rather, was being betrayed.
Vincent's Word Studies
I received(ἐγὼ παρέλαβον)
I is emphatic, giving the weight of personalauthority to the statement. The
question whether Paul means that he receiveddirectly from Christ, or

mediately through the apostles ortradition, turns on a difference betweentwo
prepositions. Strictly, ἀπὸ from or of, with the Lord, would imply the more
remote source, from the Lord, through the apostles;but Paul does not always
observe the distinction betweenthis and παρά, from the preposition of the
nearer source (see Greek,Colossians 1:7;Colossians 3:24);and this latter
preposition compounded with the verb received, the emphatic I, and the
mention of the fact itself, are decisive of the sense ofan immediate
communication from Christ to Paul.
Also (καὶ)
Important as expressing the identity of the accountof Jesus with his own.
He was betrayed (παρεδίδετο)
Imperfect tense, and very graphic. He was being betrayed. He instituted the
Eucharistwhile His betrayal was going on.
1 Corinthians11:24 and when He had given thanks,
He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for
you; do this in remembrance of Me."
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES

Remembering Christ
1 Corinthians 11:24
E. Hurndall
The Lord's Supper is very speciallya feastof remembrance. Is there in it a
suggestionthat we are very prone to forgetChrist? This is, alas!our tendency,
and here we are in strange contrastto our Lord. He needs nothing to keepus
in his remembrance; he ever thinks of his people. In the institution of the
Lord's Supper he thinks of our forgetfulness, ofits perils, of its certain
sorrows. He remembers that we are prone not to remember him. What should
we remember concerning Christ?
I. HIS HOLY SPOTLESS LIFE. Whata life that was!The greatestandbest
of human leaders have been marked by defects, but our Leaderwas "without
blemish." In the lives of heroes there is always something which we should be
glad to forget; but there is nothing in the life of Christ. Jealousy, hatred,
malice, and all uncharitableness could find in him "no fault." Many great
men have grownsmall, many holy men questionable in character, many
honoured men dishonourable, under the ruthless criticism of modern times;
but not Jesus of Nazareth. The fiercestlight has been focussedupon his
earthly course;the brains of sceptic and of scofferhave been rackedin
prolonged endeavourto discoverthe flaw; but it has not been discoveredyet!
The voices ofall the centuries cry, "Without fault!" "Holy and undefiled!"
"Separate from sinners!" Well may we remember that life.
II. HIS TEACHING. When compared with Christ, all the other teachers of
the world seemto have nothing to teach upon matters of high moment. At best
they guess, and often they guess folly. He teaches with the authority of
knowledge;all other teachers seemhidden in the valley, imagining what the
landscape may be. He alone has climbed the hill and beholds what he speaks
about. We need to remember, more than we are accustomedto do, the
utterances of the world's greatTeacher. Seekersafterknowledge shouldbe
careful lestafter all they miss the richest mine of truth. Learned scoffings and

atheisticalribaldries are naught but devil blinds to hide from our view the
beautiful form of truth as it is in Christ. In him "are hid all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge"(Colossians 2:3). When God broke the dread silence
upon the Mount of Transfigurationit was to exclaim, "This is my beloved
Son: hear him." The Holy Ghostwas promised as One who would "bring to
remembrance" what Christ had declared. Through the Lord's Supper, as a
means, the Divine Spirit works now for this end.
III. HIS MIRACLES. These speak eloquentlyof his power. Nature bows
before her God. How weak the mightiest of the earth are compared with this
mighty One! When the kingdom of Christ is about to be overwhelmedand
shatteredand generallyannihilated by blatant wiseacre warriors, withtheir
scepticalpea shooters and atheisticalpopguns, I laugh as I remember that it is
the kingdom of Christ which is being assailed!We do wellto bear in mind
what Christ did when he was upon earth, and then to sayquietly to ourselves,
"The same yesterday, today, and forever." What he did, he can do; what he
was, he is. His miracles illustrated his beneficence. Theymeant the supply of
human need, the binding up of wounds, the restorationof the outcast, the
arrestof sorrow, the wiping awayof tears, the cheerof lonely hearts. We must
remember his miracles;they show so truly what the Christ was. With all his
omnipotence, how gentle and tender!
IV. HIS DEATH. This was the grand culmination of his life; it gave to him the
greattitle of Saviour; to it the Lord's Supper speciallypoints. We must
remember him as the One who laid down his life for us, who bore our griefs
and carried our sorrows, who was wounded for our trangressions andbruised
for our iniquities, who died the just for the unjust that he might bring us to
God. The Lord's Supper leads us to Calvary - through the motley crowd, past
the weeping Marys, beyond the penitent thief, to the centralfigure in the
Judaeantragedy, and there we see salvation!"Mercyand truth are met
together;righteousness and peace have kissedeachother" (Psalm 85:10).
Remembrance of Christ's death will mean remembrance of our sinfulness.

And when we remember that "he endured the cross, despising the shame," we
may ask ourselves the suggestive question, "Whatwould be our present
condition and prospectif he had not done so?"
V. HIS RESURRECTIONAND ASCENSION. The Lord's Supper was for the
remembrance of Christ both after he had died and after he had risen from the
dead. We must not forget the dying Christ; but neither must we forgetthe
triumphing Christ. The resurrectionof Christ is the counterpart of the cross;
one is not without the other, The Lord died, but the Lord is risen indeed. He
came to this world in abasement;he lived so, he died so, but he did not depart
so. He rose from the dead, and ever liveth. We remember the dying Christ,
but we remember also the living Christ, exaltedat God's right hand, our
Advocate, preparing our heavenly home, looking down upon us, presentwith
us by his Spirit. We remember the reigning Christ, the One who has
completed his glorious redemptive work, who has triumphed openly, and we
remember him thus "till he come."
VI. HIS MARVELLOUS LOVE. Shownin every incident and every instant of
his course. In his coming; in his words, deeds, spirit; and pre-eminently in his
sufferings and death. God is love; Christ is God; Christ is love.
VII. HIS PERSONALITY. Notonly what he saidand what he did, but what
he was. All his acts and words of beneficence and love were only expressions
of himself. They were but manifestations of what dwells in perpetual fulness in
his heart. Remember him. "This do in remembrance of me." This is a dying
request. Are we observing it? The dying requestof him who "gave himself"
for us. - H.

Biblical Illustrator
And when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take, eat.
1 Corinthians 11:24
The Lord's Supper
J. Beaumont, M.D.
1. It is remarkable that we are indebted to Paul for the most particular
accountof this service, becausehe was not one of those who were present on
the night of its institution. Nordid he derive his knowledge from those who
were present (Galatians 1:11, 12). The striking agreementbetweenthis report
and that of those who were present is one of the evidences of the truth of
Scripture.
2. Thoughtful men know the value of particular customs, medals and
inscriptions, to certify any historical event. Now, the observance ofthe Lord's
Supper is a standing historicalevidence of the truth of the Christian religion.
It is to be tracedbackwards for hundreds of years to the night in which Christ
was betrayed; but no farther. There we lose the clue, because the institution
then had its origin.

I. THE NATURE OF THE ORDINANCE. It is commemorative.
1. Who is it that is to be particularly remembered? Christ claims our grateful
recollectiononthe ground of —(1) His dignity. Rank and power impress all
beings: but there never was such rank on earth as that which attachedto the
person of Christ. He was in possessionofthe attributes of Godhead.(2)His
condescension. He passedby the nature of angels, and was "found in fashion
as a man."(3) His love. A love that "passethknowledge."Christ's love has
been compared with the love of Jonathan to David. But that was love for a
friend: this is love for enemies. That was love for love: this is love for hatred.
2. What is it that is commemorated?(1)The death of Christ — a death entitled
to this distinction. Many men are remembered who are not entitled to that
honour; many have had monuments raised to them, whose name ought to
have been blotted out. I find the death of Christ observed by God the Father.
"My Father loveth Me because Ilay down My life." And we are told that in
heaven the greatevent which is celebratedis the death upon Calvary.
"Worthy is the Lamb that was slain." We may well, therefore, celebrate that
death.(2) The secondcoming of Christ. Just as Israel had manna so long as
they were in the wilderness, but when once they came into Canaan, the manna
ceased;so when Christ comes we shall not want anything to remind us of Him.
II. THE TEMPER IN WHICH THIS SERVICE SHOULD BE OBSERVED
BY US.
1. We are calledto remember the personof Christ, and the greatevents
connectedwith His person, in a manner corresponding with the dignity of His
person; and the vastness ofthe benefits flowing from His sacrifice, as expected
by us at His secondcoming.

2. We are to draw near with fervour and lively gratitude. The ordinance itself
is a eucharisticalone. Hence we find our Saviour Himself, when He had
instituted the supper, sung a hymn.
(J. Beaumont, M.D.)
The Lord's Supper: its end and our duty
A. Farindon, B.D.
I. THE AUTHOR OF THE INSTITUTION. In every action it is goodto know
by what authority we do it. For what can reasonsee in bread and wine to
quicken or raise a soul? (1 Corinthians 8:8). The outward elements are
indifferent in themselves, but authority giveth them efficacy. He that put
virtue into the clay and spittle to cure a bodily eye, may do the same to bread
and wine to heal our spiritual blindness. The outward elements of themselves
have no more powerthan the waterof Jordan had to cure a leper; their virtue
is from above.
II. THE DUTY ENJOINED. To take bread, and to give thanks, and eatit; and
so of the cup. And if this be done with a lively faith in Christ, this is all. "To
do this" is not barely to take the bread and eatit: this Judas himself might do;
this he doeth that doeth it to his own damnation. And that we may do it,
besides the authority and love of the Author, we have all those motives which
use to incite us unto action.
1. Its fitness to our presentcondition. As God sent Adam "a help meet for
him," so He affordeth us helps attempered to our infirmity. As Laban said to
Jacob, whenthey made a covenant, "This stone shall be witness betweenus,"
so God doth say to thy soulby these outward elements, "This covenant have I
made with thee, and this that thou seestshallwitness betweenthee and Me."

2. Its profitableness — a will extended, a love exalted, hope increased, faith
quickened, more earnestlooking on God, more compassionon our brethren,
more light in our understanding, more heat in our affections, more constancy
in our patience;every vicious inclination weakened, everyvirtue established.
What is but brass it refineth into gold; raiseth the earthy man to the
participation of a Divine nature.
3. Its delightfulness. In the action of worthy receiving is the joy of a
conqueror; for here we vanquish our enemy: the joy of a prisoner setat
liberty; for this is our jubilee. Here is Christ, here is heavenitself.
4. Its necessity. Forif this sacramentcould have been spared, our Lord, who
came to beat down the ceremonies ofthe law, would not have raised up this.
He calleth and commandeth us to His table, to feed on the body and blood of
Christ, and in the strength thereof to "walk before Him and be perfect."
III. WHEN ARE WE TO DO IT? "As oft as ye do it" implies that you do it
often. It is not necessaryto say how often. Every man's want in this should be
a law unto him. If we come like unmannerly guests, once is too often; but if we
come prepared we cannot come too often. The truth is, the sacramentis fit for
every day, but we are not every day fit for it. A greatshame it is that any man
should be draggedto a feast. And if we loved "the cup of blessing," we should
not fearhow oft it came into our hands.
IV. ITS END. "In remembrance of Me." We must open the registerof our
soul, and enrol Christ there in deep and living characters. Forthe memory is
a preserverof that which she receiveth. But we must inquire whether we
remember Christ as we should: whether Christ be hung up in this gallery of
our soul only as a picture, or whether He be a living Christ, and dwelleth in us
of a truth. For canhe remember a meek Christ, who will be angry without a

cause? Canhe remember a poor Christ that maketh mammon his God? Can
he remember Christ, who is as ready to betray Him as Judas, and nail Him to
the cross as Pilate? Betterneverto have knownHim, than to know and put
Him to shame!
(A. Farindon, B.D.)
Sacramentalgrace
G. D. Hill.
The outward part of the sacramentis not only a sign of the inward part or
thing signified, but a signthat the inward grace is given to us, the means
whereby it is given, and the pledge or sealto assure us of its being given. The
elements are not the sign of a hostelry, like a painted board that reminds the
wearypilgrim of the comforts he may enjoy within, if he can obtain them; but
they are the signed and stamped conveyance of that which makes him rich
and purchases repose, the note of one who will never fail, in receiving which
we receive that which it is appointed to represent by him who offers it. In
taking a note of the bank, he who receives it is assuredthat he receives the
value it represents;and that bit of paper, worthless in itself, may be worth to
him a large estate.
(G. D. Hill.)
The Lord's Supper, a symbol
T. T. Shore, M.A.
"Do you then," men ask, "reduce this sacramentto make it only a symbol? "I
confess my inability to appreciate the force of the depreciatoryinnuendo.
Does not a symbol mean all that it symbolises? Has it not the same honour and
sanctity attaching to it as that which it represents? Are not symbols the most
sacredthings on earth? Why is it that men will take a tatteredpiece of silk

and nail it to the mast, and blow themselves and the ship to atoms rather than
any enemy's hand should touch that flag? It is only a symbol. Why is it that in
one cornerof the battle-field "the swords'flash is brightest, and the pistols'
ring is loudest" round a blood-stainedbanner? It is only a symbol — but a
symbol of England, and of all the freedom, the honour, the truth, the heroism,
that that word "England" means!Thus, for the eye of faith and the heart of
love these symbols mean all that they recall and represent. We are to eatthat
bread and drink that wine in remembrance that His body was given, and that
His blood was shed for us.
(T. T. Shore, M.A.)
The Lord's Supper the sample of the Christian life
A. Maclaren, D.D.
(Text, and Colossians 3:17): — One of the saddestthings about the Christian
life is that it seems to be split into two parts. Is the distinction betweensacred
and seculara valid one? is there any reasonwhy a man's prayers should be
more devout than his business? Look at these two passages. The same
consecrationis claimed for the most trivial acts of daily life, as is claimed for
the sacredcommunion.
I. ALL THE OBJECTSAROUND US ARE TO BE REGARDED AS
SYMBOLS AND MEMORIALS OF OUR LORD. Bread and wine are
common things: the act of eating and drinking is not an elevatedone; a
supper-table is not a very holy place. And when Christ selectedthem He
showedus that all material things were fitted and intended to impart the same
teaching. The unity of the Maker, the all-pervading influence of one Divine
Spirit, make everything sacred, and put every object to witness to some Divine
truth. Every day we walk amidst the "outwardand visible signs of an inward
and spiritual grace,"and this wonderful world is one great sacrament.

1. All the elements stand as types of spiritual things — the sunshine of the
"light of the world," the wind of the Spirit, the waterof the streamof life and
drink for thirsty souls, and the fire of His purity and of His wrath.
2. All objects are consecratedto Him. The trees of the field speak ofthe "root
of David," and the vine of which we are all branches. The everlasting
mountains are His "righteousness,"the mighty deep His "judgments."
3. All the processesofnature have been laid hold of by Him. The gentle dew
falls a promise, and the lashing rain forebodes a storm, when many a sand-
built house shall be sweptaway. Every spring is a prophecy of the
resurrection, every harvest a promise of the coming of His kingdom.
4. All living things testify of Him. He is Lord over the fish, the fowls, the
beasts.
5. All occupations of men are consecratedto reveal Him. He laid His hand
upon the sower, the vine-dresser, the shepherd, etc., as being emblems of
Himself.
6. All relations betweenmen testify of Him — father, mother, brother, friend,
etc. In a word, every actof our life sets forth some aspectof our Lord and of
our relation to Him, from the moment when we open our eyes in the morning,
up to the hour when night falls, and sleep, the image of death, speaks to us of
the lastsolemn moment, when we shall close the eyes of our body on earth, to
open those of our soul on the realities of eternity. If you would know the
meaning of the world, read Christ in it.

II. EVERY ACT OF OUR LIFE IS TO BE DONE FROM THE SAME
MOTIVE AS THAT HOLY COMMUNION. "This do in remembrance of
Me... discerning the Lord's body." "Whatsoeverye do, in word or deed, do all
in the name of the Lord Jesus," i.e., forthe sake of the character, as revealed
to you, of Him whom you love.
1. Is that sacredmotive one which we keepfor selectoccasions andspecialacts
of worship? I am afraid that the most do with that Divine reason, "the love of
Christ constrainethme," as the old Franks with their long-haired kings —
they keepthem in the palace at all ordinary times, only now and then bring
them out to grace a procession. There is no action of life which is too greatto
bow to the influence of "This do in remembrance of Me";and there is no
actionof life which is too small to be turned into a solemnsacramentby the
operationof the same motive. Do you and I keepour religion as princes do
their crown jewels — only wearing them on festive occasions, andhave we
another dress for working days?
2. Is it not something to have a principle which prevents anything from
degenerating into triviality, or from pressing upon us with an overwhelming
weight? Would it not be grand if we could so go through life, as that all should
be not one dead level, but one high plateau, because allrested upon
"Whatsoeverye do, in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus"?
Ah! it is possible — not to our weak faith, perhaps; but the weaknessofthe
faith is not inevitable. It is possible, and therefore it is duty; and therefore the
opposite is sin. To have my life with one high, diffusive influence through it
all, is like one of those applications of power where a huge hammer is lifted
up, and comes down with a crashthat breaks the granite in pieces, ormay be
allowedto fall so gently and so true that it touches without cracking a tiny nut
beneath it; or it is like that mighty powerthat holds a planet in its orbit, and
yet binds down the sand-grainand dust-mote to its place.

III. ALL LIFE, LIKE THE COMMUNION OF THE LORD'S SUPPER,
MAY BE, AND OUGHT TO HE, A SHOWING-FORTHOF CHRIST'S
DEATH. The death of Christ, which is shownforth in the holy communion, as
a death for us, and the ground of our hope, is to be shown forth in our daily
walk, as a death working in us, and the ground of our conduct (2 Corinthians
4:10, 11). There is not only the atoning aspect in Christ's death, but the
example of the way by which we are to "mortify our members which are upon
earth," because "we are dead with Him, and our life is hid with Christ in
God." No man manifests the death of Christ by any outward actof worship,
who is not feeling it daily in his own soul. It is in vain for us to say that we are
relying on Christ, unless Christ be in us, slaying the old man and quickening
the new. You do "show forth the Lord's death till He come" when you
"crucify the old man with his affections and lusts," and "rise againinto
newness oflife." The factis better than the symbol — the inward communion
more true than the outward participation.
IV. THIS COMMUNION IS IN ITSELF ONE OF THE MIGHTIEST
MEANS FOR MAKING THE WHOLE OF LIFE LIKE ITSELF. In this
ordinance, as it were, is the reservoir:out of it there come the streams that
freshen and gladden the piety of daily life. Only remember, not the outward
act, but the emotions which it kindles, are the reservoir. Notthe taking that
cup in your hand, but the deeper glow of feeling which is legitimately kindled
then, and the intenser faith which springs therefrom; these are the fountains
which will nourish verdure and life through our dusty days. And so, if you
want to live in this world, doing the duty of life, knowing the blessings of it,
doing your work heartily, and yet not absorbedby it; remember that the one
powerwhereby you can so act is, that all shall be consecratedto Christ, and
done for His salve!
(A. Maclaren, D.D.)

Take, eat
Bp. Beveridge.
I. TAKE —
1. Knowingly (ver. 29).
(1)What it is in itself: bread (1 Corinthians 10:16).
(2)What it represents unto us: the body of Christ.
2. Humbly. Considering —
(1)God's greatness thatgives.
(2)Our vileness that do receive (Isaiah 6:5).
3. Believingly.
(1)That Christ is really present with us (Matthew 18:20.
(2)Doth really offer His body to us.
(3)That if we worthily receive, we are really partakers of all the merits of His
death and passion(1 Corinthians 10:16).So that —

(a)Our sins shall be pardoned (Matthew 26:28).
(b)Our natures cleansed(Acts 3:26).
4. Thankfully.
(1)That He was pleasedto offer Himself for us.
(2)That He is now pleasedto offer Himself to us.
II. EAT, not take and lay up; not take and carry about; not take and worship;
but take and eat. Take andeat bread, but yet My body —
1. With repentance (Exodus 12:8).
2. Faith.
3. Thanksgiving (1 Timothy 4:4, 5).
III. USES.
1. Prepare yourselves for this spiritual banquet.

2. Receive it with faith.
3. Feedwith thankfulness.
4. Endeavour to getthat nourishment from it, as to serve God better
hereafter.
(Bp. Beveridge.)
This is My body
The body of Christ in the sacrament
What are we to understand by this?
I. NEGATIVELY. Notthat it is transubstantiated. This error was broached
by Damascene and; opposedby a synod at Constantinople of 338 bishops, in
the East;, Bertramnus, Johannes Scotus Erigena, and, in the West. The word
was coinedin the Lateran Council. This —
1. Is not grounded on Scripture.(1) Not on John 6:55. For this —
(a)Was said before the sacramentwas instituted (ver. 4).
(b)Does not prove bread to be turned into Christ's body, but Christ's body
into flesh.

(c)Is to be understoodspiritually (vers. 50, 51, 56).(2)Not on the text (see
Genesis 41:26;Daniel 2:38; 1 Corinthians 10:4).
2. Is contrary to the Scriptures. When Christ said this there could be nothing
but bread; for His body was not yet offered (see 1 Corinthians 10:16;1
Corinthians 11:25; Matthew 26:20).
3. It takes awaythe nature of the sacrament, there being no sign.
II. POSITIVELY.
1. "This is My body"; that is, the sign and sacramentof My body (see Genesis
17:10, 11;Exodus 12:11).
2. "Which was brokenfor you."(1)How broken? Bruised, pierced (John
19:33, 34). He suffered torment.(2) For what?(a)God our Governorhas given
us laws to observe (Genesis 26:5), and annexed promises and threatenings
(Leviticus 18:5; Galatians 3:10-12).(b)Man has broken these laws (Psalm
14:1-3), and so is obligedto the punishments.(c) These punishments he cannot
bear, without being entirely miserable (Matthew 25:46). Hence Christ, the Son
of God, undertakes to bear them for him (Isaiah 53:4, 6). This He could not
do, unless He became man. Neither must He be man only, but He must suffer
(Hebrews 9:22). These His sufferings are the things representedby the bread
and wine.(3)For whom? Believers (John3:16).(4) What benefits bare we by
these sufferings? It is only by them —
(a)Our sins can be pardoned (Matthew 26:28).

(b)God reconciled(Romans 5:1). Our natures renewed(Acts 3:26). Our souls
saved(Hebrews 2:10; Hebrews 5:9).Conclusion:
1. Admire the love of Christ in dying for us.
2. Be always mindful of it.
3. Frequent the sacraments,especiallyappointed to put us in mind of it, but
come preparedly.
(1)Penitently.
(2)Believingly.
(3)Charitably.
(Bp. Beveridge.)
Which is brokenfor you
The broken Christ
U. R. Thomas.
I. A MANIFESTATION OF THE POWER OF SIN. When once threatened
with being broken by the stones that malice would have hurled at Him, He

asks, "Forwhichof these goodworks do ye stone Me?" It was because ofHis
goodworks that an evil world hated Him, and hates Him still. There is an
innate antagonism betweenselfishness andlove. Moses in hot angerbroke the
two tables of stone on which the law of God had just been inscribed; but the
Jews, with fixed and relentless purpose, broke Him who was the living
embodiment of the law. And that achievementreveals how sin stand's at
nothing, though it is most Divine. Our conflictwith sin is conflict with the
powers by which Christ was broken.
II. A MODELFOR OUR SELF-SACRIFICE. He was broken thus, not in
pursuit of any dream of ambition, or struggle for any personalsatisfaction. It
was in the one peerless work of redeeming the world.
1. Selfishness is everseeking to keepwhat it has whole. Health must never be
broken for neighbourliness, patriotism, or religion. Home must never be
broken by giving up of sons or daughters to missions. Property must on no
accountbe broken for distribution in charity or maintenance of worship. The
Church must not be broken to help to form the nucleus of some other church
much needed.
2. And yet what is broken is often the most beautiful. When is light more rich
and varied than when it is brokenin the prism? And is the oceanmore
beautiful when it ripples tamely upon the sandy shore, or when the crested
billows break in wild majesty upon some rockbound coast? So with the self-
denials that mean brokenness — brokenness oftastes, desires, comforts,
possessions, andeven affections.
3. What is broken is often the most useful. When the bark is bruised the balm
is poured forth for healing; when the wheat is ground it becomes anelement
of nourishment; when the spices are pounded their odours fill the air. So self-
denial has given to science,patriotism, and religion their apostles and
martyrs.

4. Forbeauty and usefulness in man's individual character, there must be
brokenness. Whatis there for imperious temper, hard indifference, stubborn
resistance to God's will, but brokenness?
III. AN EMBLEM OF THE UNIVERSALITY OF HIS MISSION,
1. He was broken that He might be distributed, that His teachings, influence,
grace, might eventually pervade the whole human race. By giving broken
bread, as an emblem of His brokenSelf, to all His disciples, He taught them
that His love, life, grace, are designedfor the nourishment of all.
2. And in our dealings with Him and His system, we must ever remember this.
The true Church cannever be a mere treasure-house forhoarding up
privileges and graces. Like its Lord and Master, it must suffer much
brokenness.
IV. THE HIGHEST EXPRESSIONOF THE LOVE OF GOD. Our language
has no words to describe Giver or Gift. But its influence testifies to the worth
of the Gift. The woman who broke the alabasterbox on her Lord gave
unreservedly the best she had, and the whole house was filled with fragrance.
So, when God's gift was broken, His influence, like the odours of a very
precious ointment, beganto fill the whole world.
(U. R. Thomas.)
This do in remembrance of Me

In remembrance
C. H. Spurgeon.
I. OTHER MEMORIES WILL COME, BUT MUST NOT CROWD OUT
THE ONE MEMORY. The following remembrances may be natural, and
profitable, but they must be kept in a secondaryplace: —
1. Of ourselves when we were strangers and foreigners.
2. Of our former onlooking and wishing to be at the table.
3. Of our first time of coming, and the grace receivedsince then.
4. Of the dear departed who once were with us at the table.
5. Of beloved ones who cannotbe with us at this time because they are kept at
home by sickness.
6. Of many present with us, and what grace has done in their cases.We may
think of their needs and of their holy lives, etc.
7. Of the apostateswho have proved their falseness, like Judas. Howeverthese
memories may press upon us, we must mainly remember Him for whose
honour the feastis ordained.
II. THE ORDINANCE IS HELPFUL TO THAT ONE SACRED MEMORY.

1. Setforth, the signs display the person of our Lord as really man, substantial
flesh and blood.
2. Placedon the table, their presence betokens ourLord's clearfamiliarity
with us, and our nearness to Him.
3. Brokenand poured forth, they show His sufferings.
4. Separated, breadapart from wine, the flesh divided from the blood, they
declare His death for us.
5. Eating, we symbolise the life-sustaining power of Jesus and our receptionof
Him into our innermost selves.
6. Remaining when the Supper is ended, the fragments suggestthat there is
yet more bread and wine for other feasts;anti, even so, our Lord is all-
sufficient for all time. Every particle of the ordinance points at Jesus, and we
must therein behold the Lamb of God.
III. THAT SACRED MEMORYIS IS ITSELF MOST NEEDFULFOR US. It
is —
1. The continual sustenance offaith.
2. The stimulus of love.

3. The fountain of hope.
4. A recall, from the world, from self, from controversy, from labour, from
our fellows — to our Lord.
5. The reveille, the up-and-away.It is the prelude of the marriage supper, and
makes us long for "the bridal feastabove." Above all things, it behoves us to
keepthe name of our Lord engravenon our hearts.
IV. THIS SYMBOLIC FESTIVAL IS HIGHLY BENEFICIALIN
REFRESHINGOUR MEMORIES, AND IN OTHERS WAYS.
1. We are yet in the body, and materialism is a most real and potent force;we
need that there be a set sign and form to incarnate the spiritual and make it
vivid to the mind. Moreover, as the Lord actually took upon Him our flesh
and blood, and as He means to save even the material part of us, He gives us
this link with materialism, lest we spirit things awayas well as spiritualise
them.
2. Jesus, who knew our forgetfulness, appointed this festivalof love; and we
may be sure He will bless it to the end designed.
3. Experience has ofttimes proved its eminent value.

4. While reviving the memories of the saints, it has also beensealedby the
Holy Spirit; for He has very frequently used it to arouse and convince the
spectators ofour solemn feast. Conclusion:
1. To observe the Supper is binding on all believers, to the extent of "oft."
2. Only as it assists remembrance canit be useful. Seek grace lovingly to
remember your Lord.
(C. H. Spurgeon.)
The nature and importance of the Lord's Supper
N. Meeres, B.D.
I. THE DIFFERENT NAMES DESCRIPTIVE OF THIS ORDINANCE.
1. "Breaking ofbread." Breadis consideredthe chief support of life, and,
among the Jews, breaking ofbread was a signof mutual friendship. Thus
Christ's body was broken for the sins of men.
2. "Communion" — which may signify either a participation or communion
betweenthe receivers themselves, orbetweenthe receivers and the thing
received. In both senses it is applicable to the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians
10:16).
3. "Eucharist" — which signifies thankfulness or thanksgiving, and
frequently occurs in the New Testamentas a generalexpressionof gratitude.
Taking this view of the ordinance, how should our hearts overflow with
adoring gratitude, love, and praise, whenever We approach the Lord's Table!

4. "Sacrament" — which originally signified a religious oath which the
Roman soldiers took to their commanders. So does every Christian solemnly
engage to maintain irreconcilable warfare againstthe world, the flesh, and the
devil.
5. There are two other terms often applied to this ordinance, both of Levitical
origin. They are "oblation" and "sacrifice."
II. In celebrating the Lord's Supper, according to His last solemncommand,
"This do in remembrance of Me," WE VIEW CHRIST AS THE GREAT
ATONEMENT, AND THE ONLY SACRIFICE FOR SIN. In this sacred
ordinance the Church invites the attention of men "to behold the Lamb of
God, who taketh awaythe sins of the world."
III. OUR OBLIGATION DUTY, AND INTERESTALL COMBINE TO
ENFORCEOBEDIENCETO THIS LAST, SOLEMN, AND DYING
COMMAND OF CHRIST.
(N. Meeres, B.D.)
The Supper of the Lord
J. W. Cunningham, M.A.
I. IT AFFORDS A VISIBLE AND PERMANENT TESTIMONYTO THE
TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL.
II. IT CALLS IN THE SENSESTO THE AID OF OTHER POWERS AND
FACULTIES FOR THE PROMOTIONOF PIETY.

III. IT PROVIDES A PUBLIC TEST OF OUR RELIGIOUS SINCERITY.
IV. IT TENDS TO INCREASE OUR LOVE OF THAT SAVIOUR TO
WHOSE MEMORYIT IS ESPECIALLY DEDICATED.
V. HOW WELL CALCULATED IS IT TO HUMBLE THE IMPENITENT
SINNER!
VI. IT CHEERS THE HEART OF THE TRUE BELIEVER.
(J. W. Cunningham, M.A.)
In remembrance of Me
R. H. Story, D.D.
1. Were a stranger, who had never heard of Christ, to come into church while
we are seatedat the Lord's table, he would naturally ask, "Whatdoes this
observance mean?" And the answer, no doubt, would rise to the lips readily
enough, "We commemorate the dying of Him whom we call Lord and
Saviour." And yet, would not much remain still unexplained? Would it not
still seemstrange that our highest actof worship should centre in a memory of
one whose deathwas a dishonoured death? There is no other religion whose
believers can look back to a founder who was content to say, "Be true to My
memory. That is all I command. Let your most solemn worship embody the
expressionof this remembrance."
2. You may have heard of the powerof a pure and noble memory of, e.g., a
well-loved home, to keepback the foot from falling and the soul from death;

or of a generous and trustful love which has been a breastplate to the heart
tempted to unworthy ways. But in that remembrance of Christ of which the
sacramentis the visible expression, there is something more than we find in
the besthuman memory.
I. LET US SEE WHAT CHRIST'S MEMORYIS, what is implied in
remembrance of Him. The sacramentis a memorial of —
1. One who lived a human life, and yet a life such as none else has ever lived.
2. Who, at a time when the world was full of darkness and unrest, came into it
with a messagefrom God for all whose hearts were weary, whose minds were
dark. His life was one that gladdened other lives, and bore about with it one
living message ofpeace and goodwill. And is it not well, amid all the
worldliness, and selfishness, and untruth of man's society, to be able to look
back to a life in which these evil principles had no place, in which all was
truth, honesty, earnestness andLove?
3. Who revealedGod the Father. Think of what the world would be to us
without this truth, and of what it will be to us, when we come to lie at "the last
low verge of life"; and as you think of this, and remember that all our
knowledge ofthis blessedtruth comes from Christ, do you not feel that there
is an unequalled urgency and solemnity in that lastcharge to us, "This do in
remembrance of Me"?
4. One who closedHis perfectlife by the sacrifice ofHimself. It is indeed this,
more than aught else, that the sacramentalsymbols bring home to us. Think,
then, how but for that we had been without hope and without God in the
world.

II. IF SUCH THEN BE HIS MEMORY, SHALL WE NOT REMEMBER
HIM as He has given us commandment? But is that commandment altogether
fulfilled when we have eatenthe bread and drunk the wine?
1. If we would be really true to the memory of the Master, it must be by
showing forth, in our whole life, the powerof His Divine example. There are
stately tombs, on which in the lapse of ages the graven recordof love and
sorrow has waxed dim, and the very name recordedhas been lost, and the
tomb stands there a dumb witness to an unknown memory; and just such, no
better, would be our remembrance of our Lord, if it were professedonly while
we celebrate the sacramentof His body and blood. But if it expressesa real
union with our Lord, a real devotion to Him, a realsharing of His spirit, then
in this sacramentwe indeed eatof the Breadof Heavenand drink of the
Waterof Life.
2. Now suppose the strangermentioned at the beginning had got his answer,
and gone away, and were to return after a time and see us going about our
daily works, might he not be inclined to say to us, "What has become of that
sacredmemory of which you spoke to me? I see no trace of it among you. I
understood He was one who was pure and true and unselfish; and I see you
serving your own ends. You told me that He died for you; and I look about for
the memorials of such a love as that, and cannotfind it." Let us be carefulnot
to bring reproach upon our Master's name.
3. If there be one here who is burdened with the consciousnessofsin, who
hears the voice which is saying to us now, "This do in remembrance of Me,"
speaking to him in sorrow becauseofhis faithlessness, lethim be warned and
recalledto a better spirit, and truer life; and he will find that that voice will
change its tone of sorrow and reproachfor one of encouragementand

consolation, thatwill say, "Abide in Me, and I in you; let not your heart be
troubled, neither let it be afraid."
(R. H. Story, D.D.)
In remembrance of Me
A. Maclaren, D.D.
1. This Epistle is prior in date to any of the Gospels, consequentlywe have the
earliestaccountof the institution of the Lord's Supper. More than that, the
accountis entirely independent of any oral tradition, for the apostle distinctly
affirms that he receivedthis narrative from none of the guests in that upper
chamber, but from the Host Himself. We can therefore trace the celebration
to a period very near to the death of Christ, and thus we have a strong
presumption of the historical accuracyofthe story, and a view of the aspectin
which it was regarded by the primitive belief of Christendom.
2. The occasionforthe utterance is characteristic ofPaul, and instructive to
us. Had it not been for some abuses in Corinth we should never have had one
word about this ordinance; and in that event there would have been scarcely
any reference to it outside the Gospels. Letus regard the Lord's Supper as —
I. A MEMORIAL.
1. The words are used in the institution of that Passoverwhich our Lord, with
sovereignauthority, brushed aside in order to make room for His own rite.
"This day shall be unto you for a memorial." The text therefore has reference
to the Exodus, and is meant to substitute for the memories so stirring to
Jewishnational pride and devout feeling the remembrance of Christ as the
one thing needful.

2. This is Christ's distinct statementof the purpose of the Lord's Supper, and
you will find nothing additional to it in the New Testament.
3. Notice ofwhat the Lord's Supper is a memorial — "of Me." "You have
remembered Moses and his deliverance;forget him! The shadow passes, and
here I stand, the substance!Do this; never mind about your old Passover —
that is done with. Do this in remembrance — no longer of dead Pharaohs and
exhausted deliverances, but of an everloving friend and helper; and of a
redemption that shall never pass away."(1)Whata marvellous, majestic
prevision that was, that lookedall down the ages and expectedthat to the end
of time men would turn to Him with passionate thankfulness!And more
wonderful still, the forecasthas beentrue.(2) And as majestic as is the
authority, so tender and gracious is the condescension. He does not rely upon
His mighty love and sacrifice farthe remembrance, but He consents to trust
some portion of our remembrance of Him to mere outward things. Surely we
need all the help we can get to keepHis memory vivid and fresh in spite of the
pressure of the visible and temporal.
II. AS A MEANS OF GRACE.
1. I know only one way by which grace canget into men's souls, and that is
through the occupationof a man's understanding, heart, and will, with Christ
and the gospelthat tells of Him. And the goodthat any outward thing does us
is that it brings before us the truth on which our hopes depend, and knits to
our heart the Christ and His love.
2. This Communion is obedience to a definite command, and so has the
blessing which always follows upon obedience. And this blessing, and the one
that comes from having our thoughts turned to Him, and faith and hope

kindled towards Him, exhaust the whole of the goodthat the service does to
any man.
3. All that is confirmed by the remarks in the contextabout the mischief that
it sometimes does to people. We read about an unworthy partaking, which is
defined: "Whoso eatethand drinketh (not "unworthily," for that is an
unauthorised supplement), "eatethand drinketh judgment to himself, not
discerning the Lord's body," i.e., unworthy participation is one which does
not use the external symbols as a means of turning thought and feeling to
Christ and His death; and unworthy participation does a man harm, as
unworthy handling of any outward rite does. I try with words to lead men to
look to Christ. If my words come betweenyou and Him rather as an
obscuring medium, then my sermon does you harm. You read a hymn. The
hymn is meant to lead you up to Christ; if it does not do that, then it does you
harm. If through the outward ritual we see Christ, we getall the goodthat the
outward ritual can do us. If through the outward rite we do not see Him, if the
colouredglass staythe eye instead of leading it on, then the rite does us harm.
III. A WITNESS FOR CHRISTIAN TRUTH.
1. Christ Himself has appointed this institution and selectedfor us the part of
His mission which He considers the vital and all-important centre — "This is
My body, broken for you. This is the new covenantin My blood, shed for the
remissionof sins." NotHis words, not His loving deeds, not His tenderness,
does He point us to; but to His violent death, as if He said, "There is the thing
that is to touch hearts and change lives, and bind men to Me."
2. Forms of Christianity which have let go the Incarnation and the Atonement
do not know what to make of the Lord's Supper. They who do not feelthat
Christ's death is their peace, do not feel that this rite is the centre of Christian

worship. I may be speaking to some who regard it as unnecessary. My
brother, Christ knew what He meant by His work quite as well as you do, and
He thought, that that the part of it which most concerns us to remember was
this: "that He died for our sins, according to the Scriptures."
3. And as plain as the teaching is of this ordinance in reference to what is the
living heart of Christ's work for us, so plain is it in reference to what is our
way of making that work ours. We eat that we may live. We take Christ, the
fact of His death, love, personallife for us to-day, and by faith we partake of
Him, and the body is assimilatedto the food, and so in that higher region we
live.
(A. Maclaren, D.D.)
The remembrance of Christ
C. H. Spurgeon.
1. Christians may forget Christ. It seems at first sight too gross a crime to lay
at the door of converted men; but if startling to the ear, it is, alas!too
apparent to the eye. ForgetHim who never forgotus! Who loved us even to
the death! The incessantround of world, world, world; the constantdin of
earth, earth, earth, takes awaythe soul from Christ. While memory will
preserve a poisonedweed, it suffereth the Rose ofSharon to wither.
2. The cause is apparent. We forget Christ, because regenerate as we are, still
corruption remains. Consider —
I. THE GLORIOUS AND PRECIOUS OBJECTOF MEMORY.

1. Christians have many treasures to lock up in the cabinet of memory. They
ought to remember their election, their extraction, their effectualcalling, their
specialdeliverances. Butthere is one whom they should embalm in their souls
with the most costlyspices. One I said, for I mean not an act, but a Person.
2. But how can we remember Christ's person, when we never saw it? Well, it
is true we cannot remember the visible appearance, but even the apostle said,
though he had known Christ after the flesh, yet, thenceforth after the flesh he
would know Christ no more. You may know Him after the spirit; in this
manner you canremember Jesus as much now as any of those favoured ones
who once walkedside by side with Him.
3. Let us remember Him in His baptism, in the wilderness, in all His daily
temptations and hourly trials, in Gethsemane, in Pilate's hall, at Calvary. You
can very wellcarry all this away, because youhave read it often; but you
cannot spiritually remember anything about Christ, if you never had Him
manifested to you. What we have never known, we cannot remember.
II. THE BENEFITSTO BE DERIVED FROM A LOVING
REMEMBRANCE OF CHRIST. It will tend to give you —
1. Hope when you are under the burden of your sins.
2. Patience under persecution.
3. Strength in temptation.

4. Victory in death.
III. A SWEET AID TO MEMORY. Beholdthe whole mystery of the sacred
Eucharist.
1. The power to excite remembrance consists in the appealmade to the senses.
Here the eye, the hand, the mouth, find joyful work, and thus the senses,
which are usually clogs to the soul, become wings to lift the mind in
contemplation.
2. Much of the influence in this ordinance is found in its simplicity. Here is
nothing to burden the memory. He must have no memory at all who cannot
remember that he has eaten bread, and that he has been drinking wine.
3. Note — The mighty pregnancyof these signs. Breadbroken — so was your
Saviour broken. Bread to be eaten — so His flesh is meat indeed. Wine poured
out, the pressedjuice of the grape — so was your Saviour crushed. Wine to
cheeryour heart — so does the blood of Christ. Wine to strengthenand
invigorate you — so does the blood of the mighty sacrifice.
4. But before you canremember Christ, you must ask the assistanceofthe
Holy Spirit. There ought to be a preparation before the Lord's Supper. Take
heed to yourselves (ver. 27); mind what you arc doing! Do not do it carelessly;
for of all the sacredthings on earth, it is the most solemn.
IV. A SWEET COMMAND. It is important to answerthis question — "This
do ye." Who are intended? Ye who put your trust in Me. "This do ye in
remembrance of Me." Christ watches you at the door. Some of you go home,

and Christ says, "I thought I said, 'This do ye in remembrance of Me.' "Some
of you keepyour seats as spectators. Christsits with you, and He says, "I
thought I said, 'This do ye in remembrance of Me.'"
( C. H. Spurgeon.)
The commemorationof Christ's death
We are to remember —
I. WHAT HE WAS FROM ETERNITY:God (Romans 9:5).
II. WHAT HE BECAME:Man (John 1:4).
III. WHAT HE DID, AND HOW HE LIVED.
1. Humbly (Matthew 11:29).
2. Charitably.
3. Righteously(1 Peter2:22; Matthew 3:15).
4. Inoffensively (Matthew 17:27).
5. Obediently.

IV. WHAT HE SUFFERED.
1. Contempt (Isaiah 53:3).
2. Pain in His body (Isaiah53:3).
3. Grief of heart (Matthew 26:37;Luke 22:44).
4. Death.
(1)A shameful,
(2)A painful,
(3)A cursed, death (Galatians 3:13).
V. WHOM HE SUFFEREDSO MUCH FOR:for us (Isaiah 53:5, 6).
VI. WHAT BENEFIT WE HAVE BY IT.
1. Pardon(Romans 5:1).

2. Reconciliationto God (2 Corinthians 5:11).
3. Mortificationof sin (Romans 8:1, 2; Matthew 1:21).
4. Grace here.
5. Glory hereafter(John 3:16).
VII. WHAT HE DID AFTER HIS DEATH.
1. He rose again(Romans 4:25).
2. Ascended(Acts 1:11).
3. Sits at the right hand of God (Romans 8:34).
4. Makethintercessionforus (1 John 2:1, 2).
5. Will, ere long, come and judge us (2 Corinthians 5:10).Conclusion:For
preparation —
1. Review your lives.

Jesus was instituting the lord's supper

Jesus was instituting the lord's supper

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was instituting the lord's supper

Similar to Jesus was instituting the lord's supper (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was instituting the lord's supper