Just recently I was visiting with a Christian woman who is unable to attend with the saints to worship God.  While I was there she had a family member who is also a Christian visiting with her.  That family member asked me if the congregation would find someone to deliver the Lord’s Supper to the ill Christian since she is unable to attend services to partake of the Lord’s Supper with the saints.  A discussion ensued about Bible authority, the Lord’s Supper, and why the Lord’s Supper is taken when the disciples come together.

    This family member could not understand and pressed asking what was wrong with partaking of the Lord’s Supper in the manner she suggested.  I responded by asking what is biblically correct about the situation she wanted to create with a person being delivered the Lord’s Supper.  We err when we take the “what is wrong with this” approach to Bible study.  Regardless of what is convenient or emotionally right, we must have authority for all things we do.

    It is the aforementioned discussion that has fueled the desire for me to examine this subject matter in writing that others may know the right way to look at this question.  We must remember that the Lord’s Supper is not a personal pan pizza.  Brothers in sisters in Christ are not the Lord’s Supper Hut.

If you can’t cook or go out for dinner, order a personal pan pizza from Pizza Hut (this is not an advertisement for Pizza Hut – I don’t even like their pizza).  If you can’t make it to worship services to observe the Lord’s death by partaking of the Lord’s Supper (I Corinthians 11:23-26), why not order in?  Is this really the way brethren think?  I sure hope not, but actions sometimes do speak louder than words.  The simple fact is; the Lord’s Supper is not a matter of your convenience.

     There is not one single direct statement within the pages of the New Testament that permits home delivery of the Lord’s Supper to those unable to attend.  Nor can one find an example where brethren packed up the Lord’s Supper and partook of it outside of the local assembly of saints.  However, brethren do think they have authority based upon the words of Jesus in a context dealing with discipline.  These brethren argue that they can partake of the Lord’s Supper outside of the assembly because Jesus said: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20).

     The questions that come from the argument made from Matthew 18:20 should add some clarity.  First, where in the context is the Lord dealing with the Lord’s Supper?  No where in that context is the Lord dealing with the Lord’s Supper.  Then, our second question, where in that context does the Lord conclude that a local church can be divided into several mini local churches?  No where in that context does the Lord authorize brethren to divide into sub-congregations.  Our third question, where in that context does the Lord deal with the idea of a portable worship service?  No where in that context does the Lord contradict what is later taught so clearly in the New Testament.  The Lord’s Supper is something to be observed when the disciples come together.

     Saints, according to the pattern we see in the New Testament, assembled in one place, together, on the first day of the week, with part of their purpose being to partake of the Lord’s Supper.  In fact, we have one example that clearly removes any misunderstanding on the fact that saints assemble together to partake of the Lord’s Supper.  Luke pens: “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight” (Acts 20:7).  In this account Paul is able to assemble with the brethren in Troas who came together for the purpose to partake of the Lord’s Supper.  To proclaim that one does not have to assemble with saints to partake of the Lord’s Supper is to ignore the lesson of this verse and its context.  That position, in fact, does away with the need for saints to assemble and leads to the modern day false concept known as the “house church movement”.

     The church assembles in one place to partake of the Lord’s Supper (I Corinthians 11:18; 22).  As we saw in the example of Acts 20:7, we also see a context dealing with the Lord’s Supper in the first letter to the church in Corinth where partaking of the Lord’s Supper is something we do when we COME TOGETHER (I Corinthians 11:33).  The Lord’s Supper is not something we do separate from the local assembly.  The Scriptures that we have reviewed have clearly shown we are to partake of the Lord’s Supper together.  No abundance of emotionalism can supersede the fact that the Lord’s Supper is to observed, when the saints come together for that purpose, on the first day of the week.  In fact, this delivery idea of the Lord’s Supper also brings up other problems.

     While brethren certainly abuse Matthew 18:20, they also supersede the local church’s work when they have the Lord’s Supper for delivery practice.  When brethren pack up the emblems of the Lord’s Supper and deliver it to those unable to attend, they also abuse other principles that exist within the worship and work of the local church.  They fail to take a collection that is to be taken upon the first day of the week (I Corinthians 16:1-2).  They fail when they do not preach the Gospel of Christ (Acts 20:7).  They deliver the Lord’s Supper, but they won’t sing with the brethren in worship to God (Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16).

     When brethren fail to worship with the saints on the first day of the week and they form a “to go” worship service, they also fail in doing the works of a local church.  These congregations on the go do not have a treasury whereby they can support the work of the local congregation.  Never do they appropriately support an evangelist (Philippians 4:15-16).  They do not edify the brethren as the body of Christ, as they are not a congregation (Ephesians 4:16).  They snip and sip, but do not work as a local congregation of evangelism (I Thessalonians 1:8-9).  What’s the point?  Those folks that deliver and those who partake of the “Lord’s Supper to go”, are “playing church” once or twice here and there.  They do not do the work of a local church nor do they conduct the worship of a local church.  The idea of a “Lord’s Supper to go” is not found in the Scriptures, it exists solely in the minds of brethren who truly do not desire to please the Lord.  Their focus is wrong!  Who are we trying to please when these things are practiced (Colossians 3:17)?

    The local congregation is not a “Lord’s Supper Hut”.  There may be those who cannot make it to the local assembly to remember the Lord’s death by partaking of the Lord’s Supper, but it is not our work to find ways to comfort those unable to worship God.  It is not our right to make up “type ‘b’ plans” when one cannot do something that is pleasing to God.  We must do all things with the authority of God (Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32, Proverbs 30:5-6, Matthew 15:7-9, Galatians 1:6-12, Colossians 2:8, etc.).  There simply is no authority to allow the Lord’s Supper to be delivered or to have a “to go” worship service.

     As Jesus said to those Pharisees and certain scribes that bound the washing of hands before eating, we must conclude that those who are serving or partaking of the “Lord’s Supper to go” are doing so in vain.  To those Jesus says: “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.  For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.  And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition” (Mark 7:7-9).
 

© 2005 May be used if permission by author is granted and proper acknowledgment as to the authorship of this material is made.  – B.A.Y.