|
I think you're probably right about the atmosphere of the table ceremony in the early church being more like a meal at a family gathering, and at least sometimes in some places there probably was regular food eaten during the assembly, perhaps contributing to some of the abuses Paul was writing about in 1 Cor. 11. Josephus (a late 1st century Jewish historian) doesn't really have anything to say about church meetings in general or the Lord's supper in particular. A Roman official, Pliny the Younger, wrote to the emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. about the suppression of Christians, and mentioned that interogation had provided the fact that the church ate "ordinary harmless food" but his outsider's perspective doesn't provide any helpful details. The following is from the Didache (see link below for more on this document), and is not referenced as authoritative, just as information about the attitude of some in the early days of the church. ___________________
CHAPTER 9
9:1 But concerning the Eucharist, after this fashion give ye thanks.
9:2 First, concerning the cup. We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine, David thy Son, which thou hast made known unto us through Jesus Christ thy Son; to thee be the glory for ever.
9:3 And concerning the broken bread. We thank thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which thou hast made known unto us through Jesus thy Son; to thee be the glory for ever.
9:4 As this broken bread was once scattered on the mountains, and after it had been brought together became one, so may thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth unto thy kingdom; for thine is the glory, and the power, through Jesus Christ, for ever.
9:5 And let none eat or drink of your Eucharist but such as have been baptized into the name of the Lord, for of a truth the Lord hath said concerning this, Give not that which is holy unto dogs.
_________________________ I like those answers, from both of you. While having access to those concepts, they hadn't materialized in my mind concerning the children and their place in the church. I wonder if there is any record outside the bible (Josephus and the like?) that would offer proof that it was only the baptized adults who participated in the breaking of bread. For some reason I'm picturing the children joining in back in those days as I also have a picture of their "table" being a lot more similar to their regular meals than is our own.
I think Wanda hit on several of the reasons it's appropriate to have children as observers rather than pariticipants in the table. I would understand from Acts 2:41-42 that it was people who "accepted the message and were baptized" that were added to the number of the believers and "devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching, to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread, and to prayer." Paul in 1 Cor. 11:17-34 used several expressions that would exclude children who have not yet "accepted the message" and been baptized. The bread is the body, and children who have not become Christians are innocent before God, but not part of the body. The cup is the new covenant in the blood of Jesus, and children who have not become Christians have not entered the covenant relationship with Jesus. The supper is in "remembrance" and proclaims the Lord's death, but children who've not been buried with Christ have nothing to remember or proclaim. Children won't necessarily eat in an "unworthy manner" but neither are they ready to examine themselves unless indeed they ought to be ready to become Christians and truly participate in the supper. It seems like good judgment to talk freely to "our" children about what the supper is and when they will be ready to truly participate in it, and that they aren't left out because there's anything wrong with them.
|
