The Forgotten Churches

            As another week comes to a close, I hope this writing finds you well! If you are one who celebrates the season of Lent, I hope you had a great Ash Wednesday.  I was hoping to attend an Ash Wednesday service, but came down with a brief illness that kept me from getting out and doing much. Don’t worry, I am feeling much better now! Luckily, I’ve managed to avoid significant illness this winter. Hopefully, I didn’t just jinx myself.

              While I was sick and confined to my couch, I took a look through a two-volume history set which outlines the history and places in my hometown. If you don’t know, I grew up in a small town of about 1,600 in Southwest Indiana. Not a stoplight in sight! The book has a section dedicated to the town’s churches. Currently, there are only two Churches located in Haubstadt – my own Catholic parish that I grew up in and a very small Pentecostal congregation. To my surprise, the book taught me about several other congregations that once dotted the landscape throughout the area. I can only imagine that these congregations were very small, but it led me to wonder what happened to them and the factors that led to their shuttering. In most of the cases, it seems that after the Church closed, the buildings fell into disrepair and were eventually razed with only the cemetery remaining. How sad that once-vibrant houses of God were reduced to a pile of rubble! The memories of these venues which oversaw the faithful administration of Word and Sacrament along with numerous weddings and other joyous occasions have all but faded into the rolling Southern Indiana hills. This scenario is not unique to Haubstadt and has undoubtedly played out across our great nation.

              At some point in the latter half of the 20^th century, the trend within the Church shifted from smaller congregations to larger ones. As such, the so- called megachurch movement was born. There was undoubtedly a plethora of reasons for this shift – each having their own merits, I’m sure.  There were great preachers, outstanding children’s ministry, and great coffee! All of these things are great, especially the coffee!  Without a doubt, God has been at work and changed countless lives through the ministries of these large Churches. As the body of Christ, we should be extremely grateful for this fact. These Churches have their place and will continue to be an important part of God's kingdom.

              But is the tide swinging back towards the emergence of smaller congregations? To aid in my research, I ran another Twitter poll – admittedly, this is a comically small sample size.  48% of respondents indicated their attend a Church with 100-500 members. 44% indicated their congregation is home to less than 100 members. The remaining 8% responded their congregation had between 500 and 1,000 members. Seems like the tide may indeed be turning. Experts in the field agree with me, often arguing the small Churches and even micro houses Churches are the future of corporate worship.

              In my admittedly biased opinion, I am definitely rooting for the re-emergence of the type of small congregations that once stood as beacons of the Gospel in my own hometown.  I have a few reasons for this opinion that I will outline below.

·       Smaller congregations require increased participation amongst the laity with regards to congregational activity. In a large Church, it’s easy for a lay person to come to Church, consume content, and then leave. In short, it can become difficult to get involved and become an active participant in worship and your walk with Christ. In a small congregation, it’s possible to become an active participant in the operation of the service or other congregational ministries every week.  In fact, it's often necessary for each member to pull their weight. There’s just nowhere to hide! This promotes faithfulness in worship attendance, which brings me to my next point.

·       Smaller congregations promote accountability.  When you are involved in a smaller congregation, attendance issues are much more easily noted. Again, there is nowhere to hide. It is much easier for your brothers and sisters in Christ to speak truth into your life if they know you and your story. Not to mention, Church discipline is also much more practical in a smaller setting. There’s simply an intimacy and comfort level that cannot be replicated in a larger Church setting.

·       In smaller congregations, your pastor can actually be your shepherd. I’m a firm believer that one should attend a Church at which the pastor knows your name. In the smaller settings I’ve been in, I’ve been able to cultivate wonderful friendship with my pastors. These relationships have been immensely beneficial to me and have helped to keep me on the narrow path!

·       Smaller congregations foster a culture of Christ that is transcendent among generations. It’s no secret that our society today is more transient than it has ever been. It’s easy to pack up and move to another city, state, or region of the country. But these small Churches often have a sense of pride and hardiness that is passed down from generation to generation. Children that grow up in these settings see the work their elders put into their local congregation and aspire to do the same when they grow up. And when they do, they will pass that same ethic and desire for Christ and His Church on to their children. A sense of ownership develops over time. This is what the local Church is all about! This is how Christianity can and will thrive in the post-Christian times we are now living in!

Again, this is simply my opinion. However, I am so glad to see smaller Churches beginning to spring up again. If you have memories of a smaller Church you attended, I’d love to hear them in the comments section below.

In Christ,

Kendal May

Frequency of the Lord's Supper

           Happy Wednesday evening from rainy, dreary Tennessee. I’m going to have to invest in a canoe to get me to and from work if this weather pattern persists. Since it’s storming out, this is as good a time as any to bring you a new blog post. Also, I just noticed that this will be my 25^th blog post since I started this project back in May of 2019. Although I don’t know exactly who reads this blog regularly, the stats show that a number of you do. I am grateful for each of you that has read the blog over the past several months. You truly keep me going.

              For my 25^th post, I want to harken back to the title of my blog – Word and Sacrament. I haven’t touched on Sacraments much here in my last few posts. I’d like to talk a little bit about the frequency in which the Lord’s Supper is observed in our Churches.

              If you’re reading this blog, I likely do not need to explain to you what the Lord’s Supper is. However, you may not know that there are a number of conflicting views on what the Lord’s Supper is, what it represents, and the exact manner in which Christ is made manifest to us in the Sacrament.  There are four major views on the Lord’s Supper held today by mainstream Christians. I will not go into these in detail in this post. If there is enough interest, I can write a future post outlining each potential in greater detail. For now, here is a brief description of the four views:

Transubstantiation – This view is held by Roman Catholics. In this view, the bread and wine literally become the physical body and blood of Christ.

Consubstantiation – This view is held today by most Lutherans. Consubstantiation holds that that Christ is “in, with, and under” the elements of bread and wine. However, in this view, the bread and wine do not become the literal body and blood of Christ.

Memorialist – Sometimes referred to as Zwinglianism, this view is espoused by most Baptists, Non-Denominational Christians, and Pentecostals. In the memorial view, it is taught that the Lord’s Supper is a mere memorial of Christ’s death and resurrection. The memorialist view denies that Christ is in any way present in the Lord’s Supper.

True Presence – The final view is the one held by most Reformed Christians. The True Presence indicates that Christ is present in the Lord’s Supper, but only in a spiritual, non-physical manner.

              It should not be surprising, given the varying doctrines, that there is substantial disagreement about the frequency in which the Lord’s Supper is to be celebrated. There is substantial disagreement not only between different denominations but also in different congregations within same denomination. I ran a quick Twitter poll this morning asking people to select the frequency in which their congregation observes the Lord’s Supper. The four choices included the following:

·       Weekly

·       Monthly

·       Quarterly

·       Other

The poll will still be running until tomorrow morning, so there is still time to vote for your choice! Thus far, 40 Tweeters have responded to the poll. I interact with people of varying denomination backgrounds on Twitter, so I am hoping that this poll is representative of Christianity as a whole. The results are as follows:

·    47.5% of respondents indicated their congregation celebrates the Lord’s Supper on a weekly basis.

·        35.0% of respondents said their congregation observes the Supper monthly.

·       Only 7.5% responded quarterly.

·   The remaining 10.0% of those who answered the poll indicated that they utilized a frequency other that weekly, monthly, or quarterly.

The poll results were not particularly surprising to me. Over the past several years, there has been a significant number of Churches moving towards weekly reception of the Lord’s Supper. This was the case in the PCA (Presbyterian Church in America) congregation that I attended. I’ve been attending my current Baptist Church for about 5 months and have only partaken in the Lord’s Supper once. So which frequency is correct? Let’s go to Scripture to check for guidance.

Scripture actually doesn’t specify a frequency in which the Lord’s supper should be celebrated.  1 Corinthians 11:26 offers the following guidance: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.” If I’ve never mentioned it before, 1 Corinthians is my favorite book of the Bible.

As most of you know, I was reared within the Roman Catholic tradition. In Catholicism, it is the practice of the current day for the laity to commune at each and every Mass. However, I’ve recently learned from listening to Dr. David Anders on EWTN radio that this has not always been the case within Catholicism. In the early days of the Catholicism, it was customary for the laity to partake of the Lord’s Supper only once a year. This example further lends credence to the notion that there is no right or wrong answer for the frequency of observance of the Supper.

Although we’ve established that there is no mandated frequency, I am a proponent of observing the Lord’s Supper on a weekly basis. Without getting into too much detail, I’ll also divulge that I believe that Christ is truly present in the Lord’s Supper in a way that is beyond our understanding. My reasoning for desiring weekly reception is based on the very words of Jesus Christ. In John 6: 53-57, Jesus tells his disciples: “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.  Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.  For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.  Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.” In light of Jesus’s words for us in this passage, I want the Supper as often as I can get it! The words of Jesus have the power to bring us to eternal life and the Lord’s Supper is God’s word and promise presented to us in tangible form. Sign me up to receive the Grace in the Supper weekly!

One of the main reasons for my love of 1 Corinthians is Paul’s lengthy discourse on the treatment of the Supper. In his letter to the Church at Corinth, Paul sets about to correct errors that have reached him regarding the improper handling of the Lord’s Supper. In the midst of Chapter 11, Paul issues this stern warning to the Corinthians: “Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.  But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.”

It’s clear that Paul takes the Lord’s Supper with great seriousness and expects his fellow Christians to follow suit. Paul’s words, written by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, seem to indicate that the Lord’s Supper should be celebrated with both regularity and reverence.  There are also passages found in the Acts of the Apostles that suggest the Supper played a large role in early Church gatherings.

Let me reiterate that this is just a personal preference I hold. I am certainly not intending to belittle anyone that would rather save the Supper for special occasions or observe it with less frequency. Someone who takes the Supper less frequently than I do is no less of a Christian than I am! But for me, if the Lord’s Supper is what Jesus and Paul say it is, then how could I afford not to partake of the Lord’s Supper at every opportunity?

I’d love to hear others’ thoughts on this matter. Please feel free to leave a comment below outlining your position on the frequency of the Lord’s Supper.

In Christ,

Kendal May

Getting Outside Your Tradition

              Happy Monday evening! Hopefully, your week has started off on the right path. My girlfriend is off in the Caribbean playing music with her band. That means my dog and I have the whole week to ourselves (I really miss Sarah, though!). However, it has given me some time to dive into a few of the books sitting on the shelf in my home office.

              As a Christmas gift, Sarah gifted me with a copy of “The Pilgrim’s Progress” by John Bunyan. Not growing up in the Evangelical world, I had never heard of this book. Apparently, it’s the second best selling religious book behind the Bible. You learn something new every day! I’ve made good progress (pun intended!) on this book. It’s a wonderful allegory of the Christian life and should be required reading for those seeking a deeper understanding of the faith.

              In addition to The Pilgrim’s Progress, there is a litany of other literature sitting on my shelf unread.  However, there is one behemoth on the shelf that towered above the rest. It’s a controversial book of literature that I have been working through with periods of (long) interruptions for the better part of two years. The book is none other than John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin’s magnum opus is widely considered to be one of the greatest systematic theologies ever composed.

              I’ll start by saying that I wasn’t raised in the Reformed tradition. I was raised in a devout Roman Catholic community and only heard Calvin’s name in history class. I’ll also say that I don’t currently attend a Reformed Church. I had worshiped for a time in a PCA congregation, which I thoroughly enjoyed. However, these days I attend a Baptist Church with seemingly no Reformed leanings.

So, why then, would I read Calvin?

              Simply put, I believe there is a lot to be gained by reading literature from authors that are outside of one’s own religious tradition. Even if one disagrees with Calvin’s notion of double predestination, there is still a wealth of knowledge to be gleaned from his writing on the nature of the Trinity and the Sacraments (just a few of many examples). I’ve learned so much from Calvin about the nature of God and how the persons of the Trinity relate to one another. I would have completely missed out on the enlightenment had I simply dismissed Calvin as “that predestination guy”.

              For those that aren’t aware, I’m very active on Twitter and have found Christian Twitter to be an excellent source of encouragement and learning. Follow me on Twitter @WordSacBlog! On Twitter, I follow fellow Tweeters from various denominational backgrounds. I follow many in the Presbyterian and Reformed tradition, Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists, Catholics, and even a few Eastern Orthodox. I love learning about each of these traditions and have been encouraged by their adherents. It’s amazing to gain so many fresh perspectives on theological issues and spiritual practices all in one place. Isn’t the Internet amazing?

              Outside of Twitter, I also enjoy religious radio and television.  I’m very fond of watching and listening to EWTN, which is the Catholic television network. This network has brought me to a much greater understanding of the faith tradition I grew up in. I also enjoy listening to Moody radio during my evening commute. These two entities are diametrically opposed, but I have certainly found encouragement in both stations.

              So, as you seek the wisdom of God in your life, don’t hesitate to jump outside of your native faith tradition. Keep an open mind – it won’t kill you; I promise! By avoiding other traditions, you are missing out on a wealth of information that may be very beneficial and encouraging to you.  Be sure to comment below about instances in which stepping outside the bounds of your tradition was encouraging for you.

In Christ,

Kendal May