Table Talk
I’ve thought a lot about CWINWC’s blog of several weeks ago (http://cwinwc.blogspot.com/), the one about moving the communion table to the back of the sanctuary-church-worship hall-auditorium.
CWINWC received several sympathetic replies concerning abuse received from those who responded in unkind ways to this “major” change.
At the time, I happened to be reading Hick’s Come to the Table. I think you'll find this quote interesting, as on page 125 of my copy he writes:
Modern culture, with the backing of a long heritage, has undermined the intent of the table by replacing the table with an altar. As Paul corrects the Corinthian practice of the table, he still affirms the value of eating and drinking. The table remains. In the modern church, there is no table. Some churches have an altar instead of a table, others have placed the table at the rear of the building, and still others have no visible table (or altar) in their buildings. Not only has the supper been reduced to bread and wine, it has lost almost all connection to the “table” environment. (Italics added.)
More on our table in Lausanne coming very soon. Thanks for stopping by.
posted by Brady @ 11:04 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
Hi Brady - Thanks for giving us more food (no pun intended) for thought on this subject. I have heard bits and pieces of Hicks' book but haven't read it fully myself. What aspect of the "table" is he referring to in his book? Is it an attempt to add/bring back more of an "one another" aspect to our communion time as was evident in the first century? We're trying to move away from the one model of somber reflection to reflect the multiplicity of reactions a body of believers will have when contemplating what the Lord has done for all of us at Calvary.
Here's a question from my anal/logistical part of my mind - If he is referring to the "one another" aspect during communion and this involves an actual table, how do you accomplish this in a church of 300?
As they say on Sports Talk Radio, "I'll hang up and listen to your answer."
fjgeteyf
Thanks for the questions. Sometimes Hicks uses the table image to speak of the presence of God in the Kingdom. Sometimes it's to show that Jesus is the host of the meal. Sometimes it's to show that all are invited. He also takes the energy to explain the difference between altar/sacrifice (the cross for us Christians) and the celebration after the altar, i.e. the eating of the sacrifice and celebration in the presence of God (the Supper for us Christians).
He does have some suggestions for large churches. He does NOT encourage large churches to leave out the Supper, as is done in some churches. But he does also encourage an "extra" experience/sharing of the Supper in small groups around a table in homes, or even in the sanctuary-church-worship hall-auditorium, in addition to the meal shared in the presence of all on Sunday morning.
What I thought is interesting, and my reason for bringing it up again, was that there is symbolism in the position of the altar. Symbols can play an important role in defining what we do in collective worship.
I hope to share some other things about the table in the following blogs. wphfxkv
Good stuff, Brady.
I had just finished reading the book at the time of Cecil's post and had similar thoughts. The thing is, it's not just the altar/table that some folks put too much symbolism to. It's the pulpit, the pews, and just about every other physical object in the place.
Not really what it's about, is it?
The pendulum certainly has swung on the issue of furniture and proper placement. Our Spanish speaking members believe it a requirement to have a white table cloth on the table. Makes it hard to read the carved words on the front of the table.
Brady - you're a genius. Your last comments made me think of a function we could do when we get our small groups up and running. Perhaps this could be a time when the "church" could practice that extra-communion event?
Opps! I just looked back at your comments and realized you've already made that very point!
Makes me think of the commercial that shows a boardroom scene of managers who have been given the task of cutting costs. A white-collared plain looking guy makes a suggestion that the company start using UPS or Fed Ex to cut costs on shipping. His comment is followed by dead silence in the room. Then his boss, who is dressed more hipped with a black jacket and styled long hair, makes ther same suggestion while making hand gestures. The whole room erupts with approval.
The "nerdy" middle manager protests saying that he just said the very thing as his sharply dressed boss. The boss reminds him that he didn't make the cool hand gestures that he made and that was the difference.
I'm sure when you were typing that last comment you were gesturing wildly in the air. I bow humbly before you. I apologize for my senior moment and I'm gesturing wildly with my hands.
npfpao
We have the same problem here. When I suggest something to the family, they just ho-hum. But when Wife expresses the same thing, they love it. Go figure. jdajymhg
Post a Comment
<< Home