There are other names for this sacramental meal, such as the Eucharist and the Lord's Supper. But what is the most accurate and meaningful application we can apply to our use of the meal that can cause such hurt and controversy? We must make an exegetical inquiry into the Bible, to find our answers.

We have just read the verses that comprise the words of institution that are the main ones used to offer the sacramental meal, as they were recorded so long ago. We must also realize that there are definite ties to the Old Testament here! For without that realization, we miss a great deal of opportunity to share the deeper things of what Holy Communion is all about in the first place. You may also be aware of the fact that the methods to deliver or the sharing this meal of holiness can vary widely. Let us retrace some history then.

Ezekiel 45:21 In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.

Matthew 26:2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Having made his triumphant entry into Jerusalem, Jesus prepared himself for something no one else could understand at the time. Jesus alone knew all the implications of what would now take place so quickly. He knew that the days of his earthly ministry would come to an abrupt and merciless end. He also knew that it was his becoming the scapegoat/sacrificial lamb, that would provide a way for faithful people, to come to salvation, even though no one had lived a life of completely fulfilling The Law now in effect. Jesus then, is to become the scapegoat/sacrificial lamb, the propitiation of our sins, the high priest and the Saviour of the world, to those who would come to believe in him as the Moshiack (Messiah) - the Christ. We can also say that rather than being the death angel who visited the Egyptians, Jesus is the angel of salvation to "whosoever will come." For us then, the Eucharist, or Holy Communion/Lord's Supper, should be a sombre, yet joyful meal, as is the Seder - (Passover meal) of the Jewish people.

What do we have then, as we continue to delve into this matter? We have another melding of the finite with the infinite. We have the fulfilment of one covenant and the institution of a new one.

Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. {covenant: or, testament} 

One must marvel when considering that we are learning that Abel was the first to become a martyr for righteousness. Do you remember how it was his gift on the altar that God accepted, and how in jealousy, the older brother Cain then became the world's first murderer? And do you see how it is the spilling of blood that makes the entire covenant so precious and important - because:

Genesis 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

It is the blood of a creature that carries in it, the very essence of life. It was not to be regarded lightly, or used in any way for a meal. You will see shortly, why I have included this emphasis.

First of all, he sent his disciples to the tasks of finding and readying an appropriate place for them all to share the Passover meal, which was in keeping with his perfect fulfilling of all the law required of him. And it is in that room, that he also prophecies the next few days' events. Events mind you, that would divide people for all time, as regards access to God and salvation. He knew that his little band of students wouldn't really understand right away. Yet he provided that not only could they come to understand, but that they would also have a way to recall the events in a very personal and profound manner.

John 6: And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 

We must wonder if the verse above, and of course many others Jesus used to describe himself, had any particular meaning to the disciples that night? The analogy of bread, should have struck a chord. Bread, as you know, is the staple (staff) of life is it not? Certainly, in viewing society's history, the most basic sustenance of life was to have bread and water. And so, Christ used this basic substance to declare to people, how very essential he is to our very existence. Have you ever thought of this?

We have then, in this meal named Holy Communion, two emblems of basic life sustaining properties. Bread and blood. There is no real survival without them, if a person is to be able to continue living. It is true that they are not the only things we need to live, but they are the most important ones physically. You may question by saying "well what about water?" Dear friend, check your biology knowledge with a doctor. He can quickly assure you that the main content of either our body or our blood, is water. Amazing isn't it? How thorough God is! But let us continue to delve into what Jesus did.

Having gathered his disciples around the table, he commenced the institution of the New Covenant, while simultaneously prophesying the events that were soon to take place. This was done so that not a one of those present, could later doubt what had transpired. He explained that very soon now, one of the group would betray him, and be lost from partaking in the rest of the evening's events, so far as that specific gathering would go. When questioned about who that person might be, he did not even mention his name! Why? Simply to emphasize the complete loss to that soul, of any chance or desire for pardon.

Now only 11 men and their teacher are left in the room. Can you imagine the confusion and tension that prevailed? Keep in mind that our best learned lessons come out of strife and pressure (tribulation) rather than a calm atmosphere. Can you sense how each of those men examined their own hearts? And now, Jesus offers prayer over the meal, giving thanks to his Father for this time of sharing, and the bread and drink that would be consumed.

How astounded the men must have been, when Jesus deviated from what would be the normal dialogue at passover - to the lesson he now applied.

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. 

How they must have wondered, while partaking of the bread, how this could also be their teacher's body - and wondered what else this lesson would contain?

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

From the text. We can safely assume that they shared the drink from a common cup, as they would in the colloquial sense of what would follow as they went on to minister for Christ. There would be many moments of tested emotions, a common cup of pain and anguish, yet also there would be ecstasy and joy, beyond anything they would ever know until all of God's plan for them was to be fulfilled.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.

Now they are beginning to realize that Jesus has given them something new to remember - an act of sharing, a new and different meal! And then they heard yet another prophecy.

Matt. 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

How often it is that we learn something new, but must still have a passage of time to actually learn more of what we were taught. So it is with the Holy Meal. It is so easy to fall into the trap of ambiguity. But for now, allow the ending of that meal's institution to come.

Matt. 26:30 And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

From the room and the special meal - they departed to the garden of Gethsemane - and we all know the events that followed. If for some reason you are not familiar with this account simply get a Bible and read the entire account beginning in Matthew 26.

It would seem logical to assume that nothing about the meal and how it was to be offered and celebrated could come under questioning and/or revision. Unfortunately that is not the case at all. We do not have simplicity any longer, but we do have schisms that can mar and outright defeat, the very purpose of what should be an everlasting monument of faithful practice, as it was given by our Lord Himself. Let us review this and attempt to draw some firm conclusions.

First we must ascertain ourselves that there should be an official to oversee the event if at all possible. Traditionally then, there should be an approved administrator. Depending on the circumstances we would look for an ordained minister, Bishop, priest, or an elder.

Now we must address the two portions of the meal. First we must have bread. In keeping with the idea that Jesus used unleavened bread, it would be my preference to do likewise. Since participants numbers can vary widely, a form of that bread which lends itself to easy distribution would seem proper. Therefore, wafers instead of loaves are desirable to many. Some may want to use Matzoth if possible. I personally question the use of wafers that include any form of icons though. The reason should be obvious.

Now we must consider the "fruit of the vine" that Jesus referred to. Clearly, what is used in the Passover meal is not mere grape juice. Therefore, I strongly question the use of anything but wine, as the contents of the "cup" that was used for the first communion. However, as happens for a variety of reasons and explanations, that is no longer the case. By the same token, and again, depending on the number of communicants at a given time, we see in use, individual cups rather than the use of the "common cup" in many or most of today's services. Unfortunately, today's society must also contend with hygienic laws and diseases that were not present at the time of this sacrament's inception. So be it.

The Church today is obligated, through the love and sacrifice of our Lord Jesus, to partake of a Holy Meal known as Holy Communion, The Eucharist, and The Lord's Supper. Depending on what Church we refer to - that is Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant - there are certain rules that govern who may partake. Some of these rules, to this author's understanding, should not be in use!

Why do I say this? Simply because I would avoid causing anyone to feel unworthy or left out. I do not feel that a person who calls upon the name of Jesus, should ever be exempted from partaking of the Holy Meal, so long as they understand what is being done. Neither do I think there should be a separation of  a sincere Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant.  Age alone, or  a denominational persuasion, should not automatically eliminate a person. There are a number of ways that this can be accomplished. They can include public announcements, notices in bulletins and of course, personal dialogue. The main criteria of the Bible is simple - and it alone should determine who can partake, as we see below.

1 Corinthians 11:
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

It is my hope and prayer, that the readers of this study, will be blessed enlightened and edified through the guidance of The Holy Spirit. Amen.