Communion Controversy

The Lord's Supper has been the subject of much controversy over the centuries. Even in the pages of the New Testament, the Lord's Supper generated dispute. The Apostle Paul, in his first letter to the church at Corinth, reminded the Corinthians of how they should be practicing this sacrament, which comes to us directly from Christ Himself.

But as we move through the pages of church history, one of the things we find is that the communion table becomes again a source of controversy. This happened in the Reformation itself. In fact, in the Reformation, we have a significant break between the churches in Germany, largely under the leadership of Martin Luther, and the churches in the various cities of Switzerland, the primary city being Zürich and the leader being Ulrich Zwingli. In 1529, in order to bring the Reformed churches of Switzerland together with the Evangelical (later, Lutheran) churches in Germany, church leaders held a colloquy or conference at Marburg.

A number of theological issues were discussed at Marburg, but the most controversial issue, that of the Lord's Supper, was saved for last. Of course, the Reformers disagreed with the Roman Catholic view of transubstantiation. This is the idea that the elements or the substances of the Lord's Supper, the cup and the bread, literally become the blood and body of Christ. Luther held to what he called the Real Presence. Sometimes this gets labeled as consubstantiation, but Luther rejected that term. He saw the body and blood of Christ as subsisting in, with, and under the elements.

Zwingli held to a different view. We have come to call Zwingli's view the memorial view. He held that the elements at the Lord's table are symbols. The bread is a symbol of the Lord's body and the cup is a symbol of Christ's blood shed for the remission of our sins.

Luther and Zwingli could not come to agreement over the Lord's Supper. They left Marburg and went their separate ways, and unity never came to the Reformed churches.

A few centuries later, the Lord's Supper came up again, this time in Northampton, Mass., in the 1740s and 1750s. The controversy ended in Jonathan Edwards' dismissal from his congregation. Edwards' predecessor, Solomon Stoddard, believed that the Lord's Supper should be open to all. At one point, he called it a converting ordinance, meaning that in the Lord's Supper the grace of Christ is made available, so perhaps the unconverted may come to faith by partaking of the Lord's Supper. Edwards saw this as unbiblical. He would not practice this view at Northampton, and this put him at odds with the leadership of his church, resulting in his dismissal.