Acts 2:42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

I Cor. 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

In these passages we see the controlling dynamic of worship. In that early Church we read of how the Church “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching.” That phrase reminds us that the Word preached was central to worship. The Apostle reinforces that in I Cor. Where he writes about his assignment to preach the Gospel. In the Acts passage the other central dynamic of worship is contained in the phrase “breaking of bread,” which many scholars believe is a reference to communion.

The two of these together – The Word preached & the Sacraments administered have long been considered and called, among the Reformed as the “Means of grace.” So, as Reformed folks we affirm the fact that there exist two (some say three) means of Grace. These are Word and Sacrament, with some also insisting that prayer is a means of grace. By the phrase “means of grace” what we mean is that we hold to the conviction that God convinces us of His favor, and grows us in the faith (sanctification) by way of His gathering us to attend on the Word preached and the sacraments received. We also recognize that there is only one place where these means of God’s grace are to be found and that is in God’s church. Hungry Christians — Christians who desire to be showered with grace therefore gather on the Lord’s Day where the Word is proclaimed by those set aside and ordained to the end of being God’s spokesman to speak grace and administer the sacraments and to pray.

Thus far we have only said what our Heidelberg Catechism teaches in LD 38. We are taught:

That, especially on the day of rest,
I diligently attend the church of God2
to hear God’s Word,3
to use the sacraments,4
to call publicly upon the LORD,5
and to give Christian offerings for the poor.6

I submit to you that one reason that the importance of attending Worship is that we are no longer convinced that it is in Christian Worship alone where we find God’s favor conveyed to us in a unique and promised way in the Word preached and the sacrament administered.

So, as we have said one reality that we find as we gather week by week is the means of grace — that is the Word proclaimed. In older language it was the goal of the minister to “preach Christ into his people.” This was the passion of the clergy. To help God’s people by putting Christ on display. To provide to God’s people solace, encouragement, and steel via the preaching of the Word. To not let them leave without reminding them of God’s favor in Christ and God’s standard established by Christ. To bless them with God’s blessing so they might be better able to navigate the rough waters of life.

Alas, the Word preached as fallen on hard times as we have increasingly become a people who are controlled by the image, unlike our forefathers who were word oriented. Because we have been mesmerized by moving images coming at us with rapidity we seldom have the patience to follow the careful argumentation that used to be characteristic of the pulpit — a careful argumentation that required the listener to follow points, sub-points, and sub sub points of a sermon that resulted in a thorough understanding of subjects preached on. In such a way the means of grace that was the Word proclaimed formed and shaped generations. The Word proclaimed … this preaching Christ into God’s people resulted in the health of individuals, families, churches, and social orders. This preaching Christ into God’s people yielded the byproduct of wholeness and holiness into a culture. Christian cultures started with the Preaching of God’s Word. A people convinced of God’s favor were set free to live to the glory of God in all their living and it all started with the means of grace God appointed for worship.

Today our preaching, exceptions notwithstanding, is more image oriented than it is word oriented. More sensational, and so more shallow and considerably briefer — attention spans being what they are.

The result of all this is a Christian who is malnourished and comparatively stunted in growth compared to previous generations.

Yet here we are and the cure for this decline is the Means of grace. The cure is the Word rightly proclaimed and the sacraments properly administered as taught in Acts 2 and elsewhere through Scripture.

We have emphasized thus far the Word preached but the Sacraments administered were also the means of grace. The Fathers here used to say that in the Sacraments we don’t get a better Christ but we may well get Christ better. Preachers fail… stumble in preaching the word … but in the Table and the Font there Christ is revealed in such a way that is more difficult for the preacher to confound. When we come to the table we are reminded that Christ is our sufficiency… that Christ is our answer to God’s previous just wrath that justly was upon us. When we come to the table we are remind that God is for us for the sake of our benevolent champion Elder Brother, Jesus Christ. How can we not find ourselves lost in wonder, love, and praise when we are reminded both in Baptism and the Eucharist that despite the truth we see about ourselves – sinners that we are – still we are received in the beloved Christ and being received we don’t have to be burdened with the silly attempt to work off our sins by some kind of penance system dictated to us by a tyrant church?

Historically, when the Reformed church talked and wrote about Word and Sacrament – the means of Grace – and the relationship between the two our theologians would teach us that the Sacrament, being a symbol, depended upon the Word for explanation. So, the Word preached was given pride of place because in order to understand what the drama of the Sacraments were teaching we needed the Word to provide the context of the drama that is the Sacraments.

So, historically, the Reformed adjudicated that the proclamation of the Word to be absolutely essential to Worship, while the administration of the Sacraments was reflexively essential. The Word that is the whole counsel of God from justification to sanctification can stand alone, while the Sacraments lean upon the Word and their meaning from it. Our Father’s styled the Eucharist as; as “visible sermon.”

So, both Word and Sacrament are together means of grace.

That brings us to the issue of frequency of the Eucharist. Clearly, if the Word Preached is absolutely essential then you’d expect that you would need to hear it preached every time God gathers us for worship. However, if the Sacraments are only reflexively essential than the argument might be made that they are not necessary week in and out. And this is the way that some argue, and while we might not insist that the frequency of the table is not a hill to die on, we still have some observations here.

First, we would say that if one is convinced that the Sacraments rightly administered is a Means of Grace then why would one not want to have the opportunity to avail themselves of that Means of Grace God has set aside in order to shower His people with His blessings of favor? Why would we with neglect a frequent pursuit of the Eucharist where God promises to meet with His people.

We have to understand that when we come to the table that what we do here is not first and foremost our performative act. When we come to the Table we understand that before it is about our faith act in reception it is about what God is doing. As in the Word preached where God is the one speaking so in the Sacraments God is the one feeding us with life eternal. If it was only about our doing … our remembrance then perhaps attending the Lord’s table once quarterly or once a year would be acceptable. However, keep in mind what our Catechism teaches us about the Supper. We are taught that the effect of the Eucharist is;

to be united more and more to his sacred body through the Holy Spirit, who lives both in Christ and in us.2

The HC cites John 6 here,

55 For My flesh is [a]food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

This passage indicates that the Catechists saw that the Eucharist as more than a mere memorial and teaches the Calvin doctrine of receptionism. This understanding of the Sacrament taught that the bread and wine do not change physically, thus distinguishing it from a RC or Lutheran understanding. However, at the same time we confess that in the bread and wine Christ is spiritually present so that when we eat in faith as given to us by the Holy Spirit’s power we to partake in the body and blood of Christ. The emphasis is that the body of Christ is spiritually present to the believer during the Eucharist. This understanding distinguished the Eucharist from a Zwinglian (Baptist) bare memorial understanding as if all that happens in the table is between our ears. In this understanding the Eucharist is a visible sign that is more than a sign since the sign has the reality in the sign.

All of this begins to explain why the Heidelberg Catechism continues on in LD 28;

So… to enlarge on what we said a few minutes ago, we quote from Scottish Reformer Robert Bruce;

Therefore I say, we get no other thing in the Sacrament than we get in the Word. Content yourself with this. But if this is so, the Sacrament is not superfluous.

Robert Bruce
The Mystery of the Lord’s Supper

So, we have wandered somewhat from where this section started. We started with the issue of frequency of the Table, and where we have traveled in the last few minutes I trust you’ll see why some would choose, like John Knox did do, to want the Table whenever the Word was preached. Calvin himself, though he didn’t exactly get his wish in Geneva, desired to have the table in every worship service.

Now, let us round off by considering a possible objection that is commonly heard when increasing the frequency of taking the table. Often the objection is this;

“If you have the table too often it will become common… routine, and cease to be special or precious.”

Well, first we would say here that if this line of reasoning was true we would think the same thing about commonly and routinely coming for worship. We might well say the same of the Sermon. If we took this logic into marriage husbands might reason …”Well, I don’t want to kiss my wife too often lest it becomes routine or common.”

Still, we admit that the human heart, being what it is, could well begin to treat the Eucharist as routine and common. However, if that happens might the problem not be the frequency of the sacrament but rather a frequency of undisciplined minds as well as the failure of the pulpit in the Word being proclaimed?

We want to round off by saying again, that we are not going to think ourselves superior to others who don’t take the table weekly. We understand that the Scriptures are not unmistakably clear on the issue of frequency. Good men disagree on this subject. We also might well conclude after a period of weekly communion that for whatever reason weekly communion isn’t working.

Let us though end with a passage that many have considered one which strongly points in the direction of weekly Eucharist;

Acts 20:7 – On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them intending to depart on the next day and prolonged his speech until midnight.

If the phrase “break bread” here is a reference to the Eucharist then this passage would prove the issue. However, while that phrase might well refer to the Lord’s Supper it might also refer to a common meal shared by that fellowship.