|
Site
Navigation
FREE Resources
Information Packet
Kingdom Notes e-newsletter
MP3 Downloads
Goings On
Host a Conference
Reformation Celebration
Highlands Hall
Tuesday Night Bible Study
Annual Conference
Couples Camp
Pastors Camp
R.C. Sproul Jr.'s Speaking Schedule
Other Events
Reads
Every Thought Captive
New Book Samples from Dr. R.C. Sproul Jr.
Kingdom Notes
Ask R.C. a Question
Kingdom Moments Videos
Other Articles & Writings
HSC Squiblog
Info
FAQ
Visiting
Moving Here
Contact Us
Photo Gallery
Saint Peter Presbyterian Church
Links
Unless otherwise noted,
all content is
Copyright © 2008
Highlands Study Center
|
|
(This column originally appeared in the November 9, 1996 issue of
World magazine.)
Sour Grapes
by R.C. Sproul Jr.
Grape juice is the evangelical drink of choice.
The evangelical church has perfected the art of being anti-traditional.
Old hymns are shoved aside for the latest from Nashville. Denominational
allegiances are discarded with ease. History to
many evangelicals reaches back only to the first Billy Graham crusade.
One tradition, however, is alive and well in the evangelical church.
I just completed a small survey of evangelical churches. I spoke with
10 pastors and asked them two simple questions: (1) Does your church use
wine or grape juice when receiving communion? And (2) Why?
I spoke with pastors on both coasts and in between, old churches and
new churches, Baptists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and independents.
The final score? 8-1/2 to 1-1/2. Grape
juice in a landslide. The lone church to serve wine exclusively
was, as you might have guessed, the Episcopal church.
The halves represent one church that serves both. The rest were of the
juice party. The results did not surprise me.
Neither did the reasons. Each pastor spoke of fear. The two principal
fears were that others would be offended by wine, and that some would
be tempted by wine. The other frequent response was, “I don’t know. We’ve
always done it that way,’ or some variation on the same theme.
What utterly amazed me was that, of the eight pastors who serve only
grape juice, seven of them want to serve wine. Only one pastor agreed
with his church’s position. The pastors bemoaned the lingering neo-Platonism
in the church, the tendency to find evil in the physical, in things rather
than in our hearts. Each said he knew from the Bible that it was wine
and not grape juice which Jesus drank in instituting his Supper.
My Episcopalian friend, the sole winebibber, reminded me that wine did
not come to the Lord’s table empty of meaning. In the Old Testament wine was
a symbol of blessing, of rest. Priests were forbidden to drink wine because
their work was never through. The Great High Priest, however, was about
to complete the work. The drinking of the wine, in pointing to Christ’s
shed blood, points also forward to the consummation of his kingdom, the
blessed rest we will receive at the marriage feast of the Lamb.
To water down the wine is to water down the joy. To water down the joy
is to water down the full significance of Christ’s work.
My happy teetotaler friend explained that the Supper is symbolic. He
is right. The Lord’s Supper is the Word made visible. The argument is
made that the value of a symbol lies in the response it elicits in the
heart. The Lord’s Supper works to elicit attitudes of wonder, repentance,
and thanksgiving.
Assuming an existing antipathy to wine by many in the evangelical church,
using wine might more likely elicit anger, fear, disgust, or confusion.
The eyes and heart of the believer might focus not on Christ and his blood,
but on alcohol.
Jesus, however, is the one who assigns the symbols: bread for body, wine
for blood. That they are symbols does not mean that we have the freedom
to change them. Jesus, in instituting the Supper, not only symbolized
but sacralized. That is to say, he conferred
on the bread and wine sacred, or holy, significance.
The issue of the supper comes back to the broader issue of wine. The
solution is not to change Christ’s instructions, but to change our view
of wine. We need accept neither the culture’s view nor the evangelical
subculture’s view. What we need is Jesus’ view. We, in seeking to purify
what he has called pure, instead only profane.
|
|
