Fellowship Meals During Worship: The Early House Churches & Wives at the Lord's Table-Symposium

Robert Banks writes,

"At first sight, Paul’s endorsement of women praying and prophesying in church seems to conflict with his statement that “the women should keep silence” in the gatherings (1 Cor 14: 34). Attempts to overrule his earlier endorsement by this statement or to elide these later verses from the text should both be avoided. There is no justification for the former and scarcely any manuscript support for the latter, and an appreciation of the wider and immediate context of Paul’s advice renders such solutions unnecessary."

"The injunction is the third in a series (14: 20ff.), all of which are directed against the existence of chaos in church, first through all speaking in tongues at the same time and second through all jointly prophesying. The precise nature of the offense of the women (more strictly of the wives) becomes clear in the following verse: “If there is anything they desire to know,” he says, “let them ask their husbands at home (14: 35, RSV)."

"The wives have been interrupting the meeting with questions about things said within it. If more than that were involved, then Paul would not single out this one problem without any reference to others. The injunction to “keep silence” does not itself necessarily possess an absolute sense and must always be interpreted by the context in which it occurs. The situation presupposed by Paul’s remarks is perfectly understandable."

"Women for the most part did not receive any substantial education in religious matters, yet in Christian gatherings they could be present throughout the whole meeting and also contribute to it in a number of ways. Particularly in a church like that at Corinth, where Christian liberty was prized so highly, it comes as no surprise that wives felt free to query things they did not understand. In advising against this, Paul reminds them again of its contravention of prevailing custom (14:35)— in Greek cities it was only the hetairai, courtesans, who engaged in public discussions with men— and of the practice of other churches (14: 36) and even of the OT (14: 34)."

BANQUET & PASSOVER

Rabbi Prof. David Golinkin, President of the Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem, writes:

"The Jewish people throughout the generations did not live in a vacuum; it absorbed much from its surroundings. But it did not absorb blindly. The Sages absorbed the form of the symposium from the Hellenistic world, but drastically changed its content. The Greeks and Romans discussed love, beauty, food and drink at the symposium, while the Sages at the Seder discussed the Exodus from Egypt, the miracles of God and the greatness of the Redemption. The symposium was meant for the elite, while the Sages turned the Seder into an educational experience for the entire Jewish people. Indeed, this pattern repeated itself throughout Jewish history."

"... the stunning similarity between the Greek banquet known as a symposium and the Passover Seder. Few Jews realize the Seder is a rabbinic invention. The rabbis instituted the seder to standardize practice after the destruction of the Temple. The Haggadah is an outgrowth of that standardization. And the Seder mirrors a Greek Symposium in many ways..."

"The Greek word epikomon means "after meal entertainment" and likely (again per Wikipedia) refers to the "games, songs, flute-girls, slaves performing various acts, and hired entertainments" that followed the discussion and the food. When the Sages said "one may not add an afikoman after the paschal lamb” they were referring to (and outlawing) this practice... We close each segment of the seder with a cup of wine. At the symposia the same custom was followed."

"... the rabbis took a common secular practice, widely popular in the Hellenized world, and cleaned it up a bit, removing the raunch and using the order to tell the story of Passover."

Luke 14:1-24 reveals the banquet setting among Jews in the first century:

One Sabbath day Jesus went to eat dinner in the home of a leader of the Pharisees, and the people were watching him closely. There was a man there whose arms and legs were swollen. Jesus asked the Pharisees and experts in religious law, “Is it permitted in the law to heal people on the Sabbath day, or not?” When they refused to answer, Jesus touched the sick man and healed him and sent him away. Then he turned to them and said, “Which of you doesn’t work on the Sabbath? If your son or your cow falls into a pit, don’t you rush to get him out?” Again they could not answer.

When Jesus noticed that all who had come to the dinner were trying to sit in the seats of honor near the head of the table, he gave them this advice: “When you are invited to a wedding feast, don’t sit in the seat of honor. What if someone who is more distinguished than you has also been invited? The host will come and say, ‘Give this person your seat.’ Then you will be embarrassed, and you will have to take whatever seat is left at the foot of the table! 

Instead, take the lowest place at the foot of the table. Then when your host sees you, he will come and say, ‘Friend, we have a better place for you!’ Then you will be honored in front of all the other guests. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

Then he turned to his host. “When you put on a luncheon or a banquet,” he said, “don’t invite your friends, brothers, relatives, and rich neighbors. For they will invite you back, and that will be your only reward. Instead, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. Then at the resurrection of the righteous, God will reward you for inviting those who could not repay you.”

Hearing this, a man sitting at the table with Jesus exclaimed, “What a blessing it will be to attend a banquet in the Kingdom of God!”

Jesus replied with this story: “A man prepared a great feast and sent out many invitations. When the banquet was ready, he sent his servant to tell the guests, ‘Come, the banquet is ready.’ But they all began making excuses. One said, ‘I have just bought a field and must inspect it. Please excuse me.’ Another said, ‘I have just bought five pairs of oxen, and I want to try them out. Please excuse me.’ Another said, ‘I now have a wife, so I can’t come.’

“The servant returned and told his master what they had said. His master was furious and said, ‘Go quickly into the streets and alleys of the town and invite the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame.’ After the servant had done this, he reported, ‘There is still room for more.’ So his master said, ‘Go out into the country lanes and behind the hedges and urge anyone you find to come, so that the house will be full. For none of those I first invited will get even the smallest taste of my banquet.’”

Luke 22 and Matthew 26, also record the banquet-symposium setting of assembling and discussion at The Passover:

When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.”After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”

And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. But the hand of him who is going to betray me is with mine on the table. The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed. But woe to that man who betrays him!” They began to question among themselves which of them it might be who would do this.

A dispute also arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. Jesus said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves. You are those who have stood by me in my trials. And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom...

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 

Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the[b] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives...

THE CHRISTIAN EVENING MEAL or LORD'S SUPPER

Further commenting on the importance of eating at the Lord's Table (banquet meal), Banks writes:

"Though commentators have generally assumed that the Christian meal included a formal recitation of the words uttered at the last meal Jesus shared with his disciples, this did not necessarily take place. While the recalling of the events of that night probably follows normal practice in his churches, Paul’s reciting the words of institution may simply be to remind his readers of the spirit that the meal should be conducted in (1 Cor 11: 23– 26)."

"Elsewhere in his writings similar references to sayings or actions of Jesus are introduced to recall to his audience the real nature of their responsibilities, though, it must be admitted, these do not contain anything so explicit as Jesus’ “do this in remembrance of me.” The character of the meal could be affirmed in ways other than reciting Jesus’ words, e.g., through the prayers that commence and conclude it."

"No priestly celebrant is in view in any of the contexts where the meal is discussed; indeed, there is no suggestion that its management was in the hands of officials of any kind. Most probably general arrangements were in the hands of the “host” in whose home the meal was held, though the Corinthian practice of some eating before others (plus the fact that Paul addresses his remarks to the whole church) indicates that responsibility for proper conduct lay upon all. The presence of children in the regular meetings of Christians (Col 3: 20; Eph 6: 1– 3) suggests that they participated in it. A precedent here would be the Passover Feast, also held in the home, which included education of the young in the fundamentals of their religious heritage (Exod 12: 21– 27)."

"The meal itself was a visible proclamation of the death of Christ to all who participated in it and, therefore, a call to discipleship by him. For Paul the words, “This is my body” (1 Cor11: 24) mean, “This is me, the one who gave up his life on your behalf.” The words, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood” (v. 25— not, as in Matthew and Mark, “This is the blood of the covenant”) mean, “This is the new relationship established between God and you through my death” (the term “blood” being for Paul a shorthand way of referring to Jesus’ crucifixion)."

"References to the “body” and “covenant” of Christ (by means of the “bread” and “wine”) are not simply two ways of referring to the same thing, viz., Jesus’ death for the sake of others. The term “body” obviously describes the death of Jesus, but the term “covenant” goes on to identify the great benefit that results from that death— a new relationship with God and one another. The taking of bread at the beginning and drinking of wine at the end of the meal (1 Cor 11: 23– 25) now become all the more appropriate, for between them lies the experience of that new relationship in the course of the meal itself."

"This meal is vital, for as the members of the community eat and drink together their unity comes to visible expression. The meal is therefore a truly social occasion. The sharing of the wine at the close of the meal is appropriate for another reason. This action anticipates the time when they shall all “drink” (i.e., “fellowship”) with Christ in God’s kingdom in a more direct way. What could be a more fitting note to conclude the meal with? It is a truly eschatological event for those who participate in it. Thus the meal that they shared together reminded the members of their relationship with Christ and one another and deepened those relationships in the same way that participation in an ordinary meal cements and symbolizes the bond between a family or group."

"This explains why Paul does not direct his criticisms against the attitudes of people towards the elements of bread and wine or against the quality of their individual relationships to God but against their attitudes and behavior towards one another. When these do not reflect the Christlike pouring out of their lives for each other that lies at the heart of the meal, they are “guilty of drinking the cup and eating the bread in an unworthy manner” and of “profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11: 27). This is the significance of Paul’s warning that “all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves” (v. 29, NRSV)."

"Here, as in the previous chapter (10:17), the community is in view. The emphasis is upon participation, not the elements, and upon the unity of the community, as symbolized in the “one” loaf that is distributed among them A similar thought lies behind Paul’s comments, a few paragraphs earlier, about the behavior of the “strong” towards the “weak.” There he urges the former to “take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.” Being a stumbling block sins against the weak person for whom Christ died. But it does more, for “when you thus sin against members of your family, and wound their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ” (1 Cor 8: 12, NRSV)."

"Paul considers this a serious matter; for him a meal lacking sensitivity to the physical needs of the community is not the “Lord’s meal” at all. He explains that, if unchecked, wrong attitudes between individuals will result in physical weakness, even death, among the members. This is one more indication of the way physical and spiritual factors are intertwined in Paul’s thinking..."

"The distinctive character of the Pauline meal, and of the idea of community embodied in it, remains even if at certain points there is overlap with other practices. For Paul, people’s physical frames were as much a part of their created glory as any other aspect of their personality. Consistent with this, Paul believed that the body itself is inhabited by, indeed is a “temple” of, the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6: 19). Also, according to Acts the laying on of hands conveyed healing, endorsed ministry, commissioned workers, and even communicated the Spirit. Along with every other aspect of the personality, the body should take its part in the life of the church. This is anticipated in the action by which a person joins the community— baptism— but comes to fullest expression in the central action by which the community maintains and deepens its life— the Lord’s meal."

________________________________________

--Banks, Robert J. (1994-02-01). Paul's Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Cultural Setting, Revised Edition (Kindle Locations 1550-1563). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

--Bible quotations are from the NIV 2011.