The plagues and the Exodus Event demonstrate the omnipotence of the true God over the people, livestock, and gods of Egypt. The LORD says, "For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the LORD" (Exo 12:12). And God establishes a statute or ordinance -- the Passover meal. It will be one of the ordinary means of God's grace and salvation until the Passover lamb is slain on the cross. The Gospel of John even understands the fact that the instruction, "do not break any of the bones" (Exo 12:46) with Psalm 34:20 as the reason Christ did not have any bones broken (cf. John 19:36). It is this Passover lamb, who says, this is my body; this is my blood. Thus the Lord's Supper, derived from the Passover meal, is one of the ordinary means of God's grace and salvation today.

And we have an early example of catechizing children: "And when your children say to you, 'What do you mean by this service?' you shall say, 'It is the sacrifice of the LORD's Passover, for he passed over the houses of the people of Israel in Egypt, when he struck the Egyptians but spared our houses'" (Exo 12:26-27). And concerning the feast of unleavened bread, it says, "You shall tell your son on that day, 'It is because of what the LORD did for me when I came out of Egypt'" (Exo 13:8). This is something that also should continue today as the Lord Christ taught us to teach them to observe everything that he commanded (see Matt 28:20, Great Commission). Baptism being mentioned in the previous verse, what they are to observe especially includes the Lord's Supper. See Flavel's defense of catechizing in my first quotes of Flavel's Exposition of the Assemblies Catechism on this page.

We also see a glimpse of language that will be elaborated in the Shema (Deut 6:4-9) "And it shall be to you as a sign on your hand and a memorial between your eyes, that the law of the LORD may be in your mouth. For with a strong hand the LORD has brought you out of Egypt" (Exo 13:9). The catechizing continues, "And when in time to come your son asks you, 'What does this mean?' you shall say to him, 'By a strong hand the LORD brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery. For when Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, the LORD killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man and the firstborn of animals. Therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all the males that first open the womb, but all the firstborn of my sons I redeem'" (Exo 13:14-15). And the next verse continues the Shema-like language (Exo 13:16).

This Exodus account is very much a continuation of the narrative of Genesis and we see this in the comments fulfilling prophecies of Genesis. In particular, Genesis 15:13-16 says that the people will be "in a land that is not theirs and will be servants [we could say slaves] there" 400 years and come out with great possessions. Then we see Israel plunder Egypt (Exo 12:36) and it is noted that they had lived in Egypt for 430 years (Exo 12:40). And, as in Genesis 1:2, the Spirit hovered over them like He did the waters at creation in the form of the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night (Exo 13:21-22, 14:24). And then we have the parting of the waters by the wind/Spirit to give way to dry land, also just as in Genesis 1:7-9. Israel is born (they even change their calendar to reflect this new creation (Exo 12:2). And thus how beautiful is the description, "Israel saw the great power that the LORD used against the Egyptians, so the people feared the LORD, and they believed in the LORD and in his servant Moses" (Exo 14:31).

And then we see the Song of Moses, which then Miriam takes up (the repetition of the first line implying that she led the people in singing the whole song too). She led the song, played the tambourine, and all the women danced. This is an interesting example of a prophetess leading worship and proclaiming the good news of salvation in the LORD. Anything that can be said, can be sung, and vice versa. This song was a type of proclamation -- a sermon in verse. And the lesson, fitting what we have said of the purpose of the plagues and the exodus event, is "Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?" (Exo 15:11). And the song foreshadows what will come to pass in the days (and unfortunately years) ahead, as it talks of the inhabitants of Canaan having melted away when they heard.

The principle of the firstborn in the exodus event is most critical in understanding how Jesus' death can cover our sins. It is worth saying that faith in God the Father and in his servant the Lord Christ is the Spirit wrought response of the one who is born again and that this application of salvation depends on the accomplishment of salvation in the death and resurrection of Christ as the firstborn of his people. And that given this accomplishment and application of salvation we too should have our tongues loosed (not because we are drunk, but because of the Spirit) to sing many new songs.

Though things end well, it is ominous that right before the Exodus event the people expressed such unbelief and grumbling saying, "It would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the wilderness" (Exo 14:12). And Moses tells the people, to best translate the verse, to "Shut up" (Exo 14:14). This foreshadows the rest of the story of the Torah, beginning with the verses immediately following this section (Exo 15:22ff). And is in stark contrast to Jesus who remained silent when accused by the chief priests and elders of Israel rather than complaining.

Labels: catechizing, exodus, feast of unleavened bread, Genesis 1, grumbling, Lord's Supper, miriam, moses, new songs, ordinary means of grace, passover, women

Click here to listen to this teaching.

There is probably no subject where there are more varying views among Reformed theologians and churches than on the significance and observance of the Lord's Supper. Even the names given to the sacrament show different emphases: the Lord's Supper, communion, and the eucharist (a thanksgiving meal). Nevertheless, the PC(USA) Book of Confessions is remarkably consistent in its teaching on the Supper. It is a Spiritual feeding on Christ and as such a means of God's grace.

Scots Confession:

"In the Supper rightly used, Christ Jesus is so joined with us that he becomes the very nourishment and food of our souls. Not that we imagine any transubstantiation of bread into Christ's body, and of wine into his natural blood, as the Romanists have perniciously taught and wrongly believed; but this union and conjunction which we have with the body and blood of Christ Jesus in the right use of the sacraments is wrought by means of the Holy Ghost, who by true faith carries us above all things that are visible, carnal, and earthly, and makes us feed upon the body and blood of Christ Jesus, once broken and shed for us but now in heaven, and appearing for us in the presence of his Father. Notwithstanding the distance between his glorified body in heaven and mortal men on earth, yet we must assuredly believe that the bread which we break is the communion of Christ's body and the cup which we bless the communion of his blood.

Thus we confess and believe without doubt that the faithful, in the right use of the Lord's Table, do so eat the body and drink the blood of the Lord Jesus that he remains in them and they in him; they are so made flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone that as the eternal Godhood has given to the flesh of Christ Jesus, which by nature was corruptible and mortal, life and immortality, so the eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Christ Jesus does the like for us." (3.21)

The Lord's Supper is not merely symbolic. This teaching is compared to the Roman Catholic Church, which taught that the bread and wine turn into the blood and body of Christ as physical food, the Lutheran Church, which did not teach transubstantiation but did teach that the sacrament is a physical feeding on Christ, and the view of Zwingli (a Reformed theologian), which taught that the sacrament was merely symbolic. John Calvin (Reformed theologian) tried to compromise between the Lutherans and Zwingli by arguing for a Spiritual feeding on Christ. This is the position of the confessions we hold.

Heidelberg Catechism:
This was a compromise document between the Lutherans and Reformed and it follows Calvin's teaching.

Q. 79. Then why does Christ call the bread his body, and the cup his blood, or the New Covenant in his blood, and why does the apostle Paul call the Supper "a means of sharing" in the body and blood of Christ?

A. Christ does not speak in this way except for a strong reason. He wishes to teach us by it that as bread and wine sustain this temporal life so his crucified body and shed blood are the true food and drink of our souls for eternal life. Even more, he wishes to assure us by this visible sign and pledge that we come to share in his true body and blood through the working of the Holy Spirit as surely as we receive with our mouth these holy tokens in remembrance of him, and that all his sufferings and his death are our own as certainly as if we had ourselves suffered and rendered satisfaction in our own persons. (4.079, w/emphasis)

Second Helvetic Confession:

THE SUPPER OF THE LORD. The Supper of the Lord (which is called the Lord's Table, and the Eucharist, that is, a Thanksgiving), is, therefore, usually called a supper, because it was instituted by Christ at his last supper, and still represents it, and because in it the faithful are spiritually fed and given drink. (5.193, with emphasis).

The most of the rest of the section on the Lord's Supper spells out that this means the same as above.

The Westminster Confession of Faith:

Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this sacrament, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified, and all benefits of his death: the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses. (6.167, with emphasis)

However, there is a major difference between our confessions and polity in the PC(USA) and it is debated within other denominations:

The confessions teach that children of the covenant cannot participate in the Lord's Supper until they are of age and discretion to examine themselves or they are silent on the participation of children even though they spell it out for baptism.

Scots Confession:

We hold that baptism applies as much to the children of the faithful as to those who are of age and discretion, and so we condemn the error of the Anabaptists, who deny that children should be baptized before they have faith and understanding. But we hold that the Supper of the Lord is only for those who are of the household of faith and can try and examine themselves both in their faith and their duty to their neighbors. Those who eat and drink at that holy table without faith, or without peace and goodwill to their brethren, eat unworthily. (3.23, emphasis added).

Heidelberg Catechism:

Q. 81. Who ought to come to the table of the Lord?
A. Those who are displeased with themselves for their sins, and who nevertheless trust that these sins have been forgiven them and that their remaining weakness is covered by the passion and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and improve their life. The impenitent and hypocrites, however, eat and drink judgment to themselves. (4.081)

Interestingly, the first preface to the catechism explains that it is to be taught to children in preparation for their admittance to the Lord's Table.

Second Helvetic Confession stresses self-examination but is silent about the issue of children as far as I could find.

The Westminster Standards addresses the issue in the Larger Catechism:

Q. 177. Wherein do the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper differ?
A. The sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper differ, in that Baptism is to be administered but once, with water, to be a sign and seal of our regeneration and ingrafting into Christ, and that even to infants; whereas the Lord's Supper is to be administered often, in the elements of bread and wine, to represent and exhibit Christ as spiritual nourishment to the soul, and to confirm our continuance and growth in him, and that only to such as are of years and ability to examine themselves. (7.287, emphasis added)

So Why Do We Allow Children to Come to the Table? (paedocommunion)

Other covenant meals (like Passover) included children of the covenant at the table. Since the Lord's Supper replaces those sacramental meals, it too should include children. Those Old Testament meals also required self-examination for adults (and presumably self-examination for children to the extent that they could do so). Thus when Paul says that you must examine yourself he is speaking primarily to adults, just as when the Old Testament said the same for other meals.

After all, Jesus told Peter,

"Feed my lambs" (John 21:15)

and

"Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God" (Luke 18:16).

It is still important that we insist that those who are unrepentant keep from the table. For Scripture says,

"Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1 Cor 11:28-29)

Labels: communion, consubstantiation, eucharist, Lord's Supper, mass, paedocommunion, transubstantiation