J.C. Ryle's devotional thoughts on the Gospel of Luke. The Last Supper continued. Luke 22, verses 14-23

And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you, before I suffer. For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God shall come. And he took bread, and gave thanks, and break it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body, which is given for you. This do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

But behold, the hand of him that betrays me is with me on the table. And truly the Son of Man goes as it was determined. But woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed. and they began to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should do this thing.

These verses contain Luke's account of the institution of the Lord's Supper. It is a passage which every true Christian will always read with deep interest. How astonishing it seems that an ordinance so beautifully simple at its first appointment should have been obscured and mystified by man's inventions. What a painful proof it is of human corruption that some of the bitterest controversies which have disturbed the church have been concerning the table of the Lord. Great indeed is the ingenuity of man in perverting God's gifts. The ordinance that should have been for his wealth is too often made an occasion of falling.

In appointing the Lord's Supper, Jesus distinctly tells his disciples that they were to do what they did in remembrance of him. In one word, the Lord's Supper is not a sacrifice. It is eminently a commemorative ordinance. The bread that the believer eats at the Lord's table is intended to remind him of Christ's body, given to death on the cross for his sins. The wine that he drinks is intended to remind him of Christ's blood, shed to make atonement for his transgressions. The whole ordinance was meant to keep fresh in his memory the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, and the satisfaction which that sacrifice made for the sin of the world.

The two elements of bread and wine were intended to preach Christ crucified as our substitute under lively emblems. They were to be a visible sermon, appealing to the believer's senses and teaching the old foundation truth of the gospel that Christ's death on the cross is the life of man's soul. We shall do well to keep steadily in view this simple view of the Lord's Supper. That a special blessing is attached to a worthy use of it, as well as the worthy use of every ordinance appointed by Christ, there is of course no doubt. But that there is any other means by which Christians can eat Christ's body and drink Christ's blood, excepting by faith, we must always steadily deny.

He that comes to the Lord's table with faith in Christ may confidently expect to have his faith increased by receiving the bread and wine, but he that comes without faith has no right to expect a blessing. Empty he comes to the ordinance and empty he will go away. The less mystery and obscurity we attach to the Lord's Supper, the better will it be for our souls. We should reject with abhorrence the unscriptural notion that there is any oblation or sacrifice in it, that the substance of the bread and wine is at all changed, or that the mere formal act of receiving the sacrament can do any good to the soul. We should cling firmly to the great principle laid down at its institution, that it is eminently a commemorative ordinance, and that the reception of it without faith and a thankful remembrance of Christ's death can do us no good.

We should notice for another thing in these verses that the observance of the Lord's Supper is a duty binding on all true Christians. The words of our Lord on this point are direct and emphatic. Do this in remembrance of me. To suppose, as some do, that these words are only an injunction to the apostles and all ministers to administer the Lord's Supper to others is a thoroughly unsatisfactory interpretation. The obvious sense of the words is a general precept to all disciples.

The command before us is overlooked to a fearful extent. Myriads of members of Christian churches never go to the Lord's table. They would be ashamed, perhaps, to be known as open breakers of the Ten Commandments. Yet they are not ashamed of breaking a plain command of Christ. They appear to think there's no great sin in not being communicants. They seem utterly unconscious that if they had lived in the days of the Apostles, they would not have been reckoned Christians at all.

The subject, no doubt, is one on which we must beware of mistakes. It is not, of course, to be desired that every baptized person should receive the Lord's Supper as a mere matter of form. It is an ordinance which was intended for the spiritual living, and not for those dead in sins. But when we see vast numbers of churchgoers never going to the Lord's table, and no way ashamed of their neglect of the sacrament, then it is clear that there is something very wrong in the state of the churches. It is a sign either of widespread ignorance, or of callous indifference to a divine precept. When such multitudes of baptized people habitually break a command of Christ, we cannot doubt that Christ is displeased.

What are we doing ourselves? This, after all, is the point that concerns us. Do we stay away from the Lord's Supper under a vague notion that there is no great necessity for receiving it? If we hold such an opinion, the sooner we give it up, the better. A plain precept of God's own Son is not to be trifled with in this way. Do we stay away from the Lord's Supper because we are not fit to be communicants? If we do, then let us thoroughly understand that we're not fit to die. If we are unfit for the Lord's Table, then we are unfit for heaven, and unprepared for the Judgment Day, and not ready to meet God. Surely this is the most serious state of things.

but the words before us are clear and explicit Christ gives us a plain command if we willfully disobey it then we are in danger of ruining our souls if we're not fit to obey it then we ought to repent without delay

let us notice lastly Who were the communicants at the first appointment of the Lord's Supper? They were not all holy. They were not all believers. Luke informs us that the traitor, Judas Iscariot, was one of them. The words of our Lord admit of no other fair interpretation. Behold, he says, the hand of him that betrays me is with me on the table. The lesson of these words is deeply important. They show us that we must not regard all communicants as true believers and sincere servants of Christ. The evil and good will be found side by side, even at the Lord's Supper. No discipline can possibly prevent it.

They show us furthermore that it is foolish to stay away from the Lord's Supper because some communicants are unconverted, or to leave a church because some of its members are unsound. The wheat and the tares will grow together until the harvest. Our Lord himself tolerated a Judas at the first communion that ever took place. The servant of God must not pretend to be more exclusive than his master, let him see to his own heart, and leave others to answer for themselves to God.

And now, if we are not communicants, let us ask ourselves as we leave this passage, why are we not? What satisfactory reason can we possibly give for neglecting a plain command of Christ? May we never rest until we've looked this inquiry in the face.

If we are communicants, let us take heed that we receive the sacrament worthily. The sacraments have a wholesome effect and operation in only those who worthily receive them. Let us often inquire whether we repent and believe and strive to live holy lives. So living, we need not be afraid to eat of that bread and drink of that cup which the Lord has commanded to be received.