26 Aug GS 2007 art 65
GS 2007 Article 65 – Appeal from Br. B. Van de Burgt
The advisory committee presented its second proposal. After a round of discussion it was moved and seconded to change Consideration 3.2 to read:
3.2 Synod agrees with the line of Regional Synod West 2002: Since Scripture does not prescribe the number of cups at the Lord’s Supper, no one may insist on usage of communal cups only. The point of the statement “Do this in remembrance of me” is that the outward symbols of bread and wine point to Christ. The form for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper tells us to “lift our
hearts on high in heaven, where Christ, our advocate, is, at the right hand of His heavenly Father.”
The amendment carried.
The amended proposal was adopted as follows:
1. Material
- 1.1 Appeal of Br. B. Van de Burgt, including appendices 1, 2, 3
2. Observations
- 2.1 Br. Van de Burgt asks synod to judge that Regional Synod West 2002:
- 2.1.1 Is incorrect and unjust in its judgement that “the possible interpretation of Luke 22:17 is not in conflict with Scripture.”
- 2.1.2 Is dishonest in its judgement that “the possible interpretation of Luke 22:17 is not in conflict with historical testimony and use.”
- 2.1.3 Is incorrect in its judgement that “the use of individual cups is not in conflict with Scripture.”
- 2.2 He asks synod to decide, on the solid basis of God’s Word, that the use of the communal cup (cups) be the norm in the churches.
3. Considerations
- 3.1 The main point in the appeal is the question whether the Bible prescribes the use of a communal cup for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. Br. Van de Burgt says the Bible does. Synod is not convinced that we can read in the texts a rejection of the individual cups. If we would take it literally when the Lord Jesus says: ‘The cup’ (Luke 22:17) and see it as prescriptive for the use of the common cup, then in the same vein we should also take literally the words ‘this cup’ in Luke 22:20. Since we don’t have that specific cup anymore, it would then be impossible for us to celebrate the Lord’s Supper. Br. Van de Burgt focuses too much on the cup and not on what the Lord Jesus says about the new covenant in his blood.
- 3.2 Synod agrees with the line of Regional Synod West 2002: Since Scripture does not prescribe the number of cups at the Lord’s Supper, no one may insist on usage of communal cups only. The point of the statement “Do this in remembrance of me” is that the outward symbols of bread and wine point to Christ. The form for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper tells us to “lift our hearts on high in heaven, where Christ, our advocate, is, at the right hand of His heavenly Father.”
- 3.3 Although the interpretation of Luke 22:17, that the one cup was poured out into individual cups which the disciples would have had before them, is questionable, classis only used this to show that the use of the one cup by our Lord Jesus would not necessarily mean that we must use only one cup at the Lord’s Supper celebration.
- 3.4 The use of historical testimony can not be a basis for a decision regarding the use of the communal cup. In the past some churches have used only a communal cup, others have used individual cups. Also the quoted decision of Synod Leeuwarden does not clearly state that the use of individual cups is not allowed.
4. Recommendation
Synod decide:
- 4.1 To deny the appeal of Br. Van de Burgt.