[INTRODUCTION - We have adapted the following writing to help the reader
to have a better understanding of the attack on the scriptural practice
of God's people using one cup, a common drinking vessel, in the
distribution of the fruit of the vine, and one loaf of bread from which
all communicants brake and eat in the Lord's supper. The article first
appeared in the Christian Standard, March 31, 1900, one-hundred-one
years ago. J. W. McGarvey was concerned about a very serious assault on
the scriptural practice of using a common-cup in Christian worship. The
introduction into the religious world of a "more sanitary manner of
worship" is ridiculed by him to show how foolishly inconsistent its
advocates are. Brother McGarvey points out that with the invention of
the microscope came the discovery of tiny little beings called
"microbes". Today we call them "germs" or "micro-organisms". It is
hoped that the reader understands that the Lord's supper, the Communion,
was instituted just the way Jesus wanted it. The Creator of micro-
organisms knows far more about them than a man can ever discover. We are
certain that the Lord understood about communicable diseases, including
the HIV and AIDS of our day, and he still gave the disciples a cup of
fruit of the vine and said, "this do ye" (1 Corinthians 11:25), "drink
ye all of it" (Matthew 26:27), and "they all drank of it" (Mark 14:23).
Because of this practice the apostle Paul calls it "the communion" (1
Corinthians 10:16). He teaches the disciples to do it just as he
delivered the Lord's supper to them, because that's the way he received
it from the Lord (1 Corinthians 11:1,23). The communion is a joint-
participation in the cup of fruit of the vine symbolizing their
participation together as a congregation of Christian worshipers in the
shed blood of Jesus which ratified the New Covenant, and their
participation together in the sacrificed body of Jesus symbolized as
they break and eat of the one loaf. The word "wine" used in the
following articles refers to the product or fruit of the vine in the
cup. The word, OINOS - "fermented wine" is never employed in connection
with the Lord's supper in the New Testament. Sadly, you will read that
in about 1915 the new innovation of individual cups caused division in
the body of Christ. The NOTE below is written by J. D. Phillips. -R.N.]
The early Christians were not aware that among the manifold objects of
God's creation and providential care there was a countless host of the
little bugs that now pass under the name of microbes. This fact was
left, like destructive criticism, to be discovered in our own scientific
age. Now the microbes are as well known as gnats and mosquitoes. It
is known, too, that they are widespread and are exceedingly dangerous,
for they float in the air, they swim in the water, and we drink them in
with our mother's milk. When they once get in us they begin to eat our
vitals, and they bring on all diseases. If we could only keep them out,
we might live forever, unless somebody kills us. The doctors have
warned us not to spit on the sidewalks, lest our microbes, swarming up
from the spittle, be swallowed by some passer-by to the utter ruin of
his constitution, and they object to horses and other animals being
allowed on the streets, unless we sweep up after them with great care.
Under these circumstances, it ought not to surprise anybody that some
among us, who think that religion ought to keep pace with scientific
discoveries, have become dreadfully alarmed over some of our ancient
religious customs which originated before the discovery of microbes.
For example, the custom of passing the same cup of wine to a large
number of persons when observing the Lord's Supper. We have always been
a little squeamish about drinking out of the same cup with certain
persons that we could name, and now, seeing that by doing so there is a
risk of our swallowing some of their microbes, the practice has become
intolerable. It is true that our Lord appointed it this way; but then he
may have forgotten, just at the moment, that he had made all these
microbes, and that they were such awful things; or else he thought that,
as in the case of our new criticism, the age in which he lived was not
prepared for a revelation on the subject, and so he left matters as he
found them. Perhaps he reflected that the many millions, who were
destined to premature graves by swallowing these microbes at the Lord's
Supper, would die in a good cause, and he therefore left them to their
fate until an enlightened age would correct the evil. We have now
reached that enlightened age, for the Spirit is still leading us into
the new truth; and we propose to stop that needless waste of human life
by having individual cups from which to drink the wine. If any man
cries out against it as being unscriptural, exclusive or finicky, or
anything of that sort, we will call him a legalist, a literalist, a
Pharisee, a back number, a last year's almanac, and a whole lot of
things that we use to silence croakers with.
This is not all. Revolutions, we have learned, never go backward.
When the wheels of progress once get up steam behind them, they are
going to roll on, and the man who gets in the way will be run over.
Upon further reflection about these microbes, we have been forced to
observe that there is just as much danger of swallowing other people's
microbes when we pinch a piece from the same bread from which they have
pinched, as when we drink from the same cup. Microbes come from the
tips of the fingers when they are a little soiled or a little sweaty,
and we are not going to run the risk of eating any of these. We have
not yet completed our plans for avoiding this imminent peril to our
lives; but as we have already secured the manufacture of tiny little
individual cups, we shall probably have the bread cut up into nice
little cubes, which will be dropped into the little cups, so that we can
swallow both at once. This device will charmingly harmonize with the
time-saving device which some of us who hate long services have already
adopted, of passing bread and wine both at once.
Don't be alarmed and cry out "innovation," "wolf in sheep's clothing,"
"heretic," or anything of that nature, till you hear us a little
further. It is a fact, a very alarming fact, strangely overlooked
hitherto, that there is a great deal more danger of these microbes when
we were baptized in the same water with other people; and we are bound,
in all honor and consistency, as well as by a supreme regard to life and
health, to put a stop to that.
Here we shall encounter some difficulties; but difficulties are made to
be overcome, and we must meet them courageously. At first thought
someone may propose, as a remedy, to dispense with baptisteries, and go
to outdoor pools and streams; but it only requires a moment's
consideration to be reminded that dead dogs, dead cats, and other things
are constantly thrown into these outdoor waters, and that the very worst
of microbes emanate from these. Moreover, frogs, tadpoles and snakes
frequent these waters, while horses, cows and hogs go there to drink,
and we might get some microbes if we are baptized in such places. The
remedy seems to be, to retain the baptistery, but to have it washed,
rinsed and scoured and fumigated after every individual baptism. This
can be done very easily in some of our churches, especially where the
preacher is a scientific critic whose cases of baptism, like angels'
visits, are few and far between.
There is another imminent peril to which church people are exposed, and
for which science, in God's own good time, has furnished a remedy. It
is the peril consequent on a large number of persons being shut up
together for an hour or two in the same room and breathing the same air.
On such occasions a swarm of these mischievous microbes keeps rushing
out of every man's mouth with every breath he exhales, and the air gets
so full of them that sometimes we can smell them. This is far more
perilous than drinking of the same cup, breaking pieces from the same
loaf of bread, or being baptized in the same water. This must be
remedied; and the heaven-sent remedy to which I have made reference is
the telephone. We will supply every family with one of these
instruments, so that they can assemble in their own parlors at the
appointed hour and listen while the preacher, alone in his parlor—for we
shall need no meeting house then—stands in the middle of the floor and
talks into the other end of these instruments.
There may be some defects in this scheme as yet; for all schemes, even
those invented by inspired men and by Christ himself, are found by
experience to need improvement as men become more enlightened; but
progress is the law of religion as well as of nature, and we cannot
doubt that in the progress of religious evolution all defects will
finally be removed and the fittest will survive.
Good-bye to the old conceit of restoring primitive Christianity!
NOTE: In the invention of the radio [and television], science has come to
our rescue in an amazing manner since the article on Microbes was
written.... They can sit in their own [den] and listen to the
[preaching]. Thus they can worship without running the risk of inhaling
the microbe-filled air that has been exhaled from the mouths of their
neighbors and friends. Dozens of families cannot afford to meet
together for worship. The air in the house becomes too unsanitary for
that. We cannot afford to take the risk. Paul was a back number when
he wrote: "Not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together, as the
manner of some is" (Hebrews 10:25). When he said: "If therefore the
whole church be come together in one place" he had not thought of the
millions of microbes literally swarming from the mouths of the
worshipers. The radio is our means of escape.
But here is something that brother McGarvey seems not to have thought
of. It is the danger of a whole family sitting in their parlor and
listening [to] the preaching over the radio [or TV]. The air in the
[den] gets full of [germs]. Think of the danger of that! Each member
of each family must have a room, equipped with a radio, into which he
can go when divine service begins. There he can sit alone with his
little cup containing a little cube of bread and a little of the fruit
of the vine. He can feel that he is free from all danger, for he will be
breathing in no one's [germs] and there will be no [germs] on or in the
little cup-unless someone touched it while preparing it for him. The
preacher can sit in his own [house]-it would be dangerous for him to go
to the broadcasting station and there breathe into his nostrils
thousands of microbes left there by others-and speak. When he gets
ready for his listeners to partake of the Lord's Supper he can offer
thanks. Each individual can then partake in all safety. He will need
no table to set his little cup on. Have not our preachers learned that
the table upon which the loaf and the cup are placed is no part of what
Paul calls "the Lord's table"? Or maybe Paul was mistaken anyway. Our
scientific friends are doing wonders for us.
Seriously, and truly, kind reader, "one wrong step unavoidably leads to
another, and the progress of error is always downhill." Back - back to
"that which is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6).
