Difference between revisions of "Communion"

From BiblePortal Wikipedia
Line 1: Line 1:
== Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible <ref name="term_50373" /> ==
== Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament <ref name="term_55398" /> ==
<p> <strong> [[Communion]] </strong> (Gr. <em> koinônia </em> ). In [[Ev]] [Note: English Version.] <em> koinônia </em> is tr. [Note: translate or translation.] ‘communion’ in only 3 passages (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 10:16 , &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 6:14; &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 13:14 ), while it is frequently rendered ‘ <strong> fellowship </strong> ’ [[(Av]] [Note: Authorized Version.] 12, [[Rv]] [Note: Revised Version.] 15 times), and twice ‘contribution’ or ‘distribution’ (&nbsp; Romans 15:26 , &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 9:13 [[[Rv]] [Note: Revised Version.] has ‘contrib.’ in both cases; [[Av]] [Note: Authorized Version.] ‘contrib.’ in the first passage, ‘distrib.’ in the second]). But it is ‘communion’ that brings us nearest to the original, and sets us in the path of the right interpretation of the word on every occasion when it is used in the [[Nt.]] </p> <p> <em> Koinônia </em> comes from an adj. which means ‘common,’ and, like ‘communion,’ its literal meaning is a <em> common </em> participation or sharing in anything. Similarly, in the [[Nt]] the concrete noun <em> koinônos </em> is used of a partner in the ownership of a fishing-boat (&nbsp; Luke 5:10 ); the verb <em> koinônein </em> of sharing something with another, whether by way of giving (&nbsp; Romans 12:13 , &nbsp; Galatians 6:6 ) or of receiving (&nbsp; Romans 15:27 , &nbsp; 1 Timothy 5:22 ); and the adj. <em> koinônikos </em> (&nbsp; 1 Timothy 6:18 ) is rendered ‘willing to communicate.’ </p> <p> <strong> 1. </strong> <em> Koinônia </em> meets us first in &nbsp; Acts 2:42 , where [[Rv]] [Note: Revised Version.] as well as [[Av]] [Note: Authorized Version.] obscures the meaning not only by using the word ‘fellowship,’ but by omitting the def. article. The verse ought to read, ‘And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ teaching and the <em> communion </em> , in the breaking of bread and the prayers.’ And the meaning of ‘communion’ in this case can hardly be doubtful. The reference evidently is to that ‘having all things common’ which is referred to immediately after (&nbsp; Acts 2:44 f.), and the nature and extent of which St. Luke explains more fully at a later stage (&nbsp; Acts 4:32 to &nbsp; Acts 5:4 ). It appears that ‘the communion’ was the regular expression for that ‘community of goods’ which was so marked a feature of the [[Christianity]] of the first days, and which owed its origin not only to the unselfish enthusiasm of that Pentecostal period and the expectation of the Lord’s immediate return, but to the actual needs of the poorer [[Christians]] in Jerusalem, cut off from the means of self-support by the social ostracism attendant on excommunication from the synagogue (&nbsp; John 9:22; &nbsp; John 9:34; &nbsp; John 12:42; &nbsp; John 16:2 ). </p> <p> <strong> 2. </strong> The type of <em> koinônia </em> in [[Jerusalem]] described in &nbsp; Acts 2:1-47 seems to have disappeared very soon, but its place was taken by an organized <em> diakonia </em> , a daily ‘ministration’ to the poor (6:1, 2). And when the Church spread into a larger world free from the hostile influences of the synagogue, those social conditions were absent which in Jerusalem had seemed to make it necessary that Christ’s followers should have all things common. But it was a special feature of St. Paul’s teaching that Christians everywhere were members one of another, sharers in each other’s wealth whether material or spiritual. And in particular he pressed constantly upon the wealthier [[Gentile]] churches the duty of taking part in the <em> diakonia </em> carried on in Jerusalem on behalf of the poor saints. In this connexion we find him in &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 8:4 using the striking expression ‘the <em> koinônia </em> of the <em> diakonia </em> [‘the communion of the ministration’] to the saints.’ The Christians of [[Corinth]] might have communion with their brethren in Jerusalem by imparting to them out of their own abundance. Hence, by a natural process in the development of speech, the <em> koinônia </em> , from meaning a common participation, came to be applied to the gifts which enabled that participation to be realized. In &nbsp; Romans 15:26 and &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 9:13 , accordingly, the word is properly enough rendered ‘contribution.’ And yet in the [[Apostolic]] Church it could never be forgotten that a contribution or collection for the poor brethren was a form of [[Christian]] communion. </p> <p> <strong> 3. </strong> From the first, however, ‘communion’ undoubtedly had a larger and deeper sense than those technical ones on which we have been dwelling. It was out of the consciousness of a common participation in certain great spiritual blessings that Christians were impelled to manifest their partnership in these specific ways. According to St. Paul’s teaching, those who believed in Christ enjoyed a common participation in Christ Himself which bound them to one another in a holy unity (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 1:9 , cf. &nbsp; 1 Corinthians 1:10 ff.). In the great central rite of their faith this common participation in Christ, and above all in His death and its fruits, was visibly set forth: the cup of blessing was a communion of the blood of Christ; the broken bread a communion of the body of Christ (&nbsp; 1 Corinthians 10:16 ). [[Flowing]] again from this common participation in Christ there was a common participation in the [[Holy]] Spirit, for it is from the love of God as manifested in the grace of Christ that there results that ‘communion of the Holy Ghost’ which is the strongest bond of unity and peace ( 2Co 13:14; cf. &nbsp; 2 Corinthians 13:11 , &nbsp; Philippians 2:1 f.). Thus the communion of the Christian Church came to mean a fund of spiritual privilege which was common to all the members but also peculiar to them, so that the admission of a man to the communion or his exclusion from it was his admission to, or exclusion from, the Church of Christ itself. When the Jerusalem [[Apostles]] gave ‘the right hands of communion’ to Paul and [[Barnabas]] (&nbsp; Galatians 2:9 ), that was a symbolic recognition on their part that these missionaries to the uncircumcision were true disciples and Apostles of Christ, sharers with themselves in all the blessings of the Christian faith. </p> <p> <strong> 4. </strong> We have seen that in its root-meaning <em> koinônia </em> is a partnership either in giving or in receiving. Hence it was applied to Christian duties and obligations as well as to Christian privileges. The right hands of communion given to Paul and Barnabas were not only a recognition of grace received in common, but mutual pledges of an Apostolic service to the circumcision on the one hand and the heathen on the other (&nbsp; Galatians 2:9 ). St. Paul thanks God for the ‘communion’ of the Philippians in the furtherance of the gospel (&nbsp; Philippians 1:5 ), and prays on behalf of Philemon that the ‘communion’ of his faith may become effectual (&nbsp; Philippians 1:6 ), <em> i.e. </em> that the Christian sympathies and charities inspired by his faith may come into full operation. It is the same use of <em> koinônia </em> that we find in &nbsp; Hebrews 13:16 , where the proper rendering is ‘forget not the welldoing and the communion.’ Here also the communion means the acts of charity that spring from Christian faith, with a special reference perhaps to the technical sense of <em> koinônia </em> referred to above, as a sharing of one’s material wealth with the poorer brethren. </p> <p> <strong> 5. </strong> In all the foregoing passages the <em> koinônia </em> seems to denote a mutual sharing, whether in privilege or in duty, of Christians with one another. But there are some cases where the communion evidently denotes a more exalted partnership, the partnership of a Christian with Christ or with God. This is what meets us when St. Paul speaks in &nbsp; Philippians 3:10 of the communion of Christ’s sufferings. He means a drinking of the cup of which Christ drank (cf. &nbsp; Matthew 20:22 f.), a moral partnership with the [[Redeemer]] in His pains and tears (cf. &nbsp; Romans 8:17 ). But it is St. John who brings this higher <em> koinônia </em> before us in the most absolute way when he writes, ‘Our communion is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ’ (&nbsp; 1 John 1:3 , cf. &nbsp; 1 John 1:6 ), and makes our communion one with another depend upon this previous communion with God Himself (&nbsp; 1 John 1:7 , cf. &nbsp; 1 John 1:6 ). Yet, though the <em> koinônia </em> or communion is now raised to a higher power, it has still the same meaning as before. It is a mutual sharing, a reciprocal giving and receiving. And in his [[Gospel]] St. John sets the law of this communion clearly before us when he records the words of the Lord Himself, ‘Ablde in me, and [[I]] in you’ (&nbsp; John 15:4 ). The communion of the human and the [[Divine]] is a mutual activity, which may be summed up in the two words <em> grace </em> and <em> faith </em> . For grace is the spontaneous and unstinted Divine giving as revealed and mediated by Jesus Christ, while faith in its ideal form is the action of a soul which, receiving the Divine grace, surrenders itself without any reserve unto the Lord. </p> <p> [[J.]] [[C.]] Lambert. </p>
<p> <b> [[Communion.]] </b> —It is surprising that neither the substantive (κοινωνία) nor the verb (κοινωνεῖν), which represent the concept of ‘communion’ in [[Nt,]] is to be found in any of our four Gospels. It would, however, be unsafe, and indeed untrue to fact, to assume on this account that the idea of communion is wanting. While there is an absence of the words concerned, there is no absence of the conception itself. [[A]] careful study of the Gospels, on the contrary, not only reveals a plain recognition of this vital aspect of the religious life, but also (and especially in the records of our Lord’s teaching preserved by St. John) presents the conception to us with a certain clear, if unobtrusive, prominence. </p> <p> The subject contains three distinct parts, which will naturally be considered separately: (1) The communion of Christ with the Father; (2) our communion with God; (3) our communion one with another. </p> <p> <b> 1. </b> <i> The communion of Christ with the Father </i> .—The more conspicuous aspect of our Lord’s communion with the Father as reflected in the Gospels, is that which characterized His earthly ministry. But it is not the only aspect presented. Christ Himself clearly claimed to have enjoyed pre-existent communion with His Father (&nbsp;John 17:5; &nbsp;John 17:24), and the [[Prologue]] of the Fourth [[Gospel]] in three or four weighty clauses confirms the claim. This pre-existent communion included both unity of essence and life, and fellowship in work, ( <i> a </i> ) The Word was πρὸς τὸν θεόν (&nbsp;John 1:1), realizing His very personality ‘in active intercourse with and in perfect communion with God’ (Westcott, <i> in loc </i> ). His nature was the nature of [[Deity]] (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος, <i> ib. </i> ). His Sonship is unique (&nbsp;John 1:14; and for the uniqueness of the relationship cf. the important Synoptic passage, &nbsp;Matthew 11:27 = &nbsp;Luke 10:22). His is the πλήρωμα—the sum of the [[Divine]] attributes (&nbsp;John 1:16, cf. &nbsp;Colossians 1:19; &nbsp;Colossians 2:9; &nbsp;Ephesians 1:23), and He is μονογενὴς θεός (&nbsp;John 1:18)—‘One Who is God only-begotten’ (Westcott). ( <i> b </i> ) The pre-existent communion not merely consisted in identity of essence, but was also expressed by fellowship in work. The Word was the [[Agent]] in the work of [[Creation]] (&nbsp;John 1:3; &nbsp;John 1:10, cf. also &nbsp;1 Corinthians 8:6, &nbsp;Colossians 1:16 : His work in sustaining the Universe so created is taught in &nbsp;Colossians 1:17, &nbsp;Hebrews 1:3). See art. Creator. </p> <p> Our Lord’s realization of His Father’s presence during His life upon earth was constant. That He Himself laid claim to such fellowship is beyond contention. He did so directly in His words (&nbsp;Matthew 11:27 = &nbsp;Luke 10:22, &nbsp;John 12:49-50; &nbsp;John 14:6; &nbsp;John 14:10-11; &nbsp;John 16:28; &nbsp;John 16:32), emphasizing especially His unity with the Father (&nbsp;John 10:30-38; &nbsp;John 12:44; &nbsp;John 14:7 ff.), and accepting with approval the title of ‘God’ (&nbsp;John 20:28-29). He did so even more impressively, if less directly, by assuming His Father’s functions in the world (&nbsp;Mark 2:5; &nbsp;Mark 2:7 = &nbsp;Matthew 9:2-3 = &nbsp;Luke 5:20-21; &nbsp;Luke 7:48) and representing Himself as controlling Divine forces and originating Divine missions (&nbsp;Matthew 11:27 a, &nbsp;John 15:26; &nbsp;John 20:22-23). Moreover, any attempt to explain away that intimate knowledge of God which the [[Gospels]] consistently ascribe to Him, is compelled to disregard not merely the passages in which His own words and actions distinctly assume it, but also not a few in which, whether with approval or with disapproval, others recognize that He claimed to possess it (&nbsp;John 5:18; &nbsp;John 10:33; &nbsp;John 13:3; &nbsp;John 19:7, cf. also &nbsp;John 17:7-8). See Claims of Christ. </p> <p> But apart altogether from His specific claim to the enjoyment of this Divine fellowship, we have abundant evidence of its existence in His earthly life itself. The sense of communion was an integral part of that life. It is one of those elements in His personality that could not be eliminated from it. [[A]] Christ unconscious of intercourse with God would not be the Christ of the Gospels. It was this sense of communion that moulded His first recorded conception of duty (&nbsp;Luke 2:49, Authorized Version or Revised Version [[Nt]] 1881, [[Ot]] 1885). The thirty years of quiet preparation for a three years’ ministry (the proportions are suggestive; for other examples of equipment in seclusion see &nbsp;Exodus 3:1, &nbsp;Luke 1:80, &nbsp;Galatians 1:15-17) may without doubt be summed up as one long experience of fellowship with His Father. And the recognition of this union, which marks His first thoughts of His mission, and which must so largely have constituted His earthly preparation for it, is found to be His constant support amid the stress of the work itself. It is present in a special manner in the [[Baptism]] which signalized the beginning of His ministry among men (&nbsp;Mark 1:10-11 = &nbsp;Matthew 3:16-17 = &nbsp;Luke 3:21-22). It is His stay alike before the labours of the day begin (&nbsp;Mark 1:35), at the very moment of service (&nbsp;Mark 6:41 ἀναβλέψας εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν; cf. also &nbsp;Mark 7:34; &nbsp;Mark 8:24, &nbsp;John 6:11; &nbsp;John 11:41), and when refreshment of soul is needed at the close of the long hours of toil (&nbsp;Mark 6:46 = &nbsp;Matthew 14:23, &nbsp;Luke 5:16). The Gospels, indeed, make it plain that He regarded such communion as a condition on which the accomplishment of certain work depended (&nbsp;Mark 9:29, cf. &nbsp;John 5:30), and we cannot fail to observe the frequency with which both He and His biographers insist that the Divine [[Presence]] is with Him in all His words and works (&nbsp;Luke 4:14; &nbsp;Luke 4:18, &nbsp;John 3:34; &nbsp;John 5:19-21; &nbsp;John 5:36; &nbsp;John 8:16; &nbsp;John 8:26; &nbsp;John 8:20). So constant is the communion, that even the most familiar objects of Nature convey to Him suggestions of the Father in heaven (&nbsp;Matthew 6:26; &nbsp;Matthew 6:28). It is noteworthy that retirement for intimate converse with unseen realities is especially recorded as preceding Christ’s action or speech at certain great crises in the development of His life-mission (Luke is particularly careful to draw attention to this; see &nbsp;Luke 3:21; &nbsp;Luke 6:12-13; &nbsp;Luke 9:18; &nbsp;Luke 9:28 ff., &nbsp;Luke 22:41; &nbsp;Luke 23:46; cf. also &nbsp;Mark 9:2, &nbsp;John 12:28; &nbsp;John 17:1 ff.), and that intercession for individual men had its place in this sacred experience (&nbsp;Luke 22:31-32; cf. &nbsp;Luke 23:34, &nbsp;John 17:6-26). </p> <p> Thus constantly, alike at critical junctures and in more normal moments, did the sense of His Father’s presence uphold Him. In one mysterious moment, the full meaning of which baffles human explanation. His consciousness of it appears to have wavered (&nbsp;Mark 15:34); yet even this cry of desolation must not be considered apart from the certain restoration of the communion revealed in the calm confidence of the last word of all (&nbsp;Luke 23:46). See art. Dereliction. </p> <p> One further point maybe briefly suggested. Our Lord’s communion with the Father was not inconsistent with His endurance of temptation. Nay, it was under the strong impulse of that Spirit whose presence with Him was at once the sign and the expression of His union with God (see &nbsp;Mark 1:10), that He submitted to the assaults of evil (&nbsp;Mark 1:12-13, note ἐκβάλλει, = &nbsp;Matthew 4:1 = &nbsp;Luke 4:1). The protracted testing (ἦν πειραζόμενος, analytical tense, cf. the suggestion of other occasions of temptation in the plur. ἐν τοῖς πειρασμοῖς μου, &nbsp;Luke 22:28, and &nbsp;John 12:27), successfully endured, itself became to our Lord the means of a fresh assurance and (perhaps we may add) a fuller realization of fellowship with the spiritual world (&nbsp;Mark 1:13 διηκόνουν—impf.). In this respect, as in others also, His life of communion, while in one sense unique (&nbsp;Luke 10:22), is seen to be the exemplar of our own. </p> <p> <b> 2. </b> <i> Our communion with God </i> .—The reality of the believer’s communion with God is plainly revealed in the teaching of the Gospels. This communion is presented sometimes in terms of a relationship with the Father, sometimes in terms of a relationship with the Son, sometimes in terms of a relationship with the Spirit; but all three presentations alike are relevant to our study (&nbsp;1 John 2:23 b, cf. &nbsp;1 John 1:3, &nbsp;John 14:16-17).* [Note: It is scarcely necessary to point out that for purposes of doctrine, [[I]] Jn. ranks as practically a part of the Fourth Gospel.] if our outline is to be at once clear and comprehensive, we must treat the passages concerned under two headings. The first ( <i> a </i> ) will include those that deal with the <i> state </i> of communion with God into which a man is brought when he becomes the servant of God; the second ( <i> b </i> ) those that relate to the <i> life </i> of conscious communion with God which it is his privilege to live from that time forward. The distinction, as will shortly appear, is by no means an unnecessary one, the second experience being at once more vivid and more profound than the first need necessarily be. </p> <p> ( <i> a </i> ) It is clear that in the case of every believer the barrier raised between himself and God by his sin has been broken down. In other words, he has been restored to a <i> state </i> of communion with God. The means by which this <i> state </i> is brought about have both a Divine and a human significance. It is in considering their Divine aspect that we reach the point of closest connexion between the communion of believers with God and the communion of Christ with His Father. For these in a true sense stand to one another in the relation of effect and cause (cf. what is implied in such passages as &nbsp;John 1:16; &nbsp;John 14:6; &nbsp;John 14:12; &nbsp;John 17:21-23). It is in virtue of our Lord’s perfect fellowship with God that through His life and death we too can gain unrestricted admission to the Divine Presence. This truth is all-important. It needs no detailed proof. The whole story of the [[Incarnation]] and of the Cross is one long exposition of it. Perhaps it is symbolically represented in &nbsp;Mark 15:38. The conditions required on the human side for restoration to the state of communion with God appear plainly in our Lord’s teaching. This state is described in varied language and under different metaphors. Sometimes it is presented as citizenship in God’s kingdom (&nbsp;Mark 10:14-15, &nbsp;John 3:3); sometimes as discipleship (&nbsp;Luke 14:26, &nbsp;John 8:31), friendship (&nbsp;John 15:15), and even kinship (&nbsp;Mark 3:32-35) with Christ Himself. In other places it is spoken of as a personal knowledge of Him (&nbsp;1 John 2:3); in others, again, as a following in His footsteps (&nbsp;Mark 8:34, &nbsp;John 8:12); and in yet others as the possession of a new type of life (&nbsp;John 3:16 : for the definition of eternal life as ‘knowing God’ see &nbsp;John 17:3, &nbsp;1 John 5:20). As one condition of finding this experience, which, in whatever terms it be described, places men in a new relationship with God, Christ mentions childlikeness of disposition (&nbsp;Mark 10:15). As other conditions He emphasizes poverty of spirit (&nbsp;Matthew 5:3, &nbsp;Luke 18:9 ff.). and the performance of the Divine will in a life of righteousness and love (&nbsp;Mark 3:35, &nbsp;Luke 6:35-36; &nbsp;Luke 8:21, &nbsp;John 8:31; &nbsp;John 14:23, cf. &nbsp;1 John 1:6; &nbsp;1 John 2:3-6; &nbsp;1 John 3:6). In one very important passage, addressed both to the multitude and to His own band of disciples, He may perhaps be said to include all individual conditions. ‘If any man willeth to come after me, let him renounce himself’ (&nbsp;Mark 8:34 and ||). This saying has a meaning far more profound than that suggested by our English versions. Taken with the explanation contained in the verse that follows, it really leads us to the basis of communion. All communion between two persons, whether human and human or human and Divine, is possible only in virtue of some element common to the natures of both (see &nbsp;John 4:24; &nbsp;John 8:47; cf. the same principle differently applied in &nbsp;John 5:27). Man’s sole possibility of communion with God lies in his possession, potential or actual, of the Divine life (cf. &nbsp;John 1:9). But joined to the ‘self’ (the second ψυχή of &nbsp;Mark 8:35) which is capable of union with God, he is conscious also of another ‘self’ (the first ψυχή of &nbsp;Mark 8:35) which is incongruous with that close relationship to Deity. The condition of realizing the one ‘self,’ and with it, in natural sequence, communion with God, is the renunciation of the other and lower ‘self.’ </p> <p> So both &nbsp;Mark 8:34-35 : the ἐαυτον of &nbsp;Mark 8:34 is thus equivalent to the first ψυχη of &nbsp;Mark 8:35 The ‘taking up his cross’— <i> i.e. </i> for his own crucifixion thereon—defines the ‘renouncing himself’ more closely. The teaching of the whole passage is the Evangelic representation of the [[Pauline]] doctrine of self-crucifixion, cf. &nbsp;Galatians 2:20; &nbsp;Galatians 5:24. </p> <p> To change the figure somewhat, the unity of life involved in the idea of communion between man and God can be attained only through man’s rising to God’s life. This, it is true, would have been outside his power had not God first stooped to <i> his </i> level. But in the Incarnation this step of infinite condescension has been taken, and by it the possibility of mankind’s rising to the life of God—in other words, the possibility of its entering into a state of communion with God—has been once for all secured. In order to make this state of communion his own, Christ teaches, each individual man must now leave his lower life, with all that pertains to it, behind; must be content to ‘renounce himself’; must be willing to ‘lose’ that life’ which cannot consist with the Divine life. So complete, indeed, is to be the severance from the past, that the experience in which it is brought about is called a ‘new birth’ (&nbsp;John 3:3), as real as, though of a type essentially different from, the physical birth (&nbsp;John 3:6). When with this self-renouncement is combined that faith in Christ which leads to union with Him and reliance upon Him (πιστεύειν εἰς—&nbsp;John 3:16; &nbsp;John 3:36; &nbsp;John 6:29; &nbsp;John 11:26), we have the experience which sums up into one great whole the various individual conditions required on the human side for entering into the state of communion with God. </p> <p> ( <i> b </i> ) [[Quite]] distinct in thought from the <i> state </i> of communion into which all believers are brought, is the <i> life </i> of communion which it is their privilege to enjoy. The one is always a fact, the other is also a consciously realized experience. Like so many of the blessings revealed in [[Nt,]] such a life of communion is too rich an experience to be described in any one phrase or under a single metaphor. In different contexts it is presented in different ways. Sometimes, for example, it is set forth as an abiding in Christ who also abides in the believer (&nbsp;John 15:4 ff.). In other places it is represented as an indwelling of the Spirit (&nbsp;John 14:16-20; &nbsp;John 16:7; &nbsp;John 16:13-15, &nbsp;1 John 2:20; &nbsp;1 John 2:27; &nbsp;1 John 3:24; &nbsp;1 John 4:13), whose presence, to believers (as in a deeper sense to their Lord) the sign and expression of union with God, is to be with them from the moment of their initiation into the new life (&nbsp;Mark 1:8 and || ||, &nbsp;1 John 3:24; &nbsp;1 John 4:13). Yet another statement, emphasizing in a remarkable metaphor the inwardness and intimacy of the union that results, sets the experience before us as a mystical feeding upon Christ (John 6, esp. &nbsp;John 6:53-58, cf. also &nbsp;John 6:35). But while there is variation in the language in which this sense of the Divine Presence is set forth, there is no question as to the reality of the experience itself. It is the inspiration of this Unseen Presence that shall give to believers definite guidance in moments of crisis and perplexity (&nbsp;Mark 13:11 and ||, &nbsp;Luke 12:11-12). It is in this communion with God that they will find their surest refuge against fears and dangers (&nbsp;Mark 13:18 = &nbsp;Matthew 24:20) and against the assaults of temptation (&nbsp;Mark 14:38 and ||). Such fellowship, too, is their ground of certainty, alike in their teaching (&nbsp;John 3:11—note the plurals; &nbsp;1 John 1:1-3) and in their belief (cf. &nbsp;John 4:42). It is, moreover, the source of all their fitness for service (cf. Gabriel’s suggestive speech, &nbsp;Luke 1:19) and the means of all their fruit-bearing (&nbsp;John 15:1-10). As would have been expected, the full significance of this converse with God is not understood, nor is its closest intimacy appropriated, in the earliest days of initiation. [[Knowledge]] of God, like knowledge of men, has to be realized progressively (cf. χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος, &nbsp;John 1:16). There are degrees of intimacy (cf. &nbsp;John 15:15 and the suggestive interchange of ἀγαπᾶν and φιλεῖν in &nbsp;John 21:15 ff.), and the extent to which the believer is admitted into fellowship is proportionate to the progress he has made in the lessons previously taught (cf. the significant connexion between &nbsp;Mark 8:31; &nbsp;Mark 8:27-29, which is clearly brought out in the emphatic καὶ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν of &nbsp;Mark 8:31 : cf. also &nbsp;Mark 4:33, &nbsp;John 16:12). The reason for this basis of progress is plain. An important element in communion being self-adjustment to God’s will (cf. our Lord’s own illustration of this, &nbsp;Mark 14:36 and ||), the degree of intimacy that ensues will naturally be conditioned by the extent to which this element is rendered prominent. Thus, while its neglect will open up the possibility of lapsing even to one who has been on intimate terms with Christ (&nbsp;Mark 14:18, &nbsp;John 13:18), its constant and progressive practice may bring a man to a union with God so close as to constitute his complete possession by Divine influence (cf. the Baptist’s magnificent description of himself as a ‘Voice,’ &nbsp;John 1:23, taken from &nbsp;Isaiah 40:3). And the fellowship so enjoyed and ever more intimately realized under the restricted conditions of earth, is to find its perfect consummation only in the hereafter (&nbsp;John 12:26; &nbsp;John 14:2-3; &nbsp;John 17:24, cf. &nbsp;1 John 3:2). See art. Abiding. </p> <p> The means by which, according to the Gospel teaching, the believer will practise this life of communion with God, may be briefly indicated. Prominent among them is seclusion from the world for the purpose of definite prayer. The importance of this our Lord emphasized by His own example. He also enjoined it upon His followers by oft-repeated precepts (&nbsp;Matthew 6:8; &nbsp;Matthew 7:7-8; &nbsp;Matthew 26:41 and ||, &nbsp;Luke 6:28; &nbsp;Luke 18:1). At the same time the Evangelic teaching does not aim at making recluses. There are active as well as passive means of enjoying intercourse with God, and our Lord’s whole training of the Twelve indicates, even more clearly than any individual saying (cf. &nbsp;John 17:10), His belief in the Divine communion that is found in the service of mankind. The sense of fellowship with God vivified in secret devotion is to be realized afresh <i> and tested </i> in contact with men (so &nbsp;1 John 4:8; &nbsp;1 John 4:12; &nbsp;1 John 4:16). </p> <p> Two more points call for separate attention. (1) Before His death our Lord ordained a rite which not only symbolizes the union of His followers with Himself, but is also a means of its progressive realization. If an intimate connexion between the Lord’s Supper (&nbsp;Mark 14:22 ff. and ||) and the [[Jewish]] [[Passover]] may, as seems reasonable, be assumed, that conception of the [[Christian]] rite which represents it as a means of communion between the individual soul and its [[Saviour]] would appear to have a basis in the foundation principle on which all ancient worship, whether Jewish or heathen, rests—the belief that to partake of a sacrifice is to enter into some kind of fellowship with the Deity. This aspect of the Lord’s Supper does not, of course, exhaust its meaning (see art. Lord’s Supper), but it is certainly prominent, and it is emphasized both by St. Paul (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:18) and by Christ Himself (&nbsp;John 6:56, where the eating would certainly include that of the Lord’s Supper, even though, as is most probable, it does not refer to it exclusively). </p> <p> (2) One more suggestion may be put forward. Our Lord seems to hint at a special means of communion with Himself which is really a particular extension of the self-renouncement considered above. This is a mysterious fellowship with Him in His own sufferings for mankind (&nbsp;Mark 10:38-39 = &nbsp;Matthew 20:22-23 a; for a symbolical illustration see &nbsp;Mark 15:21). It is only a hint, but the words are significant; and, taken in conjunction with St. Paul’s ἀνταναπληρῶ τὰ ὑστερήματα τῶν θλίψεων τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου (&nbsp;Colossians 1:24) and his purpose τοῦ γνῶναι … κοινωνίαν παθημάτων αὐτοῦ (&nbsp;Philippians 3:10; cf. also &nbsp;2 Corinthians 1:5; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 4:10; &nbsp;1 Peter 4:13), would certainly seem to imply that the believer’s own sufferings for Christ’s sake may become a medium through which he may enter into close communion with his Lord. </p> <p> Even this brief study will have revealed that the Gospel conception of the Christian’s communion with God is essentially different from that of the Quietist. Whether we have regard to our Lord’s example or to His teaching, whether we are thinking of the status of fellowship or of its conscious practice, the means by which the Divine communion is realized are not exclusively periods of secluded contemplation. In Christ’s own life upon earth the two elements of active and passive fellowship are signally combined. The sense of union with the Unseen Father, fostered in lonely retreat, is also intensified in moments of strenuous activity. In His thoughts for the lives of His followers, too, the consciousness of God’s presence is secured not alone by solitary worship, but also by the doing of the Divine will, by the earnest struggle to subdue the lower self, and even by active participation in the very sufferings of Christ. So the servant, as his Lord, must practise the communion of service as well as the communion of retirement (cf., again, &nbsp;John 17:15). The desire for the permanent consciousness of the more immediate Presence must be sunk in the mission of carrying to others the tidings of salvation (&nbsp;Mark 5:18-20 = &nbsp;Luke 8:38-39). It is but natural that in the moment of special revelation on the mountain the disciple should long to make it his abiding place (&nbsp;Mark 9:5 and ||); but his [[Master]] can never forget the need of service on the ordinary levels of life (&nbsp;Mark 9:14 ff. and ||). And the experience of the one is the source of power for the other (&nbsp;Mark 9:29, cf. &nbsp;John 15:4). </p> <p> <b> 3. </b> <i> Our communion one with another </i> .—Just as our communion with God was seen to bear a close relation to our Lord’s communion with the Father, so our spiritual fellowship one with another rests upon the fellowship of each with Christ. As we had occasion to point out above, communion between any two persons is possible only in virtue of some element common to the natures of both. This common possession in the case of believers is the life, the ‘self,’ which is called into being and ever progressively realized in their individual communion with Christ. The possibility of our spiritual fellowship with one another rests ultimately upon what He is and our relationship to what He is (see &nbsp;1 John 1:1-3, and especially &nbsp;1 John 1:7; cf. also &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16-17). His Presence is the bond of union in which we are one, and in which we realize the oneness that we possess (&nbsp;Matthew 18:20). Indeed, the two types of communion—the communion with God and the communion with our fellow-believers—react each upon the other. On the one hand, as we have just seen, our communion with men rests upon our communion with Christ; on the other hand, our Divine fellowship may be intensified (&nbsp;Matthew 18:20 again and &nbsp;Matthew 25:40) or impeded (&nbsp;Matthew 5:23-24; &nbsp;Matthew 6:15; &nbsp;Matthew 25:45, &nbsp;Mark 11:25) by our relations with our fellow-men. </p> <p> That our Lord looked for the unity of His followers is not open to question. He both prophesied it (&nbsp;John 10:16) and prayed for it (&nbsp;John 17:11 b, &nbsp;John 17:21). An intimate friend, clearly one of an inner circle of disciples and probably John himself, understood its attainment to be part of His purpose in dying for mankind (&nbsp;John 11:52). Moreover, it is natural to suppose that the desire to ensure it would contribute to His decision to found an organized society (&nbsp;Matthew 16:18) and to institute an important rite (&nbsp;Mark 14:22 ff. and ||) for those who should believe in Him. The unity of His followers was even to be one of the grounds on which He based His appeal for the world’s faith (&nbsp;John 17:21 b). Of His wish for this unity, therefore, there can scarcely be reasonable doubt. But when we ask in what He meant the unity to consist, agreement is not so easily reached. The expression of His followers’ unity certainly includes kind and unselfish relations with one another—mutual honour and service (&nbsp;Mark 10:35-45 = &nbsp;Matthew 20:20-28), mutual forgiveness (&nbsp;Matthew 6:14, &nbsp;Luke 17:3-4), mutual love (&nbsp;John 13:34; &nbsp;John 15:12). It is exemplified further by participation in the common work (&nbsp;John 4:36-38). Another very special means of its realization, the Lord’s Supper, we have already indicated. Although this particular aspect of the rite is not actually revealed in the Gospel narrative itself, it will scarcely be questioned that one of the great truths which it both signifies and secures, is that of the fellowship of Christ’s followers. The sacred service in which the believer may realize communion with His Lord (see § <b> 2 </b> above), is also a means by which he is to apprehend his oneness with all other believers (see &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:17). </p> <p> While, however, it is plain that in Christ’s teaching the communion of [[Christians]] is at once attested and secured by means like these, it is disputed whether He designed their unity to be simply a spiritual or also an external one. Three important passages may be very briefly considered. (1) &nbsp;John 10:16 affords no support to the upholders of an external unity. The true rendering is unquestionably, ‘They shall become one <i> flock </i> ’ ( Revised Version [[Nt]] 1881, [[Ot]] 1885; cf. Tindale and Coverdale), and not, ‘There shall be one <i> fold </i> ’ (Authorized Version; cf. Vulgate). The unity mentioned here is one that is realized in the personal relation of each member of the flock to the Great [[Shepherd]] Himself.—(2) There is teaching a little more definite in &nbsp;John 17:11; &nbsp;John 17:21-22 In both these places our Lord makes His own unity with the Father the exemplar of the unity of believers. [[Reverence]] forbids any dogmatic statement as to the point to which this sacred analogy can be pressed. But Christ’s own words in the immediate context contain suggestions as to His meaning in using the analogy. It is noticeable that here also, as in &nbsp;John 10:6, the underlying basis of unity is the believers’ personal relation to Christ (and the Father). ‘That they may be one, even as we are one,’ in &nbsp;John 10:22, is at once defined more closely in the words, [[‘I]] in them, and thou in me’ (&nbsp;John 10:23). The resultant unity is gained through the medium not of an external, but of a purely spiritual, condition (ἵνα ὧσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν, &nbsp;John 10:23). In the same way, in the statement of &nbsp;John 10:11, it is a spiritual relationship to God that will yield the unity Christ craves for His disciples. This unity will follow upon their being ‘kept ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου.’ It will be assured if their relationship to the Father is a counterpart of what had been their relationship to Christ (&nbsp;John 10:12), <i> i.e. </i> a personal relationship. Whatever, therefore, be the exact meaning which the analogy used by our Lord was intended to convey, His own language in the context appears to make it plain that it must be interpreted with a spiritual rather than with an external significance.—(3) This conclusion derives not a little support from the incident of &nbsp;Mark 9:38 ff. When a definite test case arose, He declared the real fellowship of His followers to depend not upon any outward bond of union between them, but upon each bearing such a relationship to Himself as would be involved in His working ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί μου. True, the man in question may not have been a nominal disciple of our Lord, but that in His view he was a <i> real </i> disciple is distinctly stated (&nbsp;Mark 9:40). This instance, therefore, may be regarded as a practical application on the part of Christ Himself of the teaching under consideration; and thus it strongly confirms the interpretation that we have put upon it. It would be outside the scope of the present article to consider arguments for or against the corporate unity of Christians drawn from other sources, some of which are very strong and all of which must, of course, be duly weighed before a fair judgment on the whole question can be reached. But so far as the subject-matter before us is concerned, we find it hard to resist the conclusion that such external unity formed no part of the teaching of Christ and the Gospels. </p> <p> One word must be added. The ‘communion of saints’ joins the believer not merely to his fellow-Christians upon earth, but also to those who have passed within the veil (cf. &nbsp;Hebrews 12:1). This aspect of communion is not emphasized in the Gospels, but there are indications that the fellowship of believers upon earth was linked in the thought of Christ to the yet closer fellowship of those beyond death. At any rate, it is worthy of notice that in instituting the sacred rite which, as we have seen, at once witnesses to and secures our communion one with another, our Lord carefully pointed forward to the reunion that will take place in the world to come (&nbsp;Matthew 26:29; note μεθʼ ὑμῶν); and that in a few suggestive words He represented the earthly gathering as incomplete apart from its final consummation in the heavenly kingdom (&nbsp;Luke 22:16). See further artt. Fellowship, Unity. </p> <p> Literature.— <i> [[D]] </i> [[B]] [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] <i> , s.v. </i> ; Wendt, <i> Teaching of Jesus </i> , ii. 151 ff.; Weiss, <i> [[Nt]] Theol </i> , ii. 367 ff.; Beyschlag, <i> [[Nt]] Theol </i> . i. 217 ff.; Herrmann, <i> Com. of the Christian with God </i> ; Maclaren, <i> [[Holy]] of Holies </i> , chs. xvi.–xix.; MacCulloch, <i> Comparative [[Theology]] </i> , 216, 254; Stearns, <i> Evidence of Chr. [[Experience]] </i> , 179; Strong, <i> [[Historical]] [[Christianity]] </i> , 11; Westcott, <i> Historic </i> Faith, 123, 247; McGiffert, <i> Apostles’ [[Creed]] </i> , 32, 200; <i> Expos. Times </i> , iii. 197, v. 464 [[(R.]] [[F.]] Weymouth); Tasker, <i> [[Spiritual]] [[Communion]] </i> . </p> <p> [[H.]] Bisseker. </p>
          
          
== Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament <ref name="term_55388" /> ==
== Charles Buck Theological Dictionary <ref name="term_19478" /> ==
<p> The Greek word κοινωνία has a wider scope (see Fellowship) than the English word ‘communion,’ which the English Versionuses particularly in regard to the Lord’s Supper (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16). St. Paul’s expression is somewhat ambiguous. In what way may the cup and the bread be said to be a communion? They may either be a symbol for communion or may constitute a communion by sacramental influence. What does the blood of Christ mean? Is it the blood which was shed at His death, or does it signify the death itself or its effects? Or does St. Paul perhaps think of the blood as some transfigured heavenly substance? And what does the body of Christ mean? Is it the material body, which Jesus wore on earth, and which hung on the cross, or the immaterial body of the heavenly Lord? Or, again, is it the spiritual body, whose head is Christ, <i> i.e. </i> the Church? And lastly, what does communion of the blood and of the body mean? Is it communion with, <i> i.e. </i> partaking of, the blood and the body, or is it a communion whose symbol, and medium are the blood and the body? In former times all attempts at interpretation distinguished sharply between those various meanings; nowadays there is a tendency towards accepting the different views as being present at the same time in the author’s mind and in the mind of his first readers, not as entirely separate ideas, but all together in fluctuating transition. Grammar and vocabulary are not decisive in such a case. We have to start from the general view of communion which early Christianity held. In this the particular meaning of communion in regard to the Lord’s Supper will be included. </p> <p> There can be no doubt but that early Christianity had a double conception of fellowship: all members of the Church were in close fellowship one with the other, and at the same time each and all of them were in fellowship with the heavenly Lord. The former conception was the more prominent; but the latter no doubt was the basis of faith. Now in the Lord’s Supper we find both these ideas present. St. Paul complains of the divisions at Corinth (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:18): the members of the Church do not share their meal in a brotherly way, nor do they wait for one another ( <i> i.e. </i> probably for the slaves who could not be present early). Here we have the purely social and moral idea. But St. Paul, in speaking of ‘the Lord’s Supper’ (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:20), indicates another point of view, which may be called the religious and sacramental conception: the Lard’s Supper is not only a supper held at the Lord’s command, or a supper held in honour of the Lord (cf. &nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:23; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 11:28), but it is also a supper in communion with the Lord, where the Lord is present, participating as the Host. In this way the Lord’s Supper is not only the expression of an existing communion with Him, but it realizes this communion every time it is held. Now the question is: Is it the common supper which constitutes the communion, or are we to think of the particular elements, bread and wine, as producing the communion? We shall try to find an answer by noting some analogies from the comparative history of religions. </p> <p> [[W.]] Robertson Smith started the theory that the origin of all sacrifice lies in the idea of a sacramental communion between the members of a tribe and the tribal deity, which is realized by the common eating of the flesh of the sacrifice and the drinking of its blood. The theory as a complete explanation is inadequate, but we may admit sacramental communion in this sense as one of the different views underlying the practice of sacrifice. In ancient [[Israel]] the so-called peace-offering may be taken as illustrating this view. In later Judaism, however, this rite held but a small place, and Rabbinical transcendentalism would not allow any thought of sacramental communion with God the Most High. To adduce analogies taken from primitive culture is of no value. According to Dieterich, primitive man had the idea that, by partaking of the flesh of any sacrificial animal offered to a god, he was partaking of the god himself, and thus entering into sacramental communion with him. This theory has not been proved, and in any case it is beside the point here. We find better analogies in the [[Hellenism]] of the Apostolic Age, where we may distinguish two sets of parallels. ( <i> a </i> ) In the [[Mysteries]] certain sacred foods and drinks were used to bring man into communion with the god; ( <i> b </i> ) on the other hand, many clubs held an annual or monthly supper, which generally took place in a temple, and was at any rate accompanied by religious ceremonies which were to constitute a communion between the members and the god or hero (very often the founder of the club) in whose honour the supper was given. So we have two conceptions of communion: one mystical, individual, magical; the other moral, social, spiritual. In the former, particular food is supposed to bring the partaker into communion with the god physically (or rather hyper-physically), to transfer the essence and virtues of the god into the man and so to make him god (deify him); in the latter, it is the community of the meal which unites all partakers to one another and to the hero in the same sense as marriage or friendship unites distinct personalities. </p> <p> The evidence of these parallels brings the early Christian conception of the Lord’s Supper into close affinity with the communion of the club suppers, which had their analogy in suppers held in the [[Jewish]] synagogues of the [[Hellenistic]] Dispersion. The Mysteries did not influence Christian thought before the 2nd century. St. Paul, it is true, starts the idea of an <i> unio mystica </i> between the individual Christian and Christ (&nbsp;Galatians 2:20); this idea is prevalent in his doctrine of baptism (&nbsp;Romans 6:4, &nbsp;Colossians 2:12); but his predominant line of thought is the other view, which regards the two personalities as apart from each other, and may be described as the idea of ‘fellowship.’ The same may be said about St. John’s view, in spite of all mystical appearances. </p> <p> Now, when we turn to &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16 again, we see clearly that it is not the bread and the wine that constitute sacramental communion by themselves; nor is communion the partaking of Christ’s material body and blood. [[Bread]] and wine in relation to body and blood were given by tradition, but, as far as performing a sacramental communion is concerned, they represent only the common meal, which brings men into communion with the Lord, who through His death entered upon a heavenly existence. From this conception of the transfigured body it is easy to pass to the other one of a spiritual body whose members are the partakers (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:17). </p> <p> This interpretation is further supported by the comparison, made by St. Paul himself, of Jewish and Gentile sacrifices. When he says that the [[Jews]] by eating the sacrifices have communion with the altar, he means spiritual communion with God whose representative is the altar (note that the phrase ‘communion with God’ is avoided-a true mark of Rabbinism); and when he says that to partake of a supper connected with a heathen sacrifice brings men into communion with demons, he does not accept the popular idea that the food itself was quasi-infected by demonic influence (he declares formally that to eat such flesh unconsciously does not harm a Christian); but he says; ‘ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils: ye cannot partake of the table of the Lord and of the table of devils,’ because partaking of the table constitutes a spiritual and moral communion which is exclusive in its effect. See Eucharist. </p> <p> Literature.-W. Robertson Smith, <i> Kinship and Marriage in Early [[Arabia]] </i> , new ed., 1903, <i> [[Rs]] </i> [Note: [[S]] [[Religion]] of the Semites [[(W.]] Robertson Smith).]2, 1894; [[A.]] Dieterich, <i> Eine Mithrasliturgie </i> , 1903; [[E.]] Reuterskiöld, <i> Die Entstehung der Speisesacramente </i> ( <i> Religionswissenschaftliche Bibliothek </i> , 1912); [[L.]] [[R.]] Farnell, ‘Religious and Social Aspects of the Cult of [[Ancestors]] and Heroes,’ in <i> [[Hj]] </i> [Note: [[J]] Hibbert Journal.]vii. [1909] 415-435. For memorial suppers, see inscriptions collected by [[H.]] Lietzmann, <i> Handbuch zum [[Nt]] </i> , iii. [1907] 160ff.; [[E.]] Lucius, <i> Die Anfänge des Heiligenkults </i> , 1904. For Jewish suppers in synagogues, see [[E.]] Schürer, <i> [[Gjv]] </i> [Note: [[Jv]] Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes (Schürer).]4 iii. [1909] 143; [[O.]] Schmitz, <i> Die Opferanschauung des späteren Judentums </i> , 1910; [[W.]] Heitmüller, <i> Taufe und Abendmahl bei [[Paulus]] </i> , 1903; [[E.]] v. Dobschütz, ‘Sacrament und Symbol im Urchristentum,’ in <i> [[Sk]] </i> [Note: [[K]] Studien und Kritiken.], 1905, pp. 1-40; [[F.]] Dibelius, <i> Das Abendmahl </i> , 1911. Cf. the [[Commentaries]] on 1 Cor. by [[L.]] [[I.]] Rückert (1836), [[C.]] [[F.]] [[G.]] Heinrici (1880), [[T.]] [[C.]] Edwards (21885), [[P.]] [[W.]] Schmiedel (1891), [[H.]] Lietzmann (1907), [[P.]] Bachmann (190521910), [[J.]] Weiss (in Meyer9, 1910). </p> <p> [[E.]] Von Dobschütz. </p>
<p> Spiritual or divine, is that delightful fellowship and intercourse which a believer enjoys with God. It is founded upon union with him, and consists in a communication of divine graces from him, and a return of devout affections to him. The believer holds communion with God in his works, in his word, and in his ordinances. There can be no communion without likeness, nor without Christ as the mediator. Some distinguished communion with God from the sense and feeling of it; that is, that we may hold communion with him without raptures of Joy; and that a saint, even under desertion, may have communion with God as really, though not so feelingly, as at any other time. This communion cannot be interrupted by any local mutations: it is far superior to all outward services and ordinances whatsoever; it concerns the whole soul, all the affections, faculties, and motions of it being under its influence: it is only imperfect in this life, and will be unspeakably enlarged in a better world. </p> <p> In order to keep up communion with God, we should inform ourselves of his will, &nbsp;John 5:39 . be often in prayer, &nbsp;Luke 8:1-56 . embrace opportunities of retirement, &nbsp;Psalms 104:34 . watch against a vain, trifling, and volatile spirit, &nbsp;Ephesians 4:30 . and be found in the use of all the means of grace, &nbsp;Psalms 27:4 . the advantages of communion with God are, deadness to the world, &nbsp;Philippians 3:8 . patience under trouble, &nbsp;Job 1:22 . fortitude in danger, &nbsp;Psalms 27:1 . gratitude for mercies received, &nbsp;Psalms 103:1 . direction under difficulties, &nbsp;Proverbs 3:5-6 . peace and joy in opposition, Psa 16:23. happiness in death, &nbsp;Psalms 23:4 . and an earnest desire for heaven and glory, &nbsp;2 Timothy 4:7-8 . </p> <p> See Shaw's Immanuel; Owen and Henry on Communion; and article [[Fellowship.]] </p>
       
== Vine's Expository Dictionary of NT Words <ref name="term_77185" /> ==
<div> [['''A]] — 1: κοινωνία ''' (Strong'S #2842 — Noun [[Feminine]] — koinonia — koy-nohn-ee'-ah ) </div> <p> "a having in common (koinos), partnership, fellowship" (see [[Communicate),]] denotes (a) the share which one has in anything, a participation, fellowship recognized and enjoyed; thus it is used of the common experiences and interests of Christian men, &nbsp;Acts 2:42; &nbsp;Galatians 2:9; of participation in the knowledge of the Son of God, &nbsp;1 Corinthians 1:9; of sharing the realization of the effects of the [[Blood]] (i.e., the Death) of Christ and the Body of Christ, as set forth by the emblems in the Lord's Supper, &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16; of participation in what is derived from the Holy Spirit, &nbsp;2 Corinthians 13:14 [[(Rv,]] "communion"); &nbsp; Philippians 2:1; of participation in the sufferings of Christ, &nbsp;Philippians 3:10; of sharing in the resurrection life possessed in Christ, and so of fellowship with the Father and the Son, &nbsp;1 John 1:3,6,7; negatively, of the impossibility of "communion" between light and darkness, &nbsp;2 Corinthians 6:14; (b) fellowship manifested in acts, the practical effects of fellowship with God, wrought by the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers as the outcome of faith, &nbsp;Philemon 1:6 , and finding expression in joint ministration to the needy, &nbsp;Romans 15:26; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 8:4; &nbsp;9:13; &nbsp;Hebrews 13:16 , and in the furtherance of the Gospel by gifts, &nbsp;Philippians 1:5 . See [[Communication]] , [[Contribution]] , [[Distribution]] , Fellowship. </p> <div> [['''B]] — 1: κοινωνός ''' (Strong'S #2844 — Noun Masculine — koinonos — koy-no-nos' ) </div> <p> "having in common," is rendered "have communion with (the altar)," --the altar standing by metonymy for that which is associated with it -- in &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:18 , [[Rv]] (for [[Av,]] "are partakers of"), and in &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:20 , for [[Av,]] "have fellowship with (demons)." See Companion. </p>
       
== King James Dictionary <ref name="term_58972" /> ==
<p> [[Communion,]] n. </p> 1. [[Fellowship]] intercourse between two persons or more interchange of transactions, or offices a state of giving and receiving agreement concord. <p> We are naturally led to seek communion and fellowship with other. </p> <p> What communion hath light with darkness? &nbsp;2 Corinthians 6 . </p> 2. [[Mutual]] intercourse or union in religious worship, or in doctrine and discipline. <p> The [[Protestant]] churches have no communion with the Romish church. </p> 3. The body of Christians who have one common faith and discipline. The three grand communions into which the Christian church is divided, are those of the Greek, the Romish and the Protestant churches. 4. The act of communicating the sacrament of the [[Eucharist]] the celebration of the Lords supper the participation of the blessed sacrament. The fourth council of [[Lateran]] decrees that every believer shall receive the communion at least at Easter. 5. Union of professing Christians in a particular church as, members in full communion. <p> Communion-service, in the liturgy of the Episcopal church, is the office for the administration of the holy sacrament. </p>
       
== Webster's Dictionary <ref name="term_102595" /> ==
<p> '''(1):''' (n.) [[A]] body of Christians having one common faith and discipline; as, the Presbyterian communion. </p> <p> '''(2):''' (n.) Intercourse between two or more persons; esp., intimate association and intercourse implying sympathy and confidence; interchange of thoughts, purposes, etc.; agreement; fellowship; as, the communion of saints. </p> <p> '''(3):''' (n.) The act of sharing; community; participation. </p> <p> '''(4):''' (n.) The sacrament of the eucharist; the celebration of the Lord's supper; the act of partaking of the sacrament; as, to go to communion; to partake of the communion. </p>
       
== Bridgeway Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_18483" /> ==
<p> In simple terms, ‘communion’ means a sharing together in something that people hold in common. In present-day language, ‘fellowship’ is the word usually used to indicate communion (&nbsp;Acts 2:42; for further discussion see [[Fellowship).]] </p> <p> The particular act of fellowship with Christ where Christians share together in a token or symbolic ‘meal’ of bread and wine is commonly called Holy Communion, or the Lord’s Supper (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16-17). (For further discussion see [[Lord’S]] [[Supper.)]] </p>
       
== Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary <ref name="term_80469" /> ==
<p> in a religious sense, refers chiefly to the admission of persons to the Lord's Supper. This is said to be open, when all are admitted who apply, as in the Church of England; to be strict, when confined to the members of a single society, or, at least, to members of the same denomination; and it is mixed, when persons are admitted from societies of different denominations, on the profession of their faith, and evidence of their piety. The principal difficulty on this point arises between the strict [[Baptists]] and Paedo-Baptists. </p>
       
== Easton's Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_31008" /> ==
&nbsp;Genesis 18:17-33&nbsp;Exodus 33:9-11&nbsp;Numbers 12:7,8&nbsp;John 14:23&nbsp;2 Corinthians 13:14&nbsp;Philippians 2:1&nbsp;Ephesians 4:1-6&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16,17
       
== Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology <ref name="term_17732" /> ==
<p> <i> See </i> [[Fellowship]]; [[The Lord'S Supper]] </p>
       
== Holman Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_39450" /> ==
<i> koinonia </i> [[Fellowship]][[Lord'S Supper]]
       
== Morrish Bible Dictionary <ref name="term_65653" /> ==
<p> See [[Fellowship.]] </p>
       
== Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature <ref name="term_33986" /> ==
<p> (κοινωνία, ''a sharing'' ), in ordinary terms, an association or agreement when several persons join and partake together of one thing; hence its application to the celebration of the Lord's Supper as an act of fellowship among Christians (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16); and it is to this act of participation or fellowship that the word "communion," in the religious sense, is now chiefly applied in the English language. In &nbsp;2 Corinthians 6:14, it takes the derived sense of concord. The "communion of the Holy Ghost" (&nbsp;2 Corinthians 13:14) signifies that spiritual intercourse with the divine Spirit which the child of God maintains by faith and prayer. The Greek term has also a secondary meaning of ''bestowal'' in charity, in other passages, where it is rendered "contribution," "distribution," or "communication" [which see]. The word is elsewhere translated simply "fellowship" (q.v.). For a large number of treatises on this subject, see Volbeding, ''Index Dissertationum'' , p. 147 sq. </p> <p> '''(1.)''' ''Communion'' (κοινωνία ) therefore "properly means the sharing something in common with another. Hence, in the Christian sense, it signifies the sharing divine converse or intercourse (&nbsp;1 John 1:3); and as this takes place, sacramentally, in the Lord's Supper, the word, in a third stage, signifies a joint participation in a spiritual sense of the body and blood of Christ, i.e. of his Spirit (&nbsp;John 6:63) in that sacrament (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:16). Some explain the κοινωνία in the Lord's Supper to be a communication of the ‘ body and blood of Christ,' as though these were given by the Church to the receiver, but the above account of the order in which the senses of the word have grown out of one another shows that such an interpretation is untenable. The Church has not, nor pretends to give, anything as from herself in that ordinance, but Christians come together to hold ‘ communion' with each other, and with their (once- sacrificed) Lord, of the benefits of whose death, sacramentally exhibited, they are in a special, though only spiritual, manner then partakers. ‘ Communion' (κοινωνία ) is that which is sought and spiritually partaken of by the receiver, not that which is actually conveyed by any person as the giver. Of the several names by which the Supper of the Lord has been at different times distinguished, that of the ‘ Holy Communion' is the one which the Church of [[England]] has adopted for her members. The Rubrics, Articles, and Canons almost invariably employ this designation." (See [[Eucharist]]); (See [[Lords Supper]]). </p> <p> '''(2.)''' In a historical sense, communion denotes participation in the mysteries of the Christian religion, and, of course, Church fellowship, with all its rights and privileges. Hence the term "excommunication." In this sense the word is used also with reference to the admission of persons to the Lord's Supper. This is said to be open when all are admitted who apply; to be strict when confined to the members of a single society, or at least to members of the same denomination; and it is mixed when persons are admitted from societies of different denominations, on the profession of their faith and evidence of their piety, as is the case in Protestant churches generally. The principal difficulty on this point arises between the strict Baptists and Paedo-baptists. </p>
       
== Kitto's Popular Cyclopedia of Biblial Literature <ref name="term_15381" /> ==
<p> Communion, a fellowship or agreement, when several persons join and partake together of one thing ; hence its application to the celebration of the Lord's supper as an act of fellowship among Christians and it is to this act of participation or fellowship that the word 'communion' is now restricted in the English language, the more familiar application of it having fallen into disease. </p>
          
          
==References ==
==References ==
<references>
<references>


<ref name="term_50373"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-bible/communion Communion from Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible]</ref>
<ref name="term_55398"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-new-testament/communion+(2) Communion from Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_55388"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-new-testament/communion Communion from Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_77185"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/vine-s-expository-dictionary-of-nt-words/communion Communion from Vine's Expository Dictionary of NT Words]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_58972"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/king-james-dictionary/communion Communion from King James Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_102595"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/webster-s-dictionary/communion Communion from Webster's Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_18483"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/bridgeway-bible-dictionary/communion Communion from Bridgeway Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_80469"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/watson-s-biblical-theological-dictionary/communion Communion from Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_31008"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/easton-s-bible-dictionary/communion Communion from Easton's Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_17732"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/baker-s-evangelical-dictionary-of-biblical-theology/communion Communion from Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_39450"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/holman-bible-dictionary/communion Communion from Holman Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_65653"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/morrish-bible-dictionary/communion Communion from Morrish Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_33986"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/cyclopedia-of-biblical-theological-and-ecclesiastical-literature/communion Communion from Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature]</ref>
          
          
<ref name="term_15381"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/kitto-s-popular-cyclopedia-of-biblial-literature/communion Communion from Kitto's Popular Cyclopedia of Biblial Literature]</ref>
<ref name="term_19478"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/charles-buck-theological-dictionary/communion+(2) Communion from Charles Buck Theological Dictionary]</ref>
          
          
</references>
</references>

Revision as of 22:48, 12 October 2021

Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament [1]

Communion. —It is surprising that neither the substantive (κοινωνία) nor the verb (κοινωνεῖν), which represent the concept of ‘communion’ in Nt, is to be found in any of our four Gospels. It would, however, be unsafe, and indeed untrue to fact, to assume on this account that the idea of communion is wanting. While there is an absence of the words concerned, there is no absence of the conception itself. A careful study of the Gospels, on the contrary, not only reveals a plain recognition of this vital aspect of the religious life, but also (and especially in the records of our Lord’s teaching preserved by St. John) presents the conception to us with a certain clear, if unobtrusive, prominence.

The subject contains three distinct parts, which will naturally be considered separately: (1) The communion of Christ with the Father; (2) our communion with God; (3) our communion one with another.

1. The communion of Christ with the Father .—The more conspicuous aspect of our Lord’s communion with the Father as reflected in the Gospels, is that which characterized His earthly ministry. But it is not the only aspect presented. Christ Himself clearly claimed to have enjoyed pre-existent communion with His Father ( John 17:5;  John 17:24), and the Prologue of the Fourth Gospel in three or four weighty clauses confirms the claim. This pre-existent communion included both unity of essence and life, and fellowship in work, ( a ) The Word was πρὸς τὸν θεόν ( John 1:1), realizing His very personality ‘in active intercourse with and in perfect communion with God’ (Westcott, in loc ). His nature was the nature of Deity (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος, ib. ). His Sonship is unique ( John 1:14; and for the uniqueness of the relationship cf. the important Synoptic passage,  Matthew 11:27 =  Luke 10:22). His is the πλήρωμα—the sum of the Divine attributes ( John 1:16, cf.  Colossians 1:19;  Colossians 2:9;  Ephesians 1:23), and He is μονογενὴς θεός ( John 1:18)—‘One Who is God only-begotten’ (Westcott). ( b ) The pre-existent communion not merely consisted in identity of essence, but was also expressed by fellowship in work. The Word was the Agent in the work of Creation ( John 1:3;  John 1:10, cf. also  1 Corinthians 8:6,  Colossians 1:16 : His work in sustaining the Universe so created is taught in  Colossians 1:17,  Hebrews 1:3). See art. Creator.

Our Lord’s realization of His Father’s presence during His life upon earth was constant. That He Himself laid claim to such fellowship is beyond contention. He did so directly in His words ( Matthew 11:27 =  Luke 10:22,  John 12:49-50;  John 14:6;  John 14:10-11;  John 16:28;  John 16:32), emphasizing especially His unity with the Father ( John 10:30-38;  John 12:44;  John 14:7 ff.), and accepting with approval the title of ‘God’ ( John 20:28-29). He did so even more impressively, if less directly, by assuming His Father’s functions in the world ( Mark 2:5;  Mark 2:7 =  Matthew 9:2-3 =  Luke 5:20-21;  Luke 7:48) and representing Himself as controlling Divine forces and originating Divine missions ( Matthew 11:27 a,  John 15:26;  John 20:22-23). Moreover, any attempt to explain away that intimate knowledge of God which the Gospels consistently ascribe to Him, is compelled to disregard not merely the passages in which His own words and actions distinctly assume it, but also not a few in which, whether with approval or with disapproval, others recognize that He claimed to possess it ( John 5:18;  John 10:33;  John 13:3;  John 19:7, cf. also  John 17:7-8). See Claims of Christ.

But apart altogether from His specific claim to the enjoyment of this Divine fellowship, we have abundant evidence of its existence in His earthly life itself. The sense of communion was an integral part of that life. It is one of those elements in His personality that could not be eliminated from it. A Christ unconscious of intercourse with God would not be the Christ of the Gospels. It was this sense of communion that moulded His first recorded conception of duty ( Luke 2:49, Authorized Version or Revised Version Nt 1881, Ot 1885). The thirty years of quiet preparation for a three years’ ministry (the proportions are suggestive; for other examples of equipment in seclusion see  Exodus 3:1,  Luke 1:80,  Galatians 1:15-17) may without doubt be summed up as one long experience of fellowship with His Father. And the recognition of this union, which marks His first thoughts of His mission, and which must so largely have constituted His earthly preparation for it, is found to be His constant support amid the stress of the work itself. It is present in a special manner in the Baptism which signalized the beginning of His ministry among men ( Mark 1:10-11 =  Matthew 3:16-17 =  Luke 3:21-22). It is His stay alike before the labours of the day begin ( Mark 1:35), at the very moment of service ( Mark 6:41 ἀναβλέψας εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν; cf. also  Mark 7:34;  Mark 8:24,  John 6:11;  John 11:41), and when refreshment of soul is needed at the close of the long hours of toil ( Mark 6:46 =  Matthew 14:23,  Luke 5:16). The Gospels, indeed, make it plain that He regarded such communion as a condition on which the accomplishment of certain work depended ( Mark 9:29, cf.  John 5:30), and we cannot fail to observe the frequency with which both He and His biographers insist that the Divine Presence is with Him in all His words and works ( Luke 4:14;  Luke 4:18,  John 3:34;  John 5:19-21;  John 5:36;  John 8:16;  John 8:26;  John 8:20). So constant is the communion, that even the most familiar objects of Nature convey to Him suggestions of the Father in heaven ( Matthew 6:26;  Matthew 6:28). It is noteworthy that retirement for intimate converse with unseen realities is especially recorded as preceding Christ’s action or speech at certain great crises in the development of His life-mission (Luke is particularly careful to draw attention to this; see  Luke 3:21;  Luke 6:12-13;  Luke 9:18;  Luke 9:28 ff.,  Luke 22:41;  Luke 23:46; cf. also  Mark 9:2,  John 12:28;  John 17:1 ff.), and that intercession for individual men had its place in this sacred experience ( Luke 22:31-32; cf.  Luke 23:34,  John 17:6-26).

Thus constantly, alike at critical junctures and in more normal moments, did the sense of His Father’s presence uphold Him. In one mysterious moment, the full meaning of which baffles human explanation. His consciousness of it appears to have wavered ( Mark 15:34); yet even this cry of desolation must not be considered apart from the certain restoration of the communion revealed in the calm confidence of the last word of all ( Luke 23:46). See art. Dereliction.

One further point maybe briefly suggested. Our Lord’s communion with the Father was not inconsistent with His endurance of temptation. Nay, it was under the strong impulse of that Spirit whose presence with Him was at once the sign and the expression of His union with God (see  Mark 1:10), that He submitted to the assaults of evil ( Mark 1:12-13, note ἐκβάλλει, =  Matthew 4:1 =  Luke 4:1). The protracted testing (ἦν πειραζόμενος, analytical tense, cf. the suggestion of other occasions of temptation in the plur. ἐν τοῖς πειρασμοῖς μου,  Luke 22:28, and  John 12:27), successfully endured, itself became to our Lord the means of a fresh assurance and (perhaps we may add) a fuller realization of fellowship with the spiritual world ( Mark 1:13 διηκόνουν—impf.). In this respect, as in others also, His life of communion, while in one sense unique ( Luke 10:22), is seen to be the exemplar of our own.

2. Our communion with God .—The reality of the believer’s communion with God is plainly revealed in the teaching of the Gospels. This communion is presented sometimes in terms of a relationship with the Father, sometimes in terms of a relationship with the Son, sometimes in terms of a relationship with the Spirit; but all three presentations alike are relevant to our study ( 1 John 2:23 b, cf.  1 John 1:3,  John 14:16-17).* [Note: It is scarcely necessary to point out that for purposes of doctrine, I Jn. ranks as practically a part of the Fourth Gospel.] if our outline is to be at once clear and comprehensive, we must treat the passages concerned under two headings. The first ( a ) will include those that deal with the state of communion with God into which a man is brought when he becomes the servant of God; the second ( b ) those that relate to the life of conscious communion with God which it is his privilege to live from that time forward. The distinction, as will shortly appear, is by no means an unnecessary one, the second experience being at once more vivid and more profound than the first need necessarily be.

( a ) It is clear that in the case of every believer the barrier raised between himself and God by his sin has been broken down. In other words, he has been restored to a state of communion with God. The means by which this state is brought about have both a Divine and a human significance. It is in considering their Divine aspect that we reach the point of closest connexion between the communion of believers with God and the communion of Christ with His Father. For these in a true sense stand to one another in the relation of effect and cause (cf. what is implied in such passages as  John 1:16;  John 14:6;  John 14:12;  John 17:21-23). It is in virtue of our Lord’s perfect fellowship with God that through His life and death we too can gain unrestricted admission to the Divine Presence. This truth is all-important. It needs no detailed proof. The whole story of the Incarnation and of the Cross is one long exposition of it. Perhaps it is symbolically represented in  Mark 15:38. The conditions required on the human side for restoration to the state of communion with God appear plainly in our Lord’s teaching. This state is described in varied language and under different metaphors. Sometimes it is presented as citizenship in God’s kingdom ( Mark 10:14-15,  John 3:3); sometimes as discipleship ( Luke 14:26,  John 8:31), friendship ( John 15:15), and even kinship ( Mark 3:32-35) with Christ Himself. In other places it is spoken of as a personal knowledge of Him ( 1 John 2:3); in others, again, as a following in His footsteps ( Mark 8:34,  John 8:12); and in yet others as the possession of a new type of life ( John 3:16 : for the definition of eternal life as ‘knowing God’ see  John 17:3,  1 John 5:20). As one condition of finding this experience, which, in whatever terms it be described, places men in a new relationship with God, Christ mentions childlikeness of disposition ( Mark 10:15). As other conditions He emphasizes poverty of spirit ( Matthew 5:3,  Luke 18:9 ff.). and the performance of the Divine will in a life of righteousness and love ( Mark 3:35,  Luke 6:35-36;  Luke 8:21,  John 8:31;  John 14:23, cf.  1 John 1:6;  1 John 2:3-6;  1 John 3:6). In one very important passage, addressed both to the multitude and to His own band of disciples, He may perhaps be said to include all individual conditions. ‘If any man willeth to come after me, let him renounce himself’ ( Mark 8:34 and ||). This saying has a meaning far more profound than that suggested by our English versions. Taken with the explanation contained in the verse that follows, it really leads us to the basis of communion. All communion between two persons, whether human and human or human and Divine, is possible only in virtue of some element common to the natures of both (see  John 4:24;  John 8:47; cf. the same principle differently applied in  John 5:27). Man’s sole possibility of communion with God lies in his possession, potential or actual, of the Divine life (cf.  John 1:9). But joined to the ‘self’ (the second ψυχή of  Mark 8:35) which is capable of union with God, he is conscious also of another ‘self’ (the first ψυχή of  Mark 8:35) which is incongruous with that close relationship to Deity. The condition of realizing the one ‘self,’ and with it, in natural sequence, communion with God, is the renunciation of the other and lower ‘self.’

So both  Mark 8:34-35 : the ἐαυτον of  Mark 8:34 is thus equivalent to the first ψυχη of  Mark 8:35 The ‘taking up his cross’— i.e. for his own crucifixion thereon—defines the ‘renouncing himself’ more closely. The teaching of the whole passage is the Evangelic representation of the Pauline doctrine of self-crucifixion, cf.  Galatians 2:20;  Galatians 5:24.

To change the figure somewhat, the unity of life involved in the idea of communion between man and God can be attained only through man’s rising to God’s life. This, it is true, would have been outside his power had not God first stooped to his level. But in the Incarnation this step of infinite condescension has been taken, and by it the possibility of mankind’s rising to the life of God—in other words, the possibility of its entering into a state of communion with God—has been once for all secured. In order to make this state of communion his own, Christ teaches, each individual man must now leave his lower life, with all that pertains to it, behind; must be content to ‘renounce himself’; must be willing to ‘lose’ that life’ which cannot consist with the Divine life. So complete, indeed, is to be the severance from the past, that the experience in which it is brought about is called a ‘new birth’ ( John 3:3), as real as, though of a type essentially different from, the physical birth ( John 3:6). When with this self-renouncement is combined that faith in Christ which leads to union with Him and reliance upon Him (πιστεύειν εἰς— John 3:16;  John 3:36;  John 6:29;  John 11:26), we have the experience which sums up into one great whole the various individual conditions required on the human side for entering into the state of communion with God.

( b ) Quite distinct in thought from the state of communion into which all believers are brought, is the life of communion which it is their privilege to enjoy. The one is always a fact, the other is also a consciously realized experience. Like so many of the blessings revealed in Nt, such a life of communion is too rich an experience to be described in any one phrase or under a single metaphor. In different contexts it is presented in different ways. Sometimes, for example, it is set forth as an abiding in Christ who also abides in the believer ( John 15:4 ff.). In other places it is represented as an indwelling of the Spirit ( John 14:16-20;  John 16:7;  John 16:13-15,  1 John 2:20;  1 John 2:27;  1 John 3:24;  1 John 4:13), whose presence, to believers (as in a deeper sense to their Lord) the sign and expression of union with God, is to be with them from the moment of their initiation into the new life ( Mark 1:8 and || ||,  1 John 3:24;  1 John 4:13). Yet another statement, emphasizing in a remarkable metaphor the inwardness and intimacy of the union that results, sets the experience before us as a mystical feeding upon Christ (John 6, esp.  John 6:53-58, cf. also  John 6:35). But while there is variation in the language in which this sense of the Divine Presence is set forth, there is no question as to the reality of the experience itself. It is the inspiration of this Unseen Presence that shall give to believers definite guidance in moments of crisis and perplexity ( Mark 13:11 and ||,  Luke 12:11-12). It is in this communion with God that they will find their surest refuge against fears and dangers ( Mark 13:18 =  Matthew 24:20) and against the assaults of temptation ( Mark 14:38 and ||). Such fellowship, too, is their ground of certainty, alike in their teaching ( John 3:11—note the plurals;  1 John 1:1-3) and in their belief (cf.  John 4:42). It is, moreover, the source of all their fitness for service (cf. Gabriel’s suggestive speech,  Luke 1:19) and the means of all their fruit-bearing ( John 15:1-10). As would have been expected, the full significance of this converse with God is not understood, nor is its closest intimacy appropriated, in the earliest days of initiation. Knowledge of God, like knowledge of men, has to be realized progressively (cf. χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος,  John 1:16). There are degrees of intimacy (cf.  John 15:15 and the suggestive interchange of ἀγαπᾶν and φιλεῖν in  John 21:15 ff.), and the extent to which the believer is admitted into fellowship is proportionate to the progress he has made in the lessons previously taught (cf. the significant connexion between  Mark 8:31;  Mark 8:27-29, which is clearly brought out in the emphatic καὶ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν of  Mark 8:31 : cf. also  Mark 4:33,  John 16:12). The reason for this basis of progress is plain. An important element in communion being self-adjustment to God’s will (cf. our Lord’s own illustration of this,  Mark 14:36 and ||), the degree of intimacy that ensues will naturally be conditioned by the extent to which this element is rendered prominent. Thus, while its neglect will open up the possibility of lapsing even to one who has been on intimate terms with Christ ( Mark 14:18,  John 13:18), its constant and progressive practice may bring a man to a union with God so close as to constitute his complete possession by Divine influence (cf. the Baptist’s magnificent description of himself as a ‘Voice,’  John 1:23, taken from  Isaiah 40:3). And the fellowship so enjoyed and ever more intimately realized under the restricted conditions of earth, is to find its perfect consummation only in the hereafter ( John 12:26;  John 14:2-3;  John 17:24, cf.  1 John 3:2). See art. Abiding.

The means by which, according to the Gospel teaching, the believer will practise this life of communion with God, may be briefly indicated. Prominent among them is seclusion from the world for the purpose of definite prayer. The importance of this our Lord emphasized by His own example. He also enjoined it upon His followers by oft-repeated precepts ( Matthew 6:8;  Matthew 7:7-8;  Matthew 26:41 and ||,  Luke 6:28;  Luke 18:1). At the same time the Evangelic teaching does not aim at making recluses. There are active as well as passive means of enjoying intercourse with God, and our Lord’s whole training of the Twelve indicates, even more clearly than any individual saying (cf.  John 17:10), His belief in the Divine communion that is found in the service of mankind. The sense of fellowship with God vivified in secret devotion is to be realized afresh and tested in contact with men (so  1 John 4:8;  1 John 4:12;  1 John 4:16).

Two more points call for separate attention. (1) Before His death our Lord ordained a rite which not only symbolizes the union of His followers with Himself, but is also a means of its progressive realization. If an intimate connexion between the Lord’s Supper ( Mark 14:22 ff. and ||) and the Jewish Passover may, as seems reasonable, be assumed, that conception of the Christian rite which represents it as a means of communion between the individual soul and its Saviour would appear to have a basis in the foundation principle on which all ancient worship, whether Jewish or heathen, rests—the belief that to partake of a sacrifice is to enter into some kind of fellowship with the Deity. This aspect of the Lord’s Supper does not, of course, exhaust its meaning (see art. Lord’s Supper), but it is certainly prominent, and it is emphasized both by St. Paul ( 1 Corinthians 10:18) and by Christ Himself ( John 6:56, where the eating would certainly include that of the Lord’s Supper, even though, as is most probable, it does not refer to it exclusively).

(2) One more suggestion may be put forward. Our Lord seems to hint at a special means of communion with Himself which is really a particular extension of the self-renouncement considered above. This is a mysterious fellowship with Him in His own sufferings for mankind ( Mark 10:38-39 =  Matthew 20:22-23 a; for a symbolical illustration see  Mark 15:21). It is only a hint, but the words are significant; and, taken in conjunction with St. Paul’s ἀνταναπληρῶ τὰ ὑστερήματα τῶν θλίψεων τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου ( Colossians 1:24) and his purpose τοῦ γνῶναι … κοινωνίαν παθημάτων αὐτοῦ ( Philippians 3:10; cf. also  2 Corinthians 1:5;  2 Corinthians 4:10;  1 Peter 4:13), would certainly seem to imply that the believer’s own sufferings for Christ’s sake may become a medium through which he may enter into close communion with his Lord.

Even this brief study will have revealed that the Gospel conception of the Christian’s communion with God is essentially different from that of the Quietist. Whether we have regard to our Lord’s example or to His teaching, whether we are thinking of the status of fellowship or of its conscious practice, the means by which the Divine communion is realized are not exclusively periods of secluded contemplation. In Christ’s own life upon earth the two elements of active and passive fellowship are signally combined. The sense of union with the Unseen Father, fostered in lonely retreat, is also intensified in moments of strenuous activity. In His thoughts for the lives of His followers, too, the consciousness of God’s presence is secured not alone by solitary worship, but also by the doing of the Divine will, by the earnest struggle to subdue the lower self, and even by active participation in the very sufferings of Christ. So the servant, as his Lord, must practise the communion of service as well as the communion of retirement (cf., again,  John 17:15). The desire for the permanent consciousness of the more immediate Presence must be sunk in the mission of carrying to others the tidings of salvation ( Mark 5:18-20 =  Luke 8:38-39). It is but natural that in the moment of special revelation on the mountain the disciple should long to make it his abiding place ( Mark 9:5 and ||); but his Master can never forget the need of service on the ordinary levels of life ( Mark 9:14 ff. and ||). And the experience of the one is the source of power for the other ( Mark 9:29, cf.  John 15:4).

3. Our communion one with another .—Just as our communion with God was seen to bear a close relation to our Lord’s communion with the Father, so our spiritual fellowship one with another rests upon the fellowship of each with Christ. As we had occasion to point out above, communion between any two persons is possible only in virtue of some element common to the natures of both. This common possession in the case of believers is the life, the ‘self,’ which is called into being and ever progressively realized in their individual communion with Christ. The possibility of our spiritual fellowship with one another rests ultimately upon what He is and our relationship to what He is (see  1 John 1:1-3, and especially  1 John 1:7; cf. also  1 Corinthians 10:16-17). His Presence is the bond of union in which we are one, and in which we realize the oneness that we possess ( Matthew 18:20). Indeed, the two types of communion—the communion with God and the communion with our fellow-believers—react each upon the other. On the one hand, as we have just seen, our communion with men rests upon our communion with Christ; on the other hand, our Divine fellowship may be intensified ( Matthew 18:20 again and  Matthew 25:40) or impeded ( Matthew 5:23-24;  Matthew 6:15;  Matthew 25:45,  Mark 11:25) by our relations with our fellow-men.

That our Lord looked for the unity of His followers is not open to question. He both prophesied it ( John 10:16) and prayed for it ( John 17:11 b,  John 17:21). An intimate friend, clearly one of an inner circle of disciples and probably John himself, understood its attainment to be part of His purpose in dying for mankind ( John 11:52). Moreover, it is natural to suppose that the desire to ensure it would contribute to His decision to found an organized society ( Matthew 16:18) and to institute an important rite ( Mark 14:22 ff. and ||) for those who should believe in Him. The unity of His followers was even to be one of the grounds on which He based His appeal for the world’s faith ( John 17:21 b). Of His wish for this unity, therefore, there can scarcely be reasonable doubt. But when we ask in what He meant the unity to consist, agreement is not so easily reached. The expression of His followers’ unity certainly includes kind and unselfish relations with one another—mutual honour and service ( Mark 10:35-45 =  Matthew 20:20-28), mutual forgiveness ( Matthew 6:14,  Luke 17:3-4), mutual love ( John 13:34;  John 15:12). It is exemplified further by participation in the common work ( John 4:36-38). Another very special means of its realization, the Lord’s Supper, we have already indicated. Although this particular aspect of the rite is not actually revealed in the Gospel narrative itself, it will scarcely be questioned that one of the great truths which it both signifies and secures, is that of the fellowship of Christ’s followers. The sacred service in which the believer may realize communion with His Lord (see § 2 above), is also a means by which he is to apprehend his oneness with all other believers (see  1 Corinthians 10:17).

While, however, it is plain that in Christ’s teaching the communion of Christians is at once attested and secured by means like these, it is disputed whether He designed their unity to be simply a spiritual or also an external one. Three important passages may be very briefly considered. (1)  John 10:16 affords no support to the upholders of an external unity. The true rendering is unquestionably, ‘They shall become one flock ’ ( Revised Version Nt 1881, Ot 1885; cf. Tindale and Coverdale), and not, ‘There shall be one fold ’ (Authorized Version; cf. Vulgate). The unity mentioned here is one that is realized in the personal relation of each member of the flock to the Great Shepherd Himself.—(2) There is teaching a little more definite in  John 17:11;  John 17:21-22 In both these places our Lord makes His own unity with the Father the exemplar of the unity of believers. Reverence forbids any dogmatic statement as to the point to which this sacred analogy can be pressed. But Christ’s own words in the immediate context contain suggestions as to His meaning in using the analogy. It is noticeable that here also, as in  John 10:6, the underlying basis of unity is the believers’ personal relation to Christ (and the Father). ‘That they may be one, even as we are one,’ in  John 10:22, is at once defined more closely in the words, ‘I in them, and thou in me’ ( John 10:23). The resultant unity is gained through the medium not of an external, but of a purely spiritual, condition (ἵνα ὧσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν,  John 10:23). In the same way, in the statement of  John 10:11, it is a spiritual relationship to God that will yield the unity Christ craves for His disciples. This unity will follow upon their being ‘kept ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου.’ It will be assured if their relationship to the Father is a counterpart of what had been their relationship to Christ ( John 10:12), i.e. a personal relationship. Whatever, therefore, be the exact meaning which the analogy used by our Lord was intended to convey, His own language in the context appears to make it plain that it must be interpreted with a spiritual rather than with an external significance.—(3) This conclusion derives not a little support from the incident of  Mark 9:38 ff. When a definite test case arose, He declared the real fellowship of His followers to depend not upon any outward bond of union between them, but upon each bearing such a relationship to Himself as would be involved in His working ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί μου. True, the man in question may not have been a nominal disciple of our Lord, but that in His view he was a real disciple is distinctly stated ( Mark 9:40). This instance, therefore, may be regarded as a practical application on the part of Christ Himself of the teaching under consideration; and thus it strongly confirms the interpretation that we have put upon it. It would be outside the scope of the present article to consider arguments for or against the corporate unity of Christians drawn from other sources, some of which are very strong and all of which must, of course, be duly weighed before a fair judgment on the whole question can be reached. But so far as the subject-matter before us is concerned, we find it hard to resist the conclusion that such external unity formed no part of the teaching of Christ and the Gospels.

One word must be added. The ‘communion of saints’ joins the believer not merely to his fellow-Christians upon earth, but also to those who have passed within the veil (cf.  Hebrews 12:1). This aspect of communion is not emphasized in the Gospels, but there are indications that the fellowship of believers upon earth was linked in the thought of Christ to the yet closer fellowship of those beyond death. At any rate, it is worthy of notice that in instituting the sacred rite which, as we have seen, at once witnesses to and secures our communion one with another, our Lord carefully pointed forward to the reunion that will take place in the world to come ( Matthew 26:29; note μεθʼ ὑμῶν); and that in a few suggestive words He represented the earthly gathering as incomplete apart from its final consummation in the heavenly kingdom ( Luke 22:16). See further artt. Fellowship, Unity.

Literature.— D B [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] , s.v.  ; Wendt, Teaching of Jesus , ii. 151 ff.; Weiss, Nt Theol , ii. 367 ff.; Beyschlag, Nt Theol . i. 217 ff.; Herrmann, Com. of the Christian with God  ; Maclaren, Holy of Holies , chs. xvi.–xix.; MacCulloch, Comparative Theology , 216, 254; Stearns, Evidence of Chr. Experience , 179; Strong, Historical Christianity , 11; Westcott, Historic Faith, 123, 247; McGiffert, Apostles’ Creed , 32, 200; Expos. Times , iii. 197, v. 464 (R. F. Weymouth); Tasker, Spiritual Communion .

H. Bisseker.

Charles Buck Theological Dictionary [2]

Spiritual or divine, is that delightful fellowship and intercourse which a believer enjoys with God. It is founded upon union with him, and consists in a communication of divine graces from him, and a return of devout affections to him. The believer holds communion with God in his works, in his word, and in his ordinances. There can be no communion without likeness, nor without Christ as the mediator. Some distinguished communion with God from the sense and feeling of it; that is, that we may hold communion with him without raptures of Joy; and that a saint, even under desertion, may have communion with God as really, though not so feelingly, as at any other time. This communion cannot be interrupted by any local mutations: it is far superior to all outward services and ordinances whatsoever; it concerns the whole soul, all the affections, faculties, and motions of it being under its influence: it is only imperfect in this life, and will be unspeakably enlarged in a better world.

In order to keep up communion with God, we should inform ourselves of his will,  John 5:39 . be often in prayer,  Luke 8:1-56 . embrace opportunities of retirement,  Psalms 104:34 . watch against a vain, trifling, and volatile spirit,  Ephesians 4:30 . and be found in the use of all the means of grace,  Psalms 27:4 . the advantages of communion with God are, deadness to the world,  Philippians 3:8 . patience under trouble,  Job 1:22 . fortitude in danger,  Psalms 27:1 . gratitude for mercies received,  Psalms 103:1 . direction under difficulties,  Proverbs 3:5-6 . peace and joy in opposition, Psa 16:23. happiness in death,  Psalms 23:4 . and an earnest desire for heaven and glory,  2 Timothy 4:7-8 .

See Shaw's Immanuel; Owen and Henry on Communion; and article Fellowship.

References

  1. ↑ Communion from Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament
  2. ↑ Communion from Charles Buck Theological Dictionary
Retrieved from "http://wiki.bibleportal.com/index.php?title=Communion&oldid=214720"