Why does Paul criticize the Corinthians' gatherings in 1 Corinthians 11:20? Canonical Context Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians addresses a series of pastoral crises in a young, cosmopolitan congregation (1 Colossians 1:10–11; 7:1; 8:1; 12:1). Chapters 11–14 unify around order in corporate worship. Within that unit, 1 Corinthians 11:17–34 focuses on abuses at the Lord’s Supper. Verse 20 pinpoints the heart of the malfunction: “Therefore when you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat” . Paul does not deny that bread and cup are present; he denies that what is happening can still be called “the Lord’s Supper.” The gatherings have ceased to reflect the character, purpose, and self-giving of Christ. Historical and Cultural Background of Corinthian Assemblies Corinth in the mid-first century was a bustling trade hub rebuilt by Julius Caesar (44 BC) and infused with Roman patron-client values. Dining customs followed a “symposium” model: guests reclined in a triclinium, the elite enjoyed prime portions, and latecomers—often slaves or laborers—received leftovers. Archaeological digs at the Peirene Fountain House and the urban villas along Lechaion Road reveal distinct rooms for elite dining (approx. 9–10 couches) separated from larger quarters for the lower classes. When believers met in the homes of affluent members (cf. Gaius, Romans 16:23), such architectural realities reinforced social stratification unless intentionally countered by gospel ethics. The Nature of the Lord’s Supper in the Early Church From its inception the church “broke bread” as a covenant meal signifying fellowship with the risen Christ (Acts 2:42; Luke 22:19-20). It rehearsed redemption (“proclaiming the Lord’s death,” 1 Corinthians 11:26), anticipated the eschatological banquet (Matthew 26:29), and enacted horizontal unity (1 Colossians 10:16-17). In many assemblies the Supper was embedded in a larger “love-feast” (Jude 12). That social setting magnified either gospel equality or social prejudice. Problem Identified: Division and Selfishness Verse 21 exposes two linked disorders: 1. “Each of you proceeds with his own meal” – private consumption fractures corporate identity; shared bread becomes individualized portions. 2. “While one remains hungry, another gets drunk” – economic disparity (some “have nothing,” v 22) intersects with intemperance. The wealthy arrive early with ample provisions; the working poor arrive late and find the table depleted. The very ordinance designed to dramatize Christ’s self-sacrifice is twisted into a spectacle of self-indulgence. Thus Paul’s criticism in v 20 hinges on a violation of the Supper’s essence: it is no longer Christ-centered nor community-building. To call such a practice “the Lord’s Supper” is a misnomer. Key Terminology Analysis • “The Lord’s Supper” (kuriakon deipnon) – the adjective kuriakon appears only here and in Revelation 1:10 (“the Lord’s Day”), marking singular ownership by the risen Lord. • “Despise” (kataphroneō) – conveys treating as worthless; their conduct de-values the “church of God,” which Christ purchased (Acts 20:28). • “Humiliate” (kataischynō) – public shaming of the economically disadvantaged contradicts the honor Christ bestows equally on every member (1 Colossians 12:22-24). Paul’s Apostolic Rebuke Paul withholds praise (v 22), contrasting earlier commendation for holding apostolic traditions (v 2). He reminds them (v 23) that he received the Supper’s institution “from the Lord” and transmitted it intact. By re-citing the verba domini (vv 23-25), he juxtaposes Christ’s self-giving with their self-serving. Verse 27 warns that eating “in an unworthy manner” invites culpability for “the body and blood of the Lord,” a legal idiom for homicide in Greek papyri, emphasizing covenant violation, not personal merit. Ethical and Communal Implications The Supper demands self-examination (v 28) not to foster morbid introspection but to discern (diakrinō) the body—both Christ’s sacrifice and the ecclesial body (cf. 10:17). Failure incurs discipline: “many are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep” (v 30). This local outbreak of illness illustrates God’s providential correction, paralleling covenant curses for Israel’s misuse of holy things (Leviticus 10:1-2; 1 Corinthians 10:1-11). Theological Significance of Proper Communion 1. Christology – The Supper testifies that salvation is by Christ’s atoning death and bodily resurrection (v 26). 2. Ecclesiology – Unity across socioeconomic lines embodies the “one loaf… one body” reality (10:16-17; Galatians 3:28). 3. Eschatology – “Until He comes” (11:26) sustains hope in the consummation when all divisions cease (Isaiah 25:6-8). 4. Sanctification – Communal holiness grows as believers judge themselves rightly (11:31-32), sparing the church from more severe divine chastening. Relation to the Gospel and the Nature of the Church The cross dismantles every boast (1 Colossians 1:18-31). Any practice that reinserts class privilege contradicts the gospel. Omission of love nullifies spiritual gifts (13:1-3) and invalidates worship (Amos 5:21-24). Therefore Paul’s critique in 11:20 foreshadows his larger argument that everything in corporate life must be done “for edification” and “decently and in order” (14:26, 40). Practical Applications for Contemporary Worship • Examine scheduling, seating, and serving patterns: do they marginalize late-arriving workers, parents of young children, ethnic minorities? • Link benevolence funds with Communion services to manifest shared life (Acts 2:45; 4:34-35). • Teach regularly on the covenantal meaning of the elements, guarding against routinized or consumerist participation. • Encourage brief self-examination followed by corporate assurance to avoid both presumption and paralysis. Intertextual Links in Scripture • Isaiah 58:3-10 – fasting voided by exploitation mirrors the Supper voided by selfishness. • Malachi 1:10-14 – polluted offerings bring divine displeasure, paralleling unworthy Communion. • Acts 20:7-11 – the only explicit narrative of early Christian Communion depicts shared teaching, mutual care, and resurrection hope (Eutychus), offering a positive foil to Corinth. • Revelation 19:6-9 – the marriage supper of the Lamb fulfills the typology; only those clothed in Christ’s righteousness participate. Conclusion: Unity in Christ and the Supper’s Purpose Paul criticizes the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 11:20 because their gatherings contradict the very nature of the Lord’s Supper. By turning a sacrament of self-sacrifice into an occasion of self-promotion, they deny the gospel symbolized in the bread and cup. True observance proclaims Christ’s death, nurtures mutual love, anticipates His return, and glorifies God. Any practice—ancient or modern—that fractures the body transforms the meal into something other than “the Lord’s.” The remedy is repentance, discernment, and conformity to the self-giving pattern of the Savior whose name the Supper bears. |
    |