Tom Groelsema | A Sacred Supper

Sunday Evening, July 26, 2026

Given by Tom Groelsema | Executive Pastor, Christ Covenant Church

A Sacred Supper
Heidelberg Catechism Lord's Day 30

Watch on YouTube

Download our mobile app

Transcript

Copy

Well, I invite you to keep your bulletins open during this sermon tonight. A couple of readings there from the New Testament: Hebrews 9 and 1 Corinthians 11. 1 Corinthians 11 particularly is important for the sermon tonight, so you can either be looking in your Bibles or use it as it's found there in the bulletin. And here in just a moment, we're going to be reading also from the Heidelberg Catechism. So, we've been going through the Heidelberg Catechism in the evening services. We are up to Lord's Day 30, which is our last Lord's Day on the sacraments, and particularly on the Lord's Supper. One of the things that good theology ought to do is to create clear distinctions, so help us to understand clearly a certain doctrine, and sometimes those doctrines are thick, aren't they? And so, we need the right language. We need to put things as biblically accurate as we can. And sometimes those distinctions draw lines, and they create separations, because here's this truth, and this truth stands in distinction from this truth. And friends, that's what we find here in Lord's Day 30. I grew up on the Heidelberg Catechism, and this is probably considered the most controversial part of the Heidelberg Catechism, particularly Question 80. So, before we read this together, let's pray. Let's ask for the Lord's help, for his understanding, as we study together tonight. 

Our Father in heaven, we do praise you for your Word, and we're grateful for the gospel tonight. Grateful for a gospel that says that Christ died for sinners once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous. No sacrifice ever needed again, because Jesus declared, and it is true. It is finished. We are completely forgiven because of Christ and what he has done at the cross. Father, as we turn to this Lord's Day tonight, we pray for your help as we study. We pray, Lord, that you would give us understanding. And we pray, Lord, that we would glory in Christ, that we would glory in the gospel. I pray, Father, that you would help me, especially help my voice tonight. Just give the strength it needs to preach the sermon. And we pray these things in Jesus’ name. Amen. 

So, let's read together Lord's Day 30, and I'll read both the question and the answer for us, but please follow along. Three questions. 

Q: How does the Lord's Supper differ from the Roman Catholic mass? 

A: The Lord's Supper declares to us that all our sins are completely forgiven through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself accomplished on the cross, once for all. It also declares to us that the Holy Spirit grafts us into Christ, who with his true body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father, where he wants us to worship him. But the mass teaches that the living and the dead do not have their sins forgiven through the suffering of Christ unless Christ is still offered for them daily by the priests. It also teaches that Christ is still bodily present under the form of bread and wine, where Christ is therefore to be worshiped. Thus, the mass is basically nothing but a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ and a condemnable idolatry. 

Q: Who should then come to the Lord's table? 

A: Those who are displeased with themselves because of their sins, but who nevertheless trust that their sins are pardoned and that their remaining weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and lead a better life. Hypocrites and those who are unrepentant, however, eat and drink judgment on themselves. 

Q: Should those be admitted to the Lord's Supper who show by what they profess and how they live that they are unbelieving and ungodly? 

A: No, for that would dishonor God's covenant and bring down God's wrath upon the entire congregation. Therefore, according to the instruction of Christ and his apostles, the Christian church is duty-bound to exclude such people by the official use of the keys of the kingdom until they reform their lives. 

Well, dear people of God, throughout the history of the church, different ages have had different controversies that have consumed the church. In other words, the church has paid special attention to certain things in certain times throughout the history of the church. So, if you go to the earliest centuries of the church, there were controversies over the trinity, over the nature of Christ. What about three persons, one God? How does that work? Or the fact that God is – or Jesus is human, and Jesus is divine. What about those natures? And so 325, the Council of Nicea gave us an orthodox creed on the doctrine of the trinity. 451, the Council of Chalcedon stated that Jesus was fully God and man, existing in two natures without confusion, change, division, or separation. Move ahead to the Middle Ages, and one of the controversies in the Middle Ages was over the use of icons. And so, one council of the church rendered a decision that the church may venerate icons but is not to worship icons. Or, in that same period of time, the question before the church was does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father or also from the Son? This theological word called a filioque, and debate on that began earlier than the Middle Ages but eventually divided the eastern church from the western church in 1054. Fast forward over the centuries to the 1960s and 1970s, and we have the battle over the Bible. Is the Bible inerrant or not? And so, some church leaders gathered together and put together the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy, or think about our own day and age. And probably the debate in our day is over anthropology, the doctrine of man. So, what do we believe today about the nature of man? And that takes us into subjects like abortion or human sexuality and race and gender. 

Well, during the Reformation, the period when the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Larger Catechism, Shorter Catechism, the Heidelberg Catechism were written, the issues were justification by faith and the sacraments. Is Christ's righteousness received by faith enough, or is there something that we have to do alongside of that in order to be right with God? And it's because of these two subjects being at the heart of the Reformation that the Heidelberg Catechism spends so much time on the sacraments. You might have asked yourself as we've been going through this, another Lord's Day on the sacraments? I mean, this is number six, right? This is more time than anything else in the Heidelberg Catechism: the sacraments. And this is our third Lord's Day on the Lord's Supper. Might seem like overkill until you realize, again, that this was the controversy of the day. Is the Lord's Supper just a memorial meal? Are we like Lutherans and believe in consubstantiation? Or what about the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation? Or do we take the Reformed position of a real, spiritual presence of Christ? But so much time on the sacraments because, again, this is what divided people in that day and age. Well, this last Lord's Day on the sacraments and on the supper in a way summarizes the other Lord's Days that we've already looked at and particularly points us, I think, to the sacredness of the Lord's Supper, reminding us that this is a holy meal that we celebrate when we gather together, and it does this in two different ways. And these are simple points tonight. It first of all reminds us of the essence of the supper, and then it secondly reminds us of the guests of the supper. The essence of the supper, and it shows us who the guests of the supper are. 

So, first of all, the essence of the supper. As I said, Lord's Day 30 is really a summary statement of what the Heidelberg Catechism has already taught us about the supper, but you see there in question 80, we're reminded of two things, particularly, about the supper – two things that the supper declares. First of all, it says to us that all of our sins are completely forgiven through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself accomplished on the cross, once for all. In other words, what the Heidelberg Catechism is reminding us of is that simple statement of Christ from the cross when Jesus declared it is finished. And this really is what Jesus was conveying when he instituted the supper. The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 11 thinks back on that – “I received from the Lord what I also deliver to you.” So, he's reflecting upon what Christ said in the upper room as he instituted the Lord's Supper, and he said these words. He said, "This is my body which is for you, and this cup is the new covenant in my blood." The Heidelberg Catechism, again, in previous Lord's Days has said to us, why did Jesus talk that way? Why does he use that kind of language? Why does he say the bread is his body, the cup is his blood? And the catechism has told us that is sacramental language. It's not language that is to be taken literally, as if there was some literal change to the elements, but rather the language conveys this, that just as certain as bread and wine nourish our bodies – think about that. When you ate lunch today, you did not ask the question, I wonder if this is really going to help my body or not. No, you ate because you knew it would, and just as surely as bread and wine nourish our bodies, so surely the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper – really his body and blood – nourish our bodies and remind us that we share in what Christ has accomplished. The supper is meant to ground us in the finished work of Jesus. The supper, we come to the supper, and we ought not to be saying to ourselves, "Well, I hope I'm forgiven by what Christ has done,” but rather the supper reminds us we are forgiven because Christ's work is complete. 

Friends, this is something that the Bible repeats for us over and over again. The Bible says once and for all. Christ died once and for all. Just listen to a couple of places. Hebrews 7:27, Jesus has no need like those high priests to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sin and then for those of the people, since he did this once and for all when he offered up himself. Alex read for us from Hebrews 9:25-26. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. We could go to Hebrews 10:10, Hebrews 10:12, Hebrews 10:14, and those passages would say something very similar. So, the supper says, "It's done. There's only one sacrifice. Christ has paid it all. No more sacrifice is needed. And then the other thing that the supper declares as the catechism points out is that we are grafted into Christ. His death is our death. His life is our life. And even though he is bodily in heaven, we are united with him by faith and by his Holy Spirit. 

Well, this was the point at which the catechism then goes on to compare the Lord's Supper and the Roman Catholic mass. I think you’ve found as we've been studying the Heidelberg Catechism that the Heidelberg Catechism is a deeply pastoral confession or catechism. The theme of it is comfort. It reminds us in very personal ways of what Christ has done. And then we come to question 80, and it's so bold and strong, it kind of, like, takes off the gloves, right? It's like put up your dukes. Let's fight this one out. And we might ask the question, why? Why does the catechism sort of change at this point? And here's the answer, I believe. It is to guard the sacredness of the supper and ultimately to guard the gospel. The catechism wants to stand firmly that there is only one gospel, and we have to protect it, and it's what we must stand on. Question 80 is set in a historical context. Question 80 was not part of the first version of the Heidelberg Catechism that came out in January of 1563. But two months later, already by March 1563, there was a shorter version than what we have here in the current form, but another version that had some of this same language in it within two months of the catechism coming out, and a few months later – by November of that same year – we have this current version. In other words, almost from the very, very beginning of the catechism this question as it stands was part of the Heidelberg Catechism, and the reason why there's a bit of a delay in question 80 existing as it does here is that this question was likely a response to a gathering of the Council of Trent. Met in 1562, other times as well – kind of a long council. In 1562, they gathered together for session 22. The Council of Trent dealt with the doctrine concerning the sacrifice of the mass. So, think about this. September 1562, the Council of Trent meets. Just a few months later, in January, the first version of the catechism comes out. It needs some more time to reflect upon the Council of Trent, and by the end of that year, we have question 80. 

Here's what Trent said, the Council of Trent: “In the divine sacrifice of the mass, in the transubstantiated elements, Christ is immolated (that means killed in an unbloody manner). The holy council teaches that this is truly propitiatory.” In other words, the council was saying the mass is a continuation of the sacrifice of Christ at the cross, although unbloody, and has power to take away the wrath of God. It is propitiatory. As Ursinus reflected upon that – Zacharias Ursinus, one of the original writers of the catechism – in his commentary, he says, "There are three ways that the Lord's Supper and the mass differ." He says, "The Lord's Supper testifies that we have full pardon of all sin by Christ's sacrifice on the cross, whereas the mass says there is not pardon unless Christ is daily offered. Second, the Lord's Supper testifies that Christ as to his human nature is now in heaven and not concealed under the forms of bread and wine, whereas the mass teaches that the body and blood of Christ are brought down and concealed in the elements. And then finally, the Lord's Supper teaches that Christ is to be worshiped by us in heaven at God's right hand, whereas the mass teaches that Christ is to be worshiped in the bread.” So, what Ursinus was saying is once and for all sacrifice of Christ versus a daily sacrifice; real, spiritual presence of Christ in the supper versus a literal presence, a bodily presence, of Christ in the elements; and all of this leading to worship, either worshiping Christ in glory, where he is seated at the right hand of God, or we worship Christ in the elements that we can touch and taste and feel. 

Now, I want to say this tonight in case any of you may be coming from a Roman Catholic background, or perhaps you're still part of the Roman Catholic Church. What the Heidelberg Catechism is doing is not making a statement about individual Roman Catholics. I believe there's sincere believers in the Roman Catholic Church, but it's making a statement about the doctrine of the church. It's not talking about people. It's talking about the church, what the church teaches and believes. It's important, I think, for us to ask the question tonight. Is the catechism being fair? Is it too polemical? Is it too harsh? Well, listen to something a bit more recent. Roman Catholic Catechism of 1994 says this about the mass: “The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice. The same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. This sacrifice is truly propitiatory.” So, what is said in 1994 almost sounds exactly the same as was written or stated by the Council of Trent. Now to be fair, Roman Catholics, or at least Roman Catholic theologians, would say about their theology that when the catechism says there's one single sacrifice – the Eucharist and the sacrifice of Christ are one single sacrifice – what they would say is that this means that the mass is not a re-sacrifice of Christ at all, but rather it is one sacrifice performed in different ways. And yet, people of God, what does it mean for Christ's work to be finished if it is pulled into the present? And how can we talk about the supper in any way, really, as a sacrifice for sins without challenging the gospel? And what about worship? Worship that doesn't belong to any earthly creature or any earthly elements but belongs to Christ alone. Peter Kreeft, who is a Roman Catholic theologian, says this – I think he is helpful in his reflection. He says, “If the doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist were not true, this adoration would be the most momentous idolatry, bowing to bread and worshiping wine. And if it is true, then to refuse to adore is equally monstrous.” Kreeft is helping us to realize what he's really saying is somebody has it right, and somebody has it wrong, and you don't want to be on the wrong side, because if the bread and the wine truly are the body of Christ, we ought to bow down to them. But if they are not, what an idolatrous thing it really is. You see, it does really matter what is true, doesn't it? The gospel is at stake, and true worship or idolatry is the result. Of course, what we believe is that Christ has been offered once and for all, for all ages, never to be offered again. He is not physically present in the elements. He is bodily present in heaven, where he is to be worshiped by the help of the Spirit of God. And so, the essence of the supper, it reminds us of what a sacred meal the supper is. 

And then second tonight, the guests of the supper remind us of this. So, there's two questions here left in Lord's Day 30. First question, number 81. Who should come to the Lord's Supper? That's a very practical question, isn't it? It's a good question. Who is the supper for? And then question 82, slightly different. Who is to be admitted to the supper? If question 81 is about our preparation for coming to the supper, then question 82 is about the church's responsibility to fence the table, which introduces us to the keys of the kingdom, which is next week's topic. So, we'll go there next week. And so tonight we're just thinking – think with me about this first question, 81. And this question, too, I think is really about the sacredness of the supper. Because what this question implies for us tonight is this, that the Lord's Supper is not like going to Golden Corral, right? You got this big smorgasbord in front of you, and we just say, "Hey, come and get it. Come, anybody, just join at this table, and feast at this meal.” But rather, this question reminds us that this table, the table of the Lord, is for those that the church has admitted and for those who have examined themselves. And that, of course, is what Paul was talking about in 1 Corinthians 11, isn't it? Not only reminds us of the institution of the supper, but he reminds us of how we are supposed to come to the supper, that we are to examine ourselves. And Paul talked about this with the Corinthians because there were problems at the table in their day. There was division and disunity. So, some in the Corinthian church said, "I'm a follower of Paul." And others would say, "I'm a follower of Apollos." And there was disunity among God's people and created problems at the supper, which is meant to unite us. It's communion, after all. And there was also discrimination along with the supper. It was often a love feast in those early days. And when the Corinthians gathered for those feasts, the poor were discriminated. The wealthy came to the supper with lots of food and went away stuffed, and the poor got hardly anything to eat. And each one went ahead of the other and failed to show deferential love. Paul reminds the Corinthians a result of this is disease and death. Many were weak. Some were ill. Paul says some have died, verse 30. In other words, you see the failure of a few individuals to rightly come to the table affected the entire body. That's why the leaders of the church have something to say about who comes to the table. It's why we fence the table, because this is not just a matter of me and God, you know – I just examine myself, and it's just him and I, and I decide whether I come or not. No, if we don't come rightly, it affects all of us. And so, Paul says, if we eat or drink – this is verse 29 – if we eat or drink without discerning the body, we eat and drink judgment on ourselves. And no doubt Paul is speaking primarily here about the body and blood of Christ. Yes, there are implications for how we think about the church as a body, our brothers and sisters in the Lord, when we come to the table, but discerning the body of Christ before we come, examining ourselves, thinking about the body is really about having a deep understanding of the gospel and what Christ has done for us. 

And so, who is to come? Who should come to the Lord's table, as question 81 asks? There are three people, three groups of people that the catechism points out. First of all, this is a table – the Lord's table is a table for sinners. Look at the answer. The Lord's table is for those who are displeased with themselves because of their sins. The Lord's Supper is for sinners. Isn't that good news? The Lord's Supper is not for perfect people. Of course, there are none. It is not for people who think they have spiritually arrived, but it is a table for those who know they need Christ. I remember when I was a young man and going through a class at the church I grew up in, preparing to profess my faith, and we were talking about the Lord's Supper, and there was another young man in the class, and he said, "You know, I can't come to the supper. I'm not good enough." Isn't that exactly who the supper is for? People who are not good enough. It's for sinners. It's for prodigals. And the older brother, he couldn't accept the fact that the younger brother who had squandered everything would be part of the feast – in fact, the guest of honor. The younger son didn't belong, and the father says, "No, this is exactly who the feast is for, for the son of mine who was is dead and is alive and was lost and is found. One author puts it like this, “The Lord's Supper is a hospital.” Think about that next week when you come to the Lord's Supper. The Lord's Supper is a hospital, a Bethesda, where the sick seek healing. It is there that the Lord says to the leper, "Be cleansed, and be made whole.” Wow. That's what Jesus says. And so, it's a supper for sinners. 

Second, it's a supper for saints. We hear that word, and we often think of somebody who is extra spiritual, but biblically a saint is just someone who has been set apart by God through faith in Christ. And that is who should come to the table, those who have put their hope in Jesus, typically those who have professed their faith before the people of God, have bound themselves to the family of God, to the church. In the words of the catechism, the supper is for those who are sinners, but those who nevertheless trust that their sins are pardoned and the remaining weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ. Simon Kistemaker – some of you will know him, I think part of the PCA, a teacher at Covenant College and I think RTS as well – he says, “I began to experience Christ's presence at the communion service. As the host, he invited me to be his guest at the table. As the mediator of a new covenant that God had made, he considered me a covenant partner. As the Lamb of God slain at Golgotha, he cleansed me from my sins. As my brother and friend, he showed me how to live to God's glory and express my thankfulness. And as a source of my happiness, he filled me not with grief and sadness for his death, but joy and gladness for his presence.” Meet Jesus that way when you come next week. The Lord's Supper we sometimes call the Eucharist, another word for thanksgiving. The table is for those who trust in Christ for forgiveness, for those who are thankful because they have met Jesus, and they know him. 

And so, this is not a table for seekers. I remember a pastor in my old denomination saying one time, you know, “We welcome lots of people. If you're seeking Christ, come to the table.” This is not a table, friends, for seekers, although we hope they witness what happens here and would come to Christ. This is not a table for those who may sometime believe. This is not a table for children of believers who have yet to embrace and profess Christ. This is a table for those who have professed him, who have banked all their hope on Jesus. 

And then finally, this is a table for servants – sinners, saints, and servants. Question 81 says, “for those who desire more and more to strengthen their faith and to lead a better life.” The Lord's table is a table for those who truly desire to walk more and more in the ways of God. They want holiness. They desire sanctification. They want to be done with sin and to live for Christ. Those who go on living with ongoing unrepentant sin should not come to this table. It's a table for those who desire to walk in Christ's ways. A number of years ago, Sheri and I were at a wedding. We received the invitation in the mail, went to the wedding, attended. Hope this never happens to you. Wedding was over. Went to the reception, looking – I don't remember if it was on a board, you know, there's your names, right? The table you're supposed to be sitting at or if it was cards, but you know, you find out where you're supposed to be seated – and our name wasn't there. It's kind of embarrassing. Well, we quietly left and just went home. Our name wasn't on the guest list. The Heidelberg Catechism, again, so pastoral I think, because notice what the question is not. The question is not asked, “Who shouldn't come?” The question is asked, “Who should come?” In other words, the Heidelberg Catechism here is giving us an invitation. It is saying you should come. If you're this kind of person, come. Come and meet Jesus. If this is you – sinner, saint, servant – there is a seat for you at the table. And so, the supper, what a sacred meal the Lord gives us, speaking to the finished work of Christ, comfort for weak believers, for sinners, saints, and would-be servants. And so, people of God, as we come next week, if that is you, and as our pastors often say, “Come, for everything is now ready.” Then come, and feast upon your Lord. Let's pray together. 

Our heavenly Father, we thank you for the Lord's Supper. We've been parsing it out, digging deep into what the supper is about. We thank you for the sacredness of this meal, reminding us of the finished work of Christ, that once and for all, Christ died for sinners. And so, we can know complete forgiveness through the shed blood of Christ. The supper points to that. And then, Father, it reminds us who should come, really saying to us, look at yourself. Are you a sinner in need of Christ? Do you see that? Do you trust in Jesus for your forgiveness? And do you want to live for him? Then come. So, Lord, we pray that even this week, we would examine ourselves, we'd think about these things, so that we can come next Sunday morning in faith and joy and gladness, ready to partake of the feast. In Jesus’ name we pray. Amen.