What we very often sorely lack in modern America, and which earlier generations had much more of, is precisely fellowship and communion. It might be worth considering whether in our cultural setting, a long sermon ought to partially give way to a sanctifying communal practice like the Lord’s Supper, which perhaps should be more fellowship-oriented and meal-like, as it apparently was in the early church.

From my anecdotal experience, I get the impression that more Protestant churches are moving toward weekly communion. This is a good trend. However, some don’t think so, and it will therefore be helpful to address common objections to weekly communion.  To make the basic point up front: Every argument that I’ve ever heard against weekly communion is vapid at best.

Granted, weekly communion is not commanded in Scripture, but consider the few biblical hints that we have regarding early church practice. In Acts 2:42-46, it seems implied that communion was first practiced daily by the early believers. “Breaking bread” in v. 42 and 46 could refer simply to eating regular meals together, but the phrase seems likely to refer to communion in light of Acts 20:7, which speaks of the believers being gathered “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered to break bread.” Here it does not exactly say they broke bread on every first day of the week, only that they did on this particular occasion. In 1 Corinthians 11:17-20, though, Paul seems to speak in a way that assumes the Lord’s Supper was something done (or attempted anyway) every time the church in Corinth came together (“When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat”). But it is not quite explicit in this passage either. What we have here are some suggestions that the Lord’s Supper was probably weekly in the early church, perhaps daily at first. At most this is a pattern, not exactly a command.

But why would we not celebrate the Lord’s Supper weekly and take advantage of its blessings? There seems to me no good reason. All are agreed that the Lord’s Supper is an institution of Christ, given for the church’s nourishment and edification. All would also agree that it is simple to carry out, a tool of sanctification, and a clear and distinguishing mark of an explicitly Christian gathering. So it seems plain to me that just like reading and teaching the Word, and joining together in prayer and songs of praise, the Lord’s Supper ought to be an automatic and standard component of every formal, weekly gathering of God’s people. To me this position is the obvious default, with less frequent communion being the position that needs special defense. The non-weekly position should bear the burden of proof.

So I do not mean to say that the practice of non-weekly communion is sinful or necessarily implies unfaithfulness. But since weekly communion often brings push-back, I want to look at the most common arguments urged against it, show why they are groundless, and encourage the move that more and more Protestant and Reformed churches are (I believe wisely) making.

(1) Weekly Communion Will Lead to It Becoming a Mindless Routine

This is probably the most common argument offered against weekly observance of the Lord’s Supper. A few things can be said about this objection. First, it is never given as an argument against weekly preaching, or weekly prayer, or song. In fact, in most conservative churches those things happen multiple times per week, often twice on Sunday, and on Wednesday night. Do they become routine and mindless as a result? Sometimes. But is that a reason to do them less often? I think we all recognize that a heavy responsibility falls on the worshiper himself when it comes to these things. Frequency is not the culprit here. Second, though, I think this objection is simply wrong. I have been in multiple churches that celebrate the Supper weekly, multiple churches that celebrate it monthly, and in at least one that practiced it only quarterly. I noticed no difference in the seriousness or reverence with which it was handled in any of these. If anything, far from becoming routine, the reverse is true—when the Supper is not seen as an integral part of every formal gathering, it can come to be seen as expendable and not very important.

Read More