The New Testament repeatedly emphasizes the togetherness of brethren in the early church. The fellowship that they shared was based upon their common faith – “those who had believed were together” (Acts 2:44). When John wrote his first epistle, he explained that “our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ,” and that they could “have fellowship with [each other]” through the proclamation of the gospel (1 John 1:3). As we have fellowship with God, we are naturally to have fellowship with the people of God.
Shortly after the church was established on the day of Pentecost, Luke recorded that those first Christians were not just meeting together but were also eating together.
“Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved” (Acts 2:46-47).
Many churches – even among churches of Christ – host what are sometimes called “fellowship meals.” These meals are hosted by a congregation and conducted as part of the church’s work. In fact, when many people hear the word fellowship, they automatically think of food. But is a church-sponsored meal what we read about in the passage above? If not, is a local church at least authorized to facilitate its members “taking their meals together” as part of its work? There are a few points I want us to consider.
Christians Should Be Eating Together
Regardless of how various brethren might answer the question about whether or not a local church is authorized to do this as part of their work, I believe that all would recognize the importance of Christians eating together. Sharing meals helps strengthen the bonds we have with one another. It also provides us with opportunities to give and receive encouragement as we sit across the table from each other.
Not only are there positive benefits from eating with fellow Christians, but these meals are also helpful when it becomes necessary to exercise church discipline. Notice what Paul told the brethren in Corinth about how they were to deal with a brother who refused to repent: “But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one” (1 Corinthians 5:11). The hope was that by not associating with this brother – which included not sharing meals with him – that he would repent. Based on what Paul wrote in the second letter to these brethren, it appears that this withdrawal of fellowship was effective in leading him to repent; therefore, they were to “reaffirm [their] love for him” (2 Corinthians 2:8).
This course of action can still be effective today. However, we ought to consider what an unrepentant brother loses when we take this step. What will be different for him? What will he miss when we withdraw from him? Paul said we are “not even to eat with such a one.” Yet if we never shared a meal with that brother before he fell into sin, what is different about our social interaction with him after he refuses to repent?
It is important that Christians share meals together. They can be used to grow closer, encourage one another, and cause one to reconsider his actions when he is excluded because of his rebellious behavior.
The Place Where Christians Eat Together
Paul’s instructions regarding the treatment of an erring brother assumed that the brethren in Corinth were accustomed to eating together. Later in the same letter, he talked about this practice, including where it was appropriate and inappropriate. Notice what he wrote:
“But in giving you this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse. For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you. Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you” (1 Corinthians 11:17-22).
“So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will arrange when I come” (1 Corinthians 11:33-34).
In the passage above, Paul discussed not just eating together but also eating the Lord’s Supper together. He addressed three problems that existed in Corinth:
- They changed the Lord’s Supper – “Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper” (1 Corinthians 11:20).
- They were divided – Paul said that in their corruption of the Lord’s Supper, they would “shame those who have nothing” (1 Corinthians 11:22).
- They were not eating at home – Paul said they had “houses in which to eat and drink” (1 Corinthians 11:22). He also added, “If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment” (1 Corinthians 11:34).
Most brethren recognize the first two points. They acknowledge that the Corinthians had corrupted the Lord’s Supper and needed to correct how they were partaking of it. They also see that the brethren in Corinth were wrong for causing division between the “haves” and the “have-nots.”
If we only recognize the first two points, it would be easy to conclude that “fellowship meals” were an authorized work of the local church. Once the Corinthians were observing the Lord’s Supper appropriately again and they healed the divisions that existed in the congregation, then the church could resume its practice of hosting meals for the brethren to share together.
However, that was not what Paul instructed. He did not say, “Fix the problems with the Lord’s Supper and division; then your church meals can be bigger and better than ever.” He told them to “eat at home” (outside of the assembly). The lesson was that these meals did not belong as part of the work of the church.
Again, it is good for brethren to eat together (Acts 2:46). However, these meals are not part of the function of the local church.
What About “Love Feasts”?
The book of Jude talks about “love feasts,” and some brethren have latched onto that phrase, using it to argue that these are meals shared by the church as part of the authorized work of the church. Is that a reasonable interpretation of that passage?
“Woe to them! For they have gone the way of Cain, and for pay they have rushed headlong into the error of Balaam, and perished in the rebellion of Korah. These are the men who are hidden reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you without fear, caring for themselves; clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up their own shame like foam; wandering stars, for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever” (Jude 11-13).
This is the only time the term “love feasts” is used in the New Testament, so there is some question about its meaning. Jude did not describe them, so we need to rely on extra-Biblical sources to try to determine what these “love feasts” were. Such sources can be helpful, but not when we ignore what else is revealed in the New Testament.
Many seem to think that Jude was referring to a meal shared among members of the church in connection with the Lord’s Supper. Those who believe this often cite 1 Corinthians 11:20-21 in support: “Therefore when you come together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk.” From this, they argue that there were two “meals” – (1) the Lord’s Supper to remember the death of Christ and (2) a feast shared by the brethren for them to enjoy together.
We cannot definitively say that this is what Jude was referring to. It is an assumption based upon extra-Biblical resources. However, even IF Jude was referring to a common meal (not the Lord’s Supper), additional assumptions must be made in order to conclude that (1) he was referring to an authorized practice and (2) that the meal shared by brethren was part of the work of the church.
Rather than pulling information from extra-Biblical sources and jumping to conclusions (making unnecessary inferences) in order to argue that the “love feasts” Jude referred to were “fellowship meals” hosted by the church, we should instead harmonize this text with related passages. Remember what Paul told the Corinthians – the church comes together for the Lord’s Supper, but other meals are to be eaten “at home” (1 Corinthians 11:34) or outside of the assembly.
When brethren use this passage to refer to a meal shared by brethren as part of the work of the church – even though there is no way to definitively prove that this was what Jude was talking about – they make an argument that goes against Paul’s instructions to the church in Corinth. Not only that, but they also miss the point of the passage. Jude was warning about false teachers (Jude 4, 8, 10-16). These brethren were tolerating them, welcoming them in to their “love feasts,” while they destroyed the church. Remember what John said on this point: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds” (2 John 10-11). John warned that Christians were not to invite false teachers into their homes because welcoming them in this way would signify fellowship with them. The Christians to whom Jude wrote needed the same warning.
Conclusion
Brethren who disagree on this question (whether “fellowship meals” are part of a local church’s work) still agree that Christians should be spending time together and enjoying meals together. We know from the New Testament that the Christians in the early church shared these meals in one another’s homes (Acts 2:46). It is good and beneficial for all of us to do this with our brethren today.
The Lord designed His church to be “the pillar and support of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15), not the coordinator of social events. Let us continue to spend time with our brethren beyond the assembly in order to grow closer, gain encouragement, and hold one another accountable. Then, as we come together as a local church, let us be focused on doing the work the Lord has given the local church to do.
———
[This article appeared in the July/October 2024 issue of The Quarterly.]
