What does "communion of the saints" mean in the ancient creeds?

57 N*. The Apostles' Creed, as the church has it now, was composed at different times, and no two churches hardly had just the same. "The Communion of Saints," for example, was added quite late; "the holy church" earlier; the word "Catholic" again later still. The descent into hell was not there at all in the Roman creed called the Apostles'. And it was added very late indeed; it appears in the creed of Aquileia, in the fourth century. As to the apostles making a creed, as Dr. Milner alleges, I am surprised he should quote such a fable; for such it is now, I suppose, universally owned to be. All the creeds are called apostolic, meaning they contain apostolic doctrine. What is now called the Apostles' Creed was the creed of the Roman church with one or two articles added.

And this fact is as strong against their pretence of infallibility as catholicity; for we have the church four or five hundred years after Christ, expressly decreeing that no article shall be added; and we have those who call themselves the church, fifteen or sixteen hundred years after Christ, adding twelve articles as matters of faith, and rejecting all who deny them. Was the church in the first ages, or the church of Rome at the Reformation in the right? or how can that be infallible which contradicts itself? But the true catholic church, brethren, that seed of God, which shall indeed never fail, the body of Christ, the real communion of saints, the one holy catholic and apostolic church, subsists in the company of true believers, in every age united to the great Head, Christ Jesus, by His Spirit dwelling in them, and incorporating them into His mystical body. And while the power of the Lord lasts, even to the end of the world, while the influences of the divine Spirit shew to souls His glory in hope, so long will there be a church upon earth. But to say that this is any particular communion or body of professing Christians (and that too without inquiring whether they hold the faith once delivered to the saints) is nothing else but the spirit of Antichrist.

And the Spirit of God records here that "they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." These were the four things that were characteristic of these people. No longer is it the teaching of Moses; it is now the apostles' teaching. It is no longer the natural tribal fellowship which arose because the Jews were all the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, but there was a new fellowship entirely, a fellowship which was the consequence of their being indwelt by God the Holy Spirit, Who had united these disciples of the Lord, and made them one with the Christ of God. And this fellowship expressed itself in their having one heart and one soul, having all things common, being together for one purpose. There was one fellowship, the communion of saints, which is an abiding feature of the church.

Jesus prays also for those who were to believe through their means; but the request is not the same as that which He made for the disciples, although it depends upon it. For them He asked a unity analogous to that which existed between the Father and the Son in the work of redemption; the same thoughts, the same counsels, the same truth. The Son accomplished the Father's thoughts in the unity of the same nature. They were, by the absorbing power of the Holy Ghost, to act in the work of testimony, as being absolutely and entirely one. No divergence existed between the thoughts, the counsels, the will of the Father, and the testimony and obedience of the Son; and, by grace, the disciples became the depositary, one and all together, of the testimony of the revelation of the Father in the Son. Also, the Father's word having been confided to them, their function was to communicate it to others. They were communicators of these truths; the others, for whom the Saviour now prays, received this testimony, and thus entered into communion with those who were in the unity of this grace. (Compare 1 John 1:1-4.) They enjoyed all that of which the disciples were the depositaries. The Lord prays that they may be one with them, the Father and the Son. It is always the Father revealed in the Son that is the basis of their union. Now this revelation gave them a heavenly object, one only and the same object that absorbed the heart's affections, and thus destroyed the influence of the earthly objects that would have tended to divide them, such as their social or national position, and even what was still more difficult, their religious position. They were Christians, sons of the Father, associated with Christ; their fatherland was heaven. Pilgrims and strangers down here, they declared plainly that they sought their native country. Now, in this, they were necessarily one; one in their origin, one in their object, and that with Christ Himself, the Son of the Father. He that sanctified and they who were sanctified were all of one. (See Heb. 2:11.) They formed part of the company of those to whom the Saviour had said: "I ascend unto my Father and your Father, unto my God and your God." In this spiritual position, they were one in the Father and in the Son, who were one in themselves, and all together lived in this communion. Thus in 1 John 1, we read: "that ye may have fellowship with us: and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ," and then we have fellowship "one with another."

Nor was this by any means all; but the power of the Spirit baptized all the believers into one body, the Church. The unity here, however, though produced of course by the same Spirit in those who compose that body, is not that which fell to the Apostle Paul to set out. Of a spiritual nature it nevertheless displays itself in that which the world can see and appreciate in measure. It is not precisely "one as we," that is, as the Father and the Son, which verse 11 had predicated of the disciples. As the Father and the Son had but one mind and affection, purpose and way, so was this oneness desired for the Apostles in their work and life; and wondrously was it realised in them, as we have already noticed. Here the saints at large, those who believe through their word, are in view; and the thing sought is that they should "all be one," "even as Thou, Father, in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us" — not "as we," but "in us," in the Father and the Son. It is communion in virtue of the Father made known in the Son, and of the Son the object of the Father's love and delight, into which we are brought by the Holy Ghost. With the Father we share the Son; with the Son we share the Father. Into this blessedness the saints were now for the first time to be introduced, and in such sort that they should all be one, even as the Father in the Son, and the Son in the Father, so they also one in the Father and the Son.

And further, the communion of saints expressed at the Lord's table is also characterized as being in the membership of "one body," as formed and energized by "one Spirit." In breaking the same bread, and eating of the same loaf, we not only have communion together in feeding by faith upon His body given for us, but we also, in partaking of the same loaf, express our oneness in the (mystical) body. Hence we read, not only "the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" but it is added, "For we being many are one bread, and one body; for we are all partakers of that one (bread) loaf." Breaking and eating of the same loaf is the expression of our oneness in the mystical body of Christ. And the membership of one body on earth in union with the Head in heaven, formed by the Holy Ghost come down, being an essential doctrine of Christianity, how could it have been possible for the Lord's table to have been instituted on earth on any other ground? To the thoughtful believer it commends itself at once. It may, however, make manifest to some, how little the conscience has been up to the truth of the Lord's table, both as to its associations and what it expresses. Scripture does not speak of "members of a church," or of "the minister of a church," or of "administering the Lord's Supper;" nor could such expressions have been current among Christians, if the membership of Christ's body, the varied gifts of the Head, the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and the communion character of the Lord's table had been truly recognized.

Scripture then does teach us about the Lord's table; not the Lord's tables; for being instituted for the remembrance of Himself, on the ground of the blood once shed, for the communion of saints, and for the expression of the membership of one body, however many companies there may be, and however geographically separated, still, to faith, each and all thus gathered are consciously sitting at the Lord's table, owning too the same indwelling Spirit who has united all to Christ the Head, and to each other in Him. Saints cannot go far wrong collectively when really holding the Head.

In looking carefully over the Scriptures we have just read, we find "the Lord's table" spoken of in the tenth chapter (the only place in Scripture where it occurs), and the disorderly conduct of the Corinthians brought out the remarks of the apostle on the Lord's Supper in the eleventh chapter. The former gives us more the fellowship element, while the latter sets forth more of the individual exercise of soul, and condition suited to such an occasion. The reason, no doubt, why this portion of the eleventh chapter is more frequently read at such times than the verses of the tenth chapter, is because so few seem intelligently and heartily to enter into the fellowship character of it. But it is our superlative happiness, to be consciously enjoying the communion of saints at the Lord's table, while remembering Him, and showing His death till He come. Though both portions of Scripture refer to the same meeting of the saints, we cannot fail to observe some striking differences between them. The order of the chapters too must not be unnoticed, because the association or fellowship character of the Lord's table, in separation from the tables of demons, must be entered into before the soul can be rightly exercised according to the eleventh chapter. Then in the tenth chapter the cup is mentioned first. We have "the cup of blessing which we bless" before "the bread which we break." Now, whatever other reasons there may be for this change, it is clear, if Christian fellowship is here treated of, that its only basis can be found in that which brings us on a common level before God in peace and blessing. This has been accomplished by the blood of Christ. Here we all find a true ground of communion, both spiritual and eternal. We bless together as with one soul. We drink of the same cup. "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?" Apart from that precious blood there could be no communion; but by it a solid and everlasting basis has been laid, and we express the true ground of communion in blessing together and drinking together the same cup. Though when thus assembled we may all have had different histories and experiences, yet now, in virtue of the all-cleansing power of the blood shed for many, we are on one common ground of peace and thanksgiving. It is also emphatically a time of praise; for it is "the cup of blessing which we bless."

Let it be at once observed that the Peace Offering was not an offering to make peace, but an offering that celebrated and rejoiced in peace already made. As another has said, "It is the offering, which typifies to us the communion of saints, according to the efficacy of the sacrifice with God, with the priest who has offered it in our behalf, with one another, and with the whole body of saints as priests to God." The blood of the sacrifice had indeed to be sprinkled round about the Altar. It is on the ground of shed blood alone that the communion of saints as to the death of Christ is based. The believer appropriates the Sin Offering first, and then being set free in conscience, he can joyfully enter into common thoughts with God about the wondrous sacrifice of His blessed Son, as typified in the Peace Offering.

What is fellowship? In our day, the word is often used to denote 'togetherness', but the New Testament does not limit it in this way. It refers to what two or more people have in common. We can have fellowship with the apostles because they reported to us what they heard and saw concerning the Son of God. We, his readers, cannot have a 'get-together' with the apostle John - but we can be absolutely certain that we have in common with him an appreciation of Christ based on all that he had seen and heard. In the same way we can enjoy 'the teaching and fellowship of the apostles' (Acts 2:42) even though they are no longer here.

In this same chapter, from which we have just quoted, we have the statement that Christ and His work are the basis of our fellowship one with another: "If we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin." This is the tie that, by the Holy Spirit, unites the saints in communion one with another. They have a common life, which gives them common desires and tastes for Christ. Here is a fellowship of which the world knows nothing.