The Lord's Supper and Apologetic Approach to BTh

I was listening to a sermon on the Lord's Supper this Sunday. I won't go discuss that here, but sitting there I built up the topic to another issue.

Theology overall is always a child-of-its-time -– carrying the historical legacy, of course. There is a huge reality being witnessed in the living faith of a believing individual as well in the community of them; however, the way it is revealed, and especially the form it is communicated onward takes shape in respect to people involved.

Perhaps the Lord's Supper can illustrate the thought. In the middle ages where the world of the people was filled with mysticism and magical elements, the now-known-as-Catholic explanation of the Lord's Supper with the doctrine of the trans-substantiation -– wine and bread transforming into actual blood and flesh, maintained credible and served well to the purpose. Reformation brought a shade of doubt to the practice: not just the authority issues of the people serving it, but also on how come the blood taste so much like the wine we poured to the cup. They formulated a thought that instead of actual transformation of the elements, the true blood and flesh were present in, on, and under them. (I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the issues, but bear with me -– and correct me if I'’m totally over the board)

As the enlightenment reached down to the crowds, theology too had to find a new emphasis to maintain credibility. Experimentalism that stressed the feel of faith showed up as a respond to the modern questions. E.g. the emphasis on conversion with elements of sense of guilt-repentance-sense of relief followed by an observable newness of life. (one can read the history of the great revivals to see how the theology touched the crowds)

Rational materialism became the pop worldview, and the confessing Christian struggled to fit in the faith issues. (This is what end up with the religious and historical facts' schizophrenic divorce.) One goal was to strip off to minimum all superficial elements of faith (how bizarre it might be) and perhaps within these cycles the Lord's Supper became a mere memorial miniature meal, as we now have it in Pentecostal churches.

As such I believe it has maintained the credibility and served well the purpose, but it is child-of-its-time because it is shaped in mold of the day. I think it's already taking a new forms and emphases that will only be strengthened in decades to come. Perhaps a mere intellectual remembrance won't be enough.