Knighton Family Loses Home In A Fire
Some of you probably know Garry Knighton, pulpit minister for the Church of Christ – North in Shreveport. Garry and his wife, Anita lost their house in a fire recently. Anita was home at the time. When she discovered the blaze, she jumped out a second-story window. She broke her ankle and a bone in her leg. She’s in a cast all the way up to her hip. Anita was dismissed from the hospital this week, but faces a long recovery. They are living with their son and his wife. They’ve lost all their clothes and household goods and the house is completely gone. A fund has been established for those who would like to contribute to their need.
If you care to contribute, you can send your donation to the following address and mark it “Knighton Fund”
CHURCH OF CHRIST / NORTH
3401 North Market St.
Shreveport, Louisiana 71107
THE LORD'S SUPPER: HOW OFTEN?
Recently, I came across an interesting article titled, "The Lord’s Supper: How Often?" It was written by D. G. Hart and John R. Meuther. I never heard of either one of them, but they identify themselves as members of a faith community different from my own. In the article they discuss the pros and cons of the frequent observance of the Lord’s Supper, as opposed to the occasional. They don’t involve themselves in legal arguments either way, although they do suggest that weekly communion was the practice of the early church. We are in a tradition that believes in frequency. Many of us, perhaps most of us, would probably agree that weekly participation at the table was the normal practice of the first century church.
Personally, I believe we’re on safe ground when we observe weekly communion, but I would like to look beyond trying to satisfy a legal requirement. As a matter of fact if we view it merely as the fulfillment of a Bible command, we’ll not likely experience the vibrant celebration that Jesus intended, when he said, "I’ll drink it a anew with you in my Father’s kingdom."
I’ve often wondered why some churches observe the supper monthly; others observe it quarterly, and some even observe it annually. According to Hart and Meuther, most church practices regarding the Lord’s Supper were developed in the 18th century Europe. Some church members felt hostility to a clergy that sought to impose it on the people. Poverty was another reason. Bread was scarce in the 18th century. The churches didn’t have enough qualified ministers to serve the Lord’s Supper and it was believed that only an ordained minister could serve the communion. Apparently they had long services. The communion service was also long, and they didn’t shorten they were observing communion, so it taxed the strength of the feebler members.
Hart and Meuther belong to a faith community in which the Lord’s Supper is observed quarterly, but they advocate greater frequency. They even quote John Calvin who called infrequent communion "a most evident contrivance of the devil." I wouldn’t go that far. I’d like to look at it positively. We have the potential to be greatly blessed in our weekly celebration. I was especially glad we’re celebrated the Lord’s Supper today. If we operated on some infrequent timetable, the Lord’s Supper might not have shown up on the calendar on this date. But today, three newly baptized young people, shared communion with us for the very first time. What a blessing it was to include them in our fellowship, to encourage them, encourage each other, and be mutually drawn to the crucified Savior.
RANDOM THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FOURTH
Last night I went to sleep listening to the sound of fireworks. I said to Ann, "If we were in the middle of a war right now, we wouldn’t know it. We’d just think the gunshots were firecrackers." Being a person who often faces problems by denying their existence, I can imagine the following conversation.
Ann says, "Honey, I really don’t want to upset you, but I think you ought to know there’s a cannon in the street and the barrel is pointed toward our house."
I say, "Go back to sleep. You’re an alarmist. It’s nothing but a bunch of kids trying to shoot off the ultimate Roman candle."
Fourth of July celebrations have changed. I can remember when we just had to go on a picnic on the fourth of July. Since I now live in the Louisiana heat and humidity, I would rather stay inside under the air conditioning. There was a time when oratory was the order of the day. If Daniel Webster were alive today, I don’t think he’d draw much of a crowd to hear him deliver a jim-dandy speech on the merits of the constitution.
That being said, I love being an American. I’m glad we have this nation. I’m glad some guys put their lives on the line at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, even though I recognize they were rebelling against the "powers that be." (Romans 13:1 - KJV). So here are some of my random thoughts about being an American.
I like Lee Greenwood’s sentiments, "I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free."
But being an American, even a patriotic American, doesn’t make me a Christian.
God loves people in other countries as much as he loves us.
Our nation is not a theocracy, but I hope we never take the phrase "under God" out of the pledge of allegiance.
It’s one thing to love the country enough to want to correct some of it’s shortcomings; it’s quite another to hate the country.
I’m glad I don’t have to pass through military checkpoints to get from my house to work. I’m glad the police haven’t closed the doors to the church building.
I bleed red, white and blue, and I hope you do too.
Realism in Films
I saw Cars this week. The movie raises the question, "How realistic do we expect movies to be?" In the first place it’s animated, which gives a filmmaker a lot more literary license than those producers who show real pictures. In this movie all the animated cars have personality, and they talk.
That within itself doesn’t strain credibility. I’ve ridden in cars that can talk. They say things like “the door is ajar,” “your key is in the ignition,” and helpful stuff like that. For some reason I don’t see too many talking cars these days. I think it’s because they all sounded like high school principals when they talked. I also think some cars have personality. Otherwise how do you explain the fact that you feel like you’ve just dropped an orphan on somebody’s doorstep when you trade in your old car? When I was a kid, people used to name their cars. I remember an uncle who named is car, “Blue John.” I wonder why we don’t do that any more.
However, I thought it did strain credibility when a romance developed between two cars. When I think about it, I guess I’m a sucker for such unrealistic fantasy. Near the end, the hero pushes “The King” (voiceover done by Richard Petty. Who else?). It’s The King’s last race. He gets wrecked by an unscrupulous competitor, so rather than win the race himself, the hero pushes The King over the finish line. Guess what? I had a lump in my throat. If you haven’t seen it, I’m sorry I ruined the ending for you. But it was that part of the story that convinced me that the movie was unrealistic. Racecar drivers may have drafting partners, but can you imagine Tony Stewart pushing Jeff Gordon across the finish line in front of him? Clearly the story lacks realism.
