Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 7

The early church carried the Eucharist to the absent (the sick or imprisoned); what view of the church, of communion, and of responsibility to suffering members is implied here, and how does it critique a modern tendency to treat Sunday worship as optional or individual?

Another way to ask: If the church brought the Eucharist to people who were sick or in prison, what does that show about caring for suffering members—and how does it challenge the idea that Sunday worship is optional or just personal?

Direct Answer Based on Justin Martyr’s description, the church viewed communion as a shared life of the whole body, not merely an individual experience, and they felt responsible to include suffering or confined members—critiquing a casual, optional approach to gathering.

Support from Transcript:

Justin Martyr: deacons distribute to those present, and “they carry away a portion to those who are absent.”
Bercot explains “absent” could mean “sick or in prison or something like that.”
The act is organized: “those whom we call deacons” deliver it, showing a structured congregational responsibility.
Communion is central: Bercot lists it as a weekly practice—“This is what they did every Sunday.”
Participation is treated seriously (not casual): only baptized believers living rightly may partake, which gives weight to ensuring the absent also share reverently.

Discussion Follow-ups Who are the “absent” in your church (ill, homebound, imprisoned, marginalized), and what would it look like to include them intentionally? What does it imply about membership and mutual care?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 7 of 10