I've been pondering an idea for the past few days. I didn't learn it from flesh and blood. It just sorta popped into my thinking system....and it doesn't seem to leave me. While I open myself to possible criticism, I risk such if it might awaken us to something of kingdom value.
Our heritage comes down pretty hard on brands of faiths which have bypassed what we believe to be essential regarding the essence of baptism; i.e. that it is biblically accurate only by immersion. Other practices find our clear opposition. We've taken our stance and we have refused to surrender. After all, the scriptures and original language seem to be in sync that baptism is a burial.
Regarding the Lord's Supper, though, we have not such a stance. While it seems clear such an event is always involving a meal, our tradition has felt it permissible to reduce it to emblematic pinching of a cracker and sipping of a thimble full of juice. Such a practice is never promoted in scripture by command, example, or necessary inference.
Have we accepted a principle to the Lord's Supper which we condemn in denominational baptism: reduction and sybollism for convenience sake? Are we guilty of practicing a form among ourselves which we have notoriously judged as forbidden in others? I think we have. I think we, as Romans 5:1-2 points out, are found guilty of the same thing we criticize in others.
If this is true, what does it mean? One thing is clear. We again find reason to be accepting and tolerant of others while we do our own laundry. It's not that we don't do anything right. We do. It's that all the others don't do everything wrong and sometimes they may get their direction from the same place we get ours: traditions passed down from generation to generation while we call it "of God".