In my opinion Thomas O’Loughlin provides the scholarly support I have sought for many years re: what Communion/the Eucharist is supposed to be in terms of its form, practice, procedures, setting, meaning, and purpose.
This also impacts how believers are to meet when they have “church.”
I am now even more persuaded that “The Normal Christian Church Meeting” should be a gathering for a shared meal which incorporates the blessing to the Father over the shared loaf and the shared cup in remembrance of Jesus (a remembrance to the Father of the covenant Jesus made by his death—see Eucharist by Louis Bouyer of the Oratory, pp. 84–85; photo below), and that includes time for worship and sharing/reading from the Scriptures, praying, prophesying, etc., with the participation/activity being mostly done by all the assembled members and not just a “pastor” or “leader.”
Conversely, every meal can be the occasion for all at the table to bless the Father over a shared loaf and a shared cup in remembrance of and fidelity to Jesus. I.e., every meal can be a Eucharist.
I would disagree with Bouyer and O'Loughlin (both Catholic priests) re: the sacramental and sacrificial nature of the bread and the wine and any need for a sacerdotal priesthood. I don’t believe the bread and the wine become or need to become anything other than what they are—i.e., a single shared loaf of bread and a single shared cup of wine by which the partakers at the table show their unity with each other as members of the one body of Christ, to whom they all pledge fidelity as they “remind” God of God’s fidelity to them re: the salvific purpose and results and benefits of the New Covenant made or sealed by Jesus’ blood/death.
The Eucharist: Origins and Contemporary Understandings, by Thomas O’Loughlin