Lords supper

Our fellowship warns unbelievers of partaking, but some do not. The responsibility falls on the leadership that decides which position to take. I think I probably stand with making it clear that unworthy participation is dangerous, but I also think that a seeker that does not fully understand will suffer no harm if he thinks he is doing what he is supposed to.

Saw a great sign a few weeks ago:

"Too cold to change sign...message inside."


God bless.

 

It seems strange that they would have communion on Easter Sunday morning. It would be most appropriate during Maundy Thursday services - if they observe Holy Week.

I suspect you are not actually that concerned about it being on Easter Sunday, but rather that all are invited to come to the Lord's table. I take it that you might be a closed communion or close communion kind of person.

MY OPINION:
If it is the Lord's table, then it is not our place to exclude groups of people who might also be the Lord's or to act as gatekeepers to keep people from participating in the encounter with Christ. That being said, we need to teach about the Lord's table, why we are invited to it, what happens when we participate in this connection through time and space with the Risen Christ and the entire communion of the saints - past, present and future - and the dangers of participating when we do not recognize the body of Christ (we are involved in disputes, sinning against each other, holding grudges, etc.).

The Lord's table is about healing and reorienting ourselves toward God (repentance). It is not just a symbol or empty ritual, but a powerful encounter and testimony of Christ. We should not treat it trivially or use it as a means of exclusion.

 

My church holds Communion twice per year. Both times we have some sort of teaching or reading that informs the congregation to examine themselves prior to partaking. We welcome anyone of the same faith and order as us. We've never had the problem of a Catholic or another denomination showing up, so it's never been an issue.

Smaller churches might not be capable of having so many service, so they condense. It doesn't really matter when they do the service, as Paul said "as oft as ye do it."

Consider Paul's words to the church at Corinth...

To me, that condones a "closed communion" among believers, at least in a self-enforced sense. We ought to take of Communion only if worthy of it upon self-examination. If unworthy, we ought to be big enough to recognize our lack and withdraw from Communion until we repent and seek after the Lord.

 

A "self-enforced" communion is not the same thing as closed communion. I think everyone agrees that communion should be "self-enforced." That's what I advocated in my post. If you really believe in "self-enforced" communion, then I don't know why you disagreed with my post.

 

We are having Lord's Supper this Maundy Thursday, as we have done for a number of years since my coming to pastor this church. All are invited, all are read the examination passages, all must decide for themselves. We don't have Lord Supper police.

 

I did not mean to imply disagreement, BB. Apologies.

I had the impression from you that you were condoning an open Communion for everyone. It is likely I merely misread your statement. Again, apologies.

 

IFB church I used to attend is coming up on their 4th anniversary. I don't think they've ever had communion. They hadn't in the 3 years I went there.

 

Not a problem. I was just confused by your response. Your misreading of my position probably comes from the very open attitude I have about communion. Christ invites all, but all must not partake if they want no part of discipleship to Christ or are in a position where they are not in full humble and submissive fellowship with others in the body of Christ.

Thank you for your kind response.

 

I would go more for this, but really, who goes to church and takes the Lord's Supper just for spite?

 

The standard of communion is for one to examine themselves. The concept IMO of closed communion is not supported by Scripture. The standard of closed communion is the man made concept of a church roll. On most church rolls there is dead weight from members who have either not been in a long time, do not support the church through giving, or do not help with the ministries of the church possibly all three. So, closed communion makes these deadbeats eligible to take communion. Most of the time this type of person does not show one sign of the fruits of the Spirit or becoming more like Jesus. The purpose of the communion is to "do this in remembrance of Me." Most of the time, they cannot remember where they put the remote to the TV they watch during services.

So imagine this scenario. We are having communion this Sunday. In stops a truck driver who sees the church and wants a place to worship. About the same time in walks a church member who has not been in three years, nor has anyone heard anything from him. You think I am going to serve the second guy and not the first. I think not.

Open communion is not a free for all. It is the table of the Lord Jesus Christ, and those who take communion must be believers, and when I say that, I mea the Jesus Christ of the Bible. That is sad to say, but the RCC, LDS, JWs, CoC and charismatics (SDA also) preach a different Gospel and view Christ differently than the Savior of the Bible.