Communion

Where is the Scripture in this discussion?

There is some biblical material to consider.

1. The normal biblical pattern was baptism, church membership, and continuing in the apostle's doctrine, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayers (Acts 2:42). It follows that the proper subjects for communion are saved, baptized believers.

2. Paul spoke to the Corinthians about the Lord's Table "when ye come together" (1 Cor. 11:18, 20, 33). It seems quite clear that this observance is to be a local church ordinance and is to be observed when the church assembles together as a body. When I pastored I did not take communion to my members in their homes or in the hospital. I would not participate in the ceremony at a non-local church meeting of believers, and certainly not in an ecumenical, or lititurgical church setting of any sort. There is no sacramental value to the ordinance.

3. I am not aware of any NT restriction of the Table to just members of the local church involved. In fact Paul, writing to Corinth from somewhere else, speaks of the "cup which we bless" and "the bread which we break" (1 Cor. 10:16).

4. He speaks of the unity of all believers in Christ (1 Cor. 10:17).

Can you imagine the church at Corinth practicing closed communion and denying fellowship at the Lord's Table to Paul, who was a member of the church at Antioch? That does not compute to me.

I really believe the most biblically justified practice is "close" communion, where born again, immersed believers who are members of a church of like faith and order are welcome at the observance.

5. Concerning the frequency of the observance, it looks like the Jerusalem church observed the ordinance daily, at least for awhile (Acts 2:46). The believers in Troas gathered on the first day of the week for that purpose (Acts 20:7). Paul seems to put no restriction or mandate on the frequency of observance, saying simply "for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death, till he come" (1 Cor. 11:26).

It is true that Christ used the Passover to institute the Supper, and that Scripture draws the parallels between Passover and Communion (1 Cor. 5:7). But the primary reason for the Passover being the occasion is that Christ was bringing New Covenant truth (Jer. 31) forward to the church age. I don't think the once yearly observance of the Passover has any impact on how frequently we should observe the Lord's Supper.

My own preference in this regard is monthly. I think that doing it quarterly or yearly (as some Baptist churches do) lets the significance of it fade from our consciousness. And there are some of our sister Baptist churches, several of which are in the British Isles or Europe, that still break bread on a weekly basis. That is the right of every autonomous New Testament church to determine for itself.

 

So far, so good.

Jesus limited the participation at the table at the first Lord's Supper.

We don't have any scriptural evidence that he participated. And the way he blistered the Corinthians for the way they abused the ordinance, why would he want to?

What if one of those you described shows up at your church, having just been disfellowshipped for flagrant sin? And you know it. Or, what if it is one of your own members whom you disfellowshipped just last week? Is the congregation, charged with guarding the integrity of the ordinance, not supposed to exercise any discretion whatsoever regarding to partakes, or with whom it will fellowship?

 

That is a very good question. I would have thought that would have been 100% regardless of which position one took.

This question goes way beyond the weak theological ideas for closed communion. The only result of closed communion I have seen is something exactly the opposite of the fruits of the Spirit. I want nothing to do with it.

 

We can argue from silence all day long without getting anywhere.

Paul told the Corinth church to pass judgment on the member who was messing around with his father's wife, to exclude him, and not even to eat with him. (I Cor 5}

Later, in chapter 11, Paul admonished the church at Corinth to guard the ordinances (v.2).

I really don't believe any of you would be for serving a Church of Christ friend, a Mormon pal, an acquaintance who denies the Trinity or the deity of Christ.

From the poll, it's apparent that some of you would place no limitations whatsoever on the Lord's Table. I find that regrettable, of course, that the Lord's Supper is held in such low esteem.

 

This is an issue that will never be resolved. The open communion person's comment on low esteem and standard for the Lord's Supper is that the low esteem and standard comes from local church rolls where 40% show up on a good Sunday morning, and ignoring the standard of self-examination.

 

What about the autonomy of the local church? If a church chooses to observe closed communion, that is their right. It is certainly not forbidden in Scripture. As far as making a mockery, doesn't open communion do that by allowing those who are living in sin to "maketheir own decision?"

 

Now we get into how a NT church should function. Paul told the Corinthians to discipline the immoral man, and told them not to eat with others who were disorderly. Today our churches have become so numbers oriented that we will ignore the disciplinary action of a sister church just to get the "warm bodies" in the pew. We do so to our own peril. Clearly those whose lives are disorderly and those who are under discipline are to be excluded from the Lord's Table.

 

I would only take communion in a church that I was a member of.

 

Just maybe the Plymouth Brethren got it right.....They dismiss the congregation and then sit at a closed table for communion.

There are variations of this amongst PB's......so don't stick me on this one.

Cheers,

Jim

 

The autonomy of the local church is not this issue. Any church may decide open or closed, and the congregation votes. The Biblical standard is examine yourself, not a man made barrier of a local church roll. If your church has a 40% attendance, then by your own standard, you are making a mockery by allowing people to partake of the Lords Supper who are disobeying the Scripture by not attending or supporting the local church. The fact they do not come implies there is some sin involved. You know this about your local members, and still allow it. Unless your local church roll is policed and church discipline is exercised, closed communion is the height of hypocrisy. Even with a clean roll, that is not the standard. The standard is examine yourself.