Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
why would that be an issue? The apostle Paul talks about judgment coming on those that aren't taking it in a discerning way...but if you're an unbeliever you're going there anyway.
We agree on this Theo.
I made that same point in an earlier post. If you are an unbeliever, you're lost anyway. Taking the Lord's Supper can't make things any worse. If anything, just being in a congregation of believers and communing with them could possibly impact the unbeliever positively. Whereas not allowing him/her to participate, sends a very negative message. "We're better than you are."
I think it is very important that prior to the Lord's Supper, it be thoroughly explained: the purpose we take it, and the manner we take it in. Scriptures should be read to show where the authority for our taking the Lord's Supper comes from. Prayers should be offerered that each person examine their hearts to be sure they have the right attitude before partaking.
Taking the Lord's Supper should be the central part of any worship service, no matter what denomination you belong to. IMO, our main reason for coming together for worship, besides considering one another in order to stir up love and good works, and exhorting one another, (Hebrews 10:24-25), is to remember Jesus and to proclaim His death till He comes again. (1 Cor. 11:25-26)
Communion should not be denied to any Christian. The concept of required local church membership is just religion for profit churchianity. You can be sure that such churches also teach titheing to the local church as a duty of church members.
This comes from our church's Sunday morning service last week. Our Pastor for the first time in 7 years decided to restrict the Lord's Supper to just official church membership, leaving about a third to half of those in attendance to watch and unable to participate.
His reasoning was that he felt God wanted him to make this change to protect the fellowship of the membership.
As background, the church has lost a lot of membership in the last few years, and is down to about a total of 36 voting members. On any given Sunday, church attendance is about 30-40 persons. Most of them are members, or newer fairly regular attenders. Maybe 20 member to 10 regular attenders.
Although he had his reasoning (protect fellowship of the church), his actions seem to be harming the fellowship by driving a wedge between members and non members. It created some animosity and hurt feelings, which are lingering.
I know many churches do restrict the Lord's Supper, so I think the surprise here is that it was a change in his policy, and he also did it during the Sunday AM service, which is most likely to have new people, hoppers, church shoppers, and regular attenders who have not officially joined.
How does your church handle it? How do you feel a church should handle it?
No, I disagree, as does my church. The Lord's table is just that, the Lord's table, open to one and to all. Restricting this to a wordly membership is not what was intended.
Communion should not be denied to any Christian. The concept of required local church membership is just religion for profit churchianity. You can be sure that such churches also teach titheing to the local church as a duty of church members.
Hi Bideshi,
Nice to see you again. I agree with your post. Any church that denies the Lord's Supper to someone because they are not a member in that particular group will have to answer for that.
As for your comment on titheing, we should all be giving freely as we have prospered. (1 Cor. 16:1)
I visited one of the local churches of Christ recently. No collection was taken during their worship service. A basket was placed in the foyer. Anyone wishing to contribute could do so before or after service. Nothing was mentioned about a collection at any time. When I left, I noticed the basket was stuffed with money. I was told later that a visitor approached the minister and asked, "Why no collection?" The minister told him we aren't here to take your money. He went on to explain with scriptures why we give in the first place. The visitor was very impressed by that. So was I.
Communion should not be denied to any Christian. The concept of required local church membership is just religion for profit churchianity. You can be sure that such churches also teach titheing to the local church as a duty of church members.
Unfortunately, that is the primary stance of far too many institutions claiming to represent the body of Christ (which is NOT a physical institution or hierarchy or exclusive club). Christ abides with us ALL and no one should be kept from remembering Him or acknowledging His sacrifice, period. Churchianity is an excellent name for it and it is usually the result of Bibleanity (Bible worship).
I visited one of the local churches of Christ recently. No collection was taken during their worship service. A basket was placed in the foyer. Anyone wishing to contribute could do so before or after service. Nothing was mentioned about a collection at any time. When I left, I noticed the basket was stuffed with money. I was told later that a visitor approached the minister and asked, "Why no collection?" The minister told him we aren't here to take your money. He went on to explain with scriptures why we give in the first place. The visitor was very impressed by that. So was I.
Katie
Who is that minister fooling ..... "no collection" ?
What do you call "A basket was placed in the foyer. Anyone wishing to contribute could do so before or after service."
Just because a "duck" doesn't happen during a service doesn't mean it was a duck.
Why didn't you ask why if they weren't there for the money.... why was there was a basket in foyer?
Katie. The policy of closed communion comes from two locations I have already cited.
1 Corinthians 5, clearly teaches that those who are involved in ongoing unrepentant sin, should not be given the sacrament.
1Co 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 1Co 5:13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
The other text is 1 Cornithians 11. Here it is taught that those who receive the sacrament unworthily drink judgment on themselves.
1Co 11:28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
1Co 11:29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.
Therefore our church body follows a traditional practice that dates back to the early Christian church. In love and concern for outsiders, The sacrament is only given to church members who have been properly instructed. We are brothers keeper. Many churches deny that the sacrament is the body and blood of Christ. Many churches also deny the divinity of Jesus Christ, do not baptize, do not baptize in the name of the Triune God, do not even teach the 10 commandments. America is awash with false doctrine and false teachers. Therefore, in love, we don't want them to take the sacrament, so that they are misled that they are Ok with God, when in fact they may not be because of impetitence or because they are trusting in their own works and righteousness to save them.
This is also done out of concern for our church members. Lets say we commune everyone, no matter how they live their life or what their religion is, Mormons, Muslims, Jews, athiests, those involved in sexual immorality and drunkards, etc. The logical conclusion is that repentance and trying to live within the will of God doesn't mater. It means that everyone, no matter what gets forgiveness and gets to go to heaven. IT might very easily lead the members of that congregation that "its all good", everyone goes to heaven no matter what. A church should not want to do that to their members.
1Pe 4:18 And, "If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?"
A churches first concern should be for the members of that congregation, to help them remain faithful so that they do not fall away.
Exaxctly correct. But I find it better if it is refered to as "close" communion rather than "closed" because it gives more of the understanding as to what you explained above rather than fuel for those who just don't want to conform to scripturally sound teaching.
Who is that minister fooling ..... "no collection" ?
What do you call "A basket was placed in the foyer. Anyone wishing to contribute could do so before or after service."
Just because a "duck" doesn't happen during a service doesn't mean it was a duck.
Why didn't you ask why if they weren't there for the money.... why was there was a basket in foyer?
Some churches make it a point about preaching money from the pulpit. Matter of fact, there is a group down the road whose minister works up a sweat each week pounding on the pulpit telling the people they've gotta give more more more. The church I referenced never brought the subject of money up.
We have Biblical examples for giving. It is our christian duty to do so.
Putting a basket in the entryway of the building is a far cry from the way the church down the road does it.
Where I go to worship, the collection basket is passed, but there is never a pitch for money. I also know that all monies collected, except for heat and light expenses, goes to the community for various benevolent works and furthering the gospel. No portion is sent to a central headquarters because we don't have one other than in heaven.
Maybe I wasn't clear in my explanation about the church I visited. The minister never told visitors that there was a basket if they wanted to donate. As a visitor, I didn't know there was a basket in the foyer until service was over. At the end of services, I asked a friend if they'd forgotten to take the collection. She said they put a basket in the entryway/foyer for members, and they never bring it up unless someone asks.
Now Twin, if you have a problem with that, I'd say you got up on the wrong side of the bed today. Either that or you don't believe we should support the work of the church.
Katie. The policy of closed communion comes from two locations I have already cited.
1 Corinthians 5, clearly teaches that those who are involved in ongoing unrepentant sin, should not be given the sacrament.
1Co 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 1Co 5:13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
The other text is 1 Cornithians 11. Here it is taught that those who receive the sacrament unworthily drink judgment on themselves.
1Co 11:28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
1Co 11:29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.
Therefore our church body follows a traditional practice that dates back to the early Christian church. In love and concern for outsiders, The sacrament is only given to church members who have been properly instructed. We are brothers keeper. Many churches deny that the sacrament is the body and blood of Christ. Many churches also deny the divinity of Jesus Christ, do not baptize, do not baptize in the name of the Triune God, do not even teach the 10 commandments. America is awash with false doctrine and false teachers. Therefore, in love, we don't want them to take the sacrament, so that they are misled that they are Ok with God, when in fact they may not be because of impetitence or because they are trusting in their own works and righteousness to save them.
This is also done out of concern for our church members. Lets say we commune everyone, no matter how they live their life or what their religion is, Mormons, Muslims, Jews, athiests, those involved in sexual immorality and drunkards, etc. The logical conclusion is that repentance and trying to live within the will of God doesn't mater. It means that everyone, no matter what gets forgiveness and gets to go to heaven. IT might very easily lead the members of that congregation that "its all good", everyone goes to heaven no matter what. A church should not want to do that to their members.
1Pe 4:18 And, "If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?"
A churches first concern should be for the members of that congregation, to help them remain faithful so that they do not fall away.
Hi Prairie,
Thank you for your explanation. I agree that if you have a christian among you that has or is sinning publicly, then that person must be confronted first by one, then by several. If he/she refuses to listen, then withdraw yourselves. That is the Biblical way.
It's what we're commanded to do.
You brought up 1 Cor. 5:13. It's pretty clear that it's not our job to judge outsiders. God will do that. It is the believers we should judge, and it must be done by the word, not by us personally.
You cited scriptures from 1 Corinthians. I know that you know Paul is writing to believers, not unbelievers. So I don't think you can deny the Lord's table to visitors or unbelievers based on anything in Corinthians. We have no business judging them. That's God's job.
Kate
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
