It appears that many congregations calling themselves Reformed have come to a point where they do not know how or why to practice close, or supervised communion. Historically, it was not just Reformed congregations that had this practice. Years ago, both Baptist and Presbyterian churches practiced this. However, many ceased after the Second Great Awakening in the early 1800s, because of its revivalism, the resulting Arminianism, and individualistic Congregationalism in many congregations. In spite of this, many Scottish Presbyterians held on to the old practice of fencing, or guarding the Table, and granting communion tokens to those who had attended preparatory services. These tokens gave them the right to sit at the Lord’s Table. (Today, believe it or not, these communion tokens have their own place in the antique market.)

In the 1700s, it was the practice in the Reformed Church in America to give letters of attestation to members who would be traveling so that they could be admitted to the Table in churches where they were worshiping. This was also the early practice of the Christian Reformed churches, and it is still the practice in the Canadian Reformed churches. These certificates of attestation state that the bearer is in good and regular standing in his own congregation.

However, we live in a new age in which men of the church seem to take ecclesiastical rules and practices with some freedom. The general membership has also begun to view freely church procedure. It is not uncommon for visitors at a particular congregation to decide suddenly that since the Lord’s Supper is being served, “it would be nice” if they could partake, too. It has even become common in places to serve the Lord’s Supper in services where professions of faith have just taken place. All present are invited to partake, and sadly, sometimes those who refuse are criticized by members of that congregation.

It has become common in some congregations for the minister to make a verbal announcement inviting all who are members of some Bible-believing congregation to come to the Table. In other congregations it is common for an elder to be near the entrance to invite any guests to come to the Table. Really, these are just ways allowing anyone who desires to come to the Table—this has always been, and still is, open communion.

Perhaps all of this is related to a declining church consciousness, the growth of an unhealthy sentimentalism, or a lack of understanding of the biblical office of elder. Certainly, it is the result of individualism and Arminianism in the church and its members.

Those who think in individualistic terms become upset by churches that still practice close or supervised communion. How often we hear comments like, “You think you are better than others.” After all, they think that attendance at the Table is only a personal matter. Indeed, there is a personal element in preparing to come. Yet, after the explanation of the Lord’s Supper in question 79, the Heidelberg Catechism goes on in Lord’s Day 30 to explain the error of Rome (q. 80), and then in question 81, to show who may come: those who know their sins and who have professed a living faith in Jesus Christ. Then we read, “But hypocrites and such as turn not to God with sincere hearts eat and drink judgment to themselves.”

Still our Instructor is not finished with the subject, for in question 82, we are asked: “Are they also to be admitted to this supper who, by their profession and life, show themselves to be unbelieving and ungodly?” In one word, the answer is no. This would profane God’s covenant, and God’s “wrath would be kindled against the whole congregation.” Then some very important words appear: “Wherefore the Christian Church is in duty bound, according to the ordinance of Christ and His apostles, to exclude such persons by the keys of the kingdom of heaven, until they show amendment of life.”

                                     

The Christian church is to exclude! In what way?

The twelfth principle of Reformed church government appended to our United Reformed Church Order states: “Christ cares for His church through the office-bearers whom He chooses. Acts 6:2–3; I Timothy 3:1, 8; 5:17.”

Further, our church order indicates: “The Consistory shall supervise participation at the Lord’s Table. . . . Visitors may be admitted provided that, as much as possible, the Consistory is assured of their Biblical church membership, of their proper confession of faith, and their godly life” (Art. 45).

This supervision is not fulfilled by simply asking, “As a visitor, would you like to participate at the Lord’s Table?” This is not supervision.

The consistory is defined in Article 21 as being comprised of the minister of the Word and the elders. Further, it is stated that the consistory receives its authority directly from Christ, and therefore, the elders are accountable to Christ (Art. 21).

In God’s great love for his covenant people he provided some organization and some responsibilities in the church. How beautifully this is laid out to Ezekiel as he ministers in the name of the Lord:

Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel: therefore hear a word from My mouth, and give them warning from Me: when I say to the wicked, “You shall surely die,” and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, that same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. Yet, if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity: but you shall have delivered your soul. (Ezek. 3:17– 19, New King James Version) Elders have a calling! They are not simply board members. God has called them out of love for us. They are to guard the Table out of love for us. They watch for our souls (Heb. 13:7, 17).

Certainly, we are to be prepared to come. Our time-honored practice of preparation has a real place in our worship.

In the early days of the Reformation, the congregation would be told of the upcoming Lord’s Supper on the Lord’s Day, and then on the Saturday before the sacrament the congregation would gather for a service of preparation.

This was not so that they would engage in questioning if they had faith, but rather, so they could be reminded that they were to live out of faith. Was the fruit of knowing Christ in their lives (2 Cor. 13:5)? Meanwhile, the elders were visiting each family—often once a week. Why? Because the elders were concerned about the souls of the congregation. How seriously the elders took being accountable to Christ!

True, we live in a different age. The congregation is spread out and no longer in the shadow of the steeple. We travel more, and farther. But the principle still applies regarding the holiness of worship and of the Lord’s Table. Unfortunately, we do not always think of this. It is so easy to forget that the Supper is coming up. Once, a lady in one of our churches was upset because she had forgotten that the Table would be prepared on that Sunday. Does this happen today? That is why some elders make a point of providing Lord’s Supper meditations for preparation, and why older church orders include a word requiring services of preparation.

Still the question remains: How do elders supervise the Lord’s Supper?

The key word is “supervise.” Certainly they demand profession of faith, and they demand a godly life. They have that authority. Therefore, immediately following the catechism’s treatment of the Holy Supper, we have a Lord’s Day on church discipline. In this day when we no longer hear warnings about cults and questionable sects, but are inclined to view all groups as acceptable religious groups, this supervision is very important.

Always there has been a problem with carelessness at the Table. The apostle had to deal with this in Corinth. He rebuked the congregation for this (1 Cor. 11:18). While there were a number of issues in Corinth, he addressed especially the problem at the Lord’s Table with these words: “For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep” (1 Cor. 11:30, New King James Version).

God was chastening his people.

Calvin also had to struggle with this carelessness at the Table in Geneva. It was during his second stay—the long and profitable one—that a man was placed under church discipline. He was a morally weak man with whom the elders had worked hard. The man was determined to participate at the sacrament, and so he went to the city council requesting they intervene with the discipline of the church. The city council granted him the right to go to the Lord’s Table. While this may sound strange to our ears, in those early days the council members believed they had to rule the church, too. The man, one of Calvin’s opponents who thought they could continue to live unholy lives and have the blessings of church membership, came forward to the sacrament. Calvin would have nothing of it, and so he stretched forth his arms and said he would rather die than allow this man to partake.

Calvin knew who was coming in his day, but today when guests take Communion on their own, a big question looms: Who is this who takes, and what is his life like? What are the watchmen doing today?

Our elders are to know something about the guests. They must answer to Christ, who gives them authority (Church Order 21). Historically, it has always been that Reformed guests may ask. But elders must know something about them. The guests are in a good position if either an elder or someone in the congregation knows them. But once a Roman Catholic made a request through a member of a prominent family in a particular congregation. The elders said that while there may be believers in the Roman church (for God looks on the heart), yet on the basis of question 80 in the Heidelberg Catechism, they could not grant his request. These elders were watchmen! There are consistories will allow only guests who have made profession in a Reformed congregation.

Of course, it is true that sometimes an almost split-second decision has to be made. The request comes as someone is walking into the church. The consistory must make a decision about granting permission. Would it not be in order to make an announcement of guests who have been approved, and from where they have come? This would solve the problem of letting someone know if permission has been granted, and save the one who has not been permitted some embarrassment. Further, it would make the congregation aware of brothers and sisters who have come from elsewhere, and emphasize the body of Christ in that place.

Supervision involves active participation on the part of the elders.

While our Church Order does not describe this supervision, it does demand it.

It involves more than a note in the minutes that there have been requests made and granted. It involves, rather, an approval before the service of communion by the consistory.

No one questions if visitors may request. But this must be dealt with in good order. Perhaps they are in town the week before. A consistory, or at least a delegated committee, should be willing to meet with them earlier than on Sunday. But if they cannot be present until Sunday morning, the proper questions can still be asked—and a statement of faith can be signed.

God grant that we may see more spiritual blessing, not just as individuals but as the body of Christ, as the holiness of the sacrament is remembered and this time-honored practice of supervision is followed with renewed zeal.

Rev. Jerome Julien is a retired minister in the URCNA living in Hudsonville, MI, and serves on the Board of Reformed Fellowship. He and his wife, Reita, are members of Bethel URC, in Jenision, MI.