By close communion the Church attempts to be faithful in her calling to exercise discipline. By open communion the gates of the Church are opened to the world and worldliness.
When Classis Holland met in the Church building at Zeeland on April 8, 1857, four letters of secession were read. Of the four, the one from the congregation at Graafschap was the most explicit as to grounds for secession. One of the six grounds was, “Inviting (men of) all religious views to the Lord’s Supper, excepting Roman Catholics.” The consistory was simply saying that they could not agree with the growing American Church custom of open communion which was being practiced in the eastern congregations of the Reformed Church in America.
Ever since the 1857 secession, the Christian Reformed Church has held to the practice of close communion, though at present there are some consistories who are willing to relinquish supervision of the Lord’s Table and practice something like an open communion. The Reformed Church has continued to practice open communion, though many brethren in the RCA do not want to call it that.
Our question now is: Is supervised or restricted communion, or is open communion correct? Our answer can only be found in the Word of God. From whatever is taught in Scripture we are not at liberty to depart. This question we will try to answer.
Before we go any farther, let’s define carefully both close and open communion. A congregation practicing open communion believes that no unbeliever or profane person may partake of the Lord’s Supper. But they also believe that the individual communicant is responsible to maintain this sanctity. In a congregation practicing open communion either it will be assumed that all who are gathered for the sacrament will know this, or, an announcement will be made stating that all who are members in good and regular standing in a sister evangelical church may partake.
A congregation practicing close communion believes that not only is the responsibility of maintaining the holiness of the Table a personal, individual thing; it is also the responsibility of the church and its office-bearers. In a congregation practicing dose communion if you are a visitor desiring to partake of the sacrament, and, of course, a professing Christian, you will need the permission of the office-bearers to partake.
Now, what does the Bible say?
As we search the Bible to learn what it says about the Lord’s Supper we find that related to the Lord’s Table is discipline. Withol1t a doubt, the Church is commissioned to exercise discipline. Jesus Christ emphasized this in Matthew 18: 15-18. Paul, writing Spirit-given directions for the maintaining of order in the Church wrote, “A factious man after a first and second admonition refuse” (Titus 3:10). Also, in writing to the troubled Corinthian congregation—a congregation troubled by laxness and sin—Paul writes, “Put away the wicked man from among yourselves” (I Cor. 5:13). These wicked men, the Christians were not to recognize as Christians (I Cor. 5:11).
Of course, this disciplining is the familiar power to open and shut, of which we read in Revelation 3:7, Matthew 16:19, John 20:2.3, and Matthew 18:17. This power belongs first to Christ Himself, then to the ministers and apostles. Finally, it belongs to Christ’s body, the Church.
This power has always belonged to the Church, even in the Old Testament days. Throughout the Old Testament the emphasis was on the sanctity of worship and Jehovah’s covenant. Before a foreigner was allowed to partake of the Passover he had to be incorporated into the congregation of Israel hy the rite of circumcision (Ex. 12:48). Participation had to he not only outward but also inward—from the heart (Isaiah 1:10–17, Psalm 50:16, 17). True participation demanded no heathen allegiance’s.
Now, this discipline carries over to the Lord’s Table. Only true Christians are to he allowed at the Table. When our Lord inititated the sacrament He said, “This do in remembrance of me.” Only Christians may truly remember Him in the sacrament. No one else may be allowed to come to the Table. In fact, only those who have made public profession of faith may partake of the sacrament. Profession of Faith is essential because through this public ceremony the believer is saying that he is one with the congregation, and, therefore, with the Body of Christ. He is one with them in faith, hope, and doctrine.
But more needs to be said concerning the task of the Church in relation to the Lord’s Table. Paul discusses this in I Corinthians 10 and 11. He makes it clear that a Christian cannot serve God and sin and demons (I Cor. 10:21). And to see that this is not done the Church has a task. Corinth had a problem: spiritually, Corinth was in trouble. There was sin in the actions of the Church—and this sin was allowed (1 Cor. 11:18–21)! Neglected were the commands of God. Because of this, afflictions of God came on the Church. Now, as Paul is writing about this trouble he is addressing the Church at Corinth as a congregation and not as individuals (I Cor. 11:18). The office-bearers in the Church who are there for the spiritual building up of the people of God (Eph. 4:11–13) must see that unconfessed sin is not present at the Lord’s Table.
Of course, there is personal introspection to be done (I Cor. 11:28, 29) and there are those who know themselves to be unprepared for the sacrament and its message. There are sins which are very personal and unknown to others, except God. It stands to reason that these must be taken care of by the individual Christians. At this point we are in agreement with our Reformed Church brethren. However, this does not absolve the elders from their spiritual task. Because we are sinners, we may not be allowed to do what is right in our own eyes. Sometimes the elders must show us the sin we fail to see. And since the table is the Lord’s Table, it must be governed by the Lord’s law.
But the question still stands, why cannot we invite those of good standing to sit with us?
If the elders must for our good exercise discipline in our congregations as they were to do at Corinth, how can they if they do not know those whom they invite to come? Discipline is gone if they invite promiscuously. Oh, true, immediately there is the cry: but how can you deny the sacrament to Christians? Are you saying, others are not Christians? Under close communion the CRC docs not deny the sacrament to Christians, nor do we say that others arc not Christians. In keeping with their office, elders doing their work properly deny the Lord’s Supper to those who cannot give proof of their soundness of faith and walk.
By close communion the Church attempts to he faithful in her calling to exercise discipline. By open communion the gates of the Church are opened to the world and worldliness. What happens? The destruction of the Church is at hand. This always happens.
Granted, there is a difference between the RCA and the CRC at the point of serving communion. It is hard to believe that the RCA and those favoring open communion in the enc are willing to open the gates of the Church to the world and destruction. Nevertheless, unless we remain Biblical that is exactly what will happen.
When Classis Holland met in the Church building at Zeeland on April 8, 1857, four letters of secession were read. Of the four, the one from the congregation at Graafschap was the most explicit as to grounds for secession. One of the six grounds was, “Inviting (men of) all religious views to the Lord’s Supper, excepting Roman Catholics.” The consistory was simply saying that they could not agree with the growing American Church custom of open communion which was being practiced in the eastern congregations of the Reformed Church in America.
Ever since the 1857 secession, the Christian Reformed Church has held to the practice of close communion, though at present there are some consistories who are willing to relinquish supervision of the Lord’s Table and practice something like an open communion. The Reformed Church has continued to practice open communion, though many brethren in the RCA do not want to call it that.
Our question now is: Is supervised or restricted communion, or is open communion correct? Our answer can only be found in the Word of God. From whatever is taught in Scripture we are not at liberty to depart. This question we will try to answer.
Before we go any farther, let’s define carefully both close and open communion. A congregation practicing open communion believes that no unbeliever or profane person may partake of the Lord’s Supper. But they also believe that the individual communicant is responsible to maintain this sanctity. In a congregation practicing open communion either it will be assumed that all who are gathered for the sacrament will know this, or, an announcement will be made stating that all who are members in good and regular standing in a sister evangelical church may partake.
A congregation practicing close communion believes that not only is the responsibility of maintaining the holiness of the Table a personal, individual thing; it is also the responsibility of the church and its office-bearers. In a congregation practicing dose communion if you are a visitor desiring to partake of the sacrament, and, of course, a professing Christian, you will need the permission of the office-bearers to partake.
Now, what does the Bible say?
As we search the Bible to learn what it says about the Lord’s Supper we find that related to the Lord’s Table is discipline. Withol1t a doubt, the Church is commissioned to exercise discipline. Jesus Christ emphasized this in Matthew 18: 15-18. Paul, writing Spirit-given directions for the maintaining of order in the Church wrote, “A factious man after a first and second admonition refuse” (Titus 3:10). Also, in writing to the troubled Corinthian congregation—a congregation troubled by laxness and sin—Paul writes, “Put away the wicked man from among yourselves” (I Cor. 5:13). These wicked men, the Christians were not to recognize as Christians (I Cor. 5:11).
Of course, this disciplining is the familiar power to open and shut, of which we read in Revelation 3:7, Matthew 16:19, John 20:2.3, and Matthew 18:17. This power belongs first to Christ Himself, then to the ministers and apostles. Finally, it belongs to Christ’s body, the Church.
This power has always belonged to the Church, even in the Old Testament days. Throughout the Old Testament the emphasis was on the sanctity of worship and Jehovah’s covenant. Before a foreigner was allowed to partake of the Passover he had to be incorporated into the congregation of Israel hy the rite of circumcision (Ex. 12:48). Participation had to he not only outward but also inward—from the heart (Isaiah 1:10–17, Psalm 50:16, 17). True participation demanded no heathen allegiance’s.
Now, this discipline carries over to the Lord’s Table. Only true Christians are to he allowed at the Table. When our Lord inititated the sacrament He said, “This do in remembrance of me.” Only Christians may truly remember Him in the sacrament. No one else may be allowed to come to the Table. In fact, only those who have made public profession of faith may partake of the sacrament. Profession of Faith is essential because through this public ceremony the believer is saying that he is one with the congregation, and, therefore, with the Body of Christ. He is one with them in faith, hope, and doctrine.
But more needs to be said concerning the task of the Church in relation to the Lord’s Table. Paul discusses this in I Corinthians 10 and 11. He makes it clear that a Christian cannot serve God and sin and demons (I Cor. 10:21). And to see that this is not done the Church has a task. Corinth had a problem: spiritually, Corinth was in trouble. There was sin in the actions of the Church—and this sin was allowed (1 Cor. 11:18–21)! Neglected were the commands of God. Because of this, afflictions of God came on the Church. Now, as Paul is writing about this trouble he is addressing the Church at Corinth as a congregation and not as individuals (I Cor. 11:18). The office-bearers in the Church who are there for the spiritual building up of the people of God (Eph. 4:11–13) must see that unconfessed sin is not present at the Lord’s Table.
Of course, there is personal introspection to be done (I Cor. 11:28, 29) and there are those who know themselves to be unprepared for the sacrament and its message. There are sins which are very personal and unknown to others, except God. It stands to reason that these must be taken care of by the individual Christians. At this point we are in agreement with our Reformed Church brethren. However, this does not absolve the elders from their spiritual task. Because we are sinners, we may not be allowed to do what is right in our own eyes. Sometimes the elders must show us the sin we fail to see. And since the table is the Lord’s Table, it must be governed by the Lord’s law.
But the question still stands, why cannot we invite those of good standing to sit with us?
If the elders must for our good exercise discipline in our congregations as they were to do at Corinth, how can they if they do not know those whom they invite to come? Discipline is gone if they invite promiscuously. Oh, true, immediately there is the cry: but how can you deny the sacrament to Christians? Are you saying, others are not Christians? Under close communion the CRC docs not deny the sacrament to Christians, nor do we say that others arc not Christians. In keeping with their office, elders doing their work properly deny the Lord’s Supper to those who cannot give proof of their soundness of faith and walk.
By close communion the Church attempts to he faithful in her calling to exercise discipline. By open communion the gates of the Church are opened to the world and worldliness. What happens? The destruction of the Church is at hand. This always happens.
Granted, there is a difference between the RCA and the CRC at the point of serving communion. It is hard to believe that the RCA and those favoring open communion in the enc are willing to open the gates of the Church to the world and destruction. Nevertheless, unless we remain Biblical that is exactly what will happen.