The Lord’s Supper

What is “open”, “close” and “closed” communion, and why does it matter?

Before we understand the “open” versus “close” versus “closed” communion, we must first understand The Lord’s Supper.

1. What is The Lord’s Supper?

2. What is the purpose of The Lord’s Supper?

3. How is The Lord’s Supper observed?

4. Who can partake of The Lord’s Supper?

What is the Lord’s Supper?

To fully understand The Lord’s Supper we must go back to the moment it was first observed and instituted. The Lord Jesus presented His body as a sacrifice, and His blood was shed for our redemption.

It is interesting to notice that the Lord commanded us to commemorate His death and sacrifice. To remember His death, until He comes back. Also to notice that the ordinance was given to the 12 disciples, and not to the larger masses of followers. Therefore we understand this to be given as a command to the church only. Not to be observed by the world. The Lord’s Supper is presented in the Gospels (Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22), and then the apostle Paul, led by the Holy Spirit, writes extensively on the subject in 1 Corinthians chapter 11 verses 17 to 34, correcting some doctrinal errors and also educating the church in general on the symbolism and practices of the Lord’s Supper.

But let’s see what the Lord’s Supper is and what is not.

Some Christians will call it the Lord’s Supper, others will call it communion, others call it the Lord’s Table, and others may call it simply “breaking of bread”. And while we can agree with it being called communion, the Lord’s Supper or the Lord’s table, we cannot use the expression “breaking of bread”. Breaking of bread is a common expression in that part of the world, and it simply means having a meal. Bread is the staple food of the area, and was made in a round shape usually. The host, or head of the family would take bread at the beginning of the meal, break it, and then share it with those sitting with them for the meal. It was a very common phrase. Not every time you see the expression “breaking of bread” in the scripture would mean the Lord’s Supper. But rather having a meal. Could it also be taking the Lord’s Supper? Yes, but we have no way to differentiate between the two in that context. But the Lord’s Supper is a commemoration. As we can see in the Gospels and also in 1 Cor 11, it is NOT a sacrament. It is NOT something that will give a Christian anything he/she did not already have in Christ. When a person is saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, they are a new creature, they have received the adoption, they are a child of God, they receive the Holy Spirit and are sealed for eternity. There is nothing additional that a person needs. However, they are now a newborn baby in Christ. They need to grow, from His word, and learn how to walk and live in this new life they have received. So they need to feed spiritually from God’s word to grow.

The Lord’s Supper needs to be understood together with Ecclesiology, the theology or doctrine about the Church. The Lord gave us in the church two ordinances, baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

As far back as the First London Confession (1644), Baptists rejected the word “sacrament” because of its implication that the rites are an actual means of grace by which the participant gains something more than they had already through Christ, in favour of the more accurate “ordinance” because both baptism and the Lord’s Supper are commands of Jesus to those who have already been saved. Additionally, Baptists have always named them specifically as church ordinances, to be observed in the context and under the authority of a local church. This may seem unimportant or inconsequential, but the doctrine of the local church will affect the doctrine of salvation. Salvation by grace through faith must be preceded by repentance, and baptism is preceded by salvation. The question of who may partake of the Lord’s Supper is important precisely because it reflects on both doctrines. When a church observes communion, who is eligible to sit at the Lord’s table? Is everyone eligible, saved and lost? All believers? All baptized believers? Only members of that local church? Baptists have historically debated this question with three possible answers. Open communion is the position that all believers present when a local church observes the Lord’s Supper may partake. Alternatively, the close communion view maintains that only those who are saved, properly baptized, and in fellowship with a church of like faith and order — meaning holding to the same basic doctrine as the observing church — may sit at the Lord’s Table. Finally, closed communion is the most restrictive position, asserting that since communion is connected to church membership and discipline, only members of that local church can partake.

In all honesty, neither the Statement of Faith nor any iteration of the Baptist Faith allows for open communion. While an autonomous church can certainly remove all restrictions for communion, it cannot do so and claim to be Baptistic in its doctrines. The Scripture and the Statement of Faith teach baptism by immersion, as symbolic, as a “church ordinance” and as a “prerequisite” to the Lord’s Supper which is observed by the members of the church.

In contrast, open communion recognizes any baptism or no baptism, any church membership or no church membership, and makes membership and participation in its responsibilities optional and immaterial. Meaningful discipline is impossible in a church that practices open communion because the church cannot withdraw fellowship when it extends the privilege of communion to anyone who happens to be present.

Often, a pastor serving the Lord’s Supper will say something generic like, “This is the Lord’s table, not our table. We don’t have any right to deny anyone from partaking so long as your heart is right with God.” That may sound kind, but it contradicts the New Testament, on several points. If baptism is indeed a prerequisite to the Lord’s Supper (as the Baptist faith straightforwardly states), then those who were sprinkled, baptized before salvation or baptized with a sacramental purpose (such as Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or even Reformed, are not properly baptized and do not meet the qualifications for partaking. They do not have Scriptural baptism — which is always the immersion of a believer and is symbolic of one’s evidence of repentance and profession of faith. The observance of open communion suggests that the timing, means, purpose, and administrator of baptism are irrelevant to obedience to Christ or participation in the life of the church.

While churches that claim the Baptist Faith as their doctrinal statement may practice either close or closed communion, open communion is impossible to reconcile with its definitions and doctrines.

We believe that closed communion is the right way to practice and we do so based on the close connection between discipline and the Lord’s Supper. In 1 Corinthians 5:11, Paul instructs the church at Corinth “not even to eat” with the offending member that they are placing under church discipline, and therefore putting out of the church membership. We believe that the Lord’s Supper is limited to members of that particular church, and understand this to mean that the former member who is being disciplined is ineligible to partake of the ordinance. Jesus says something similar in Matthew 18:17: “Let him be to you as a Gentile or a tax collector.” That does not mean to have no contact with that person, but rather not to eat with that person or have fellowship with that person. Church discipline has the role of bringing the offender to repentance, and eventually back into fellowship with the church. But if there are no consequences of church discipline, there is no reason for the offender to seek repentance and reconciliation with the church. Pastors and churches often lower the bar either because they simply do not think about the issues involved and do not realize what is at stake or, more frequently, they feel uncomfortable excluding anyone and risking hurt feelings. Both my theology and my experience encourage me on this point; because biblical barriers exist for a reason. God put them there, to keep some things in, and some things out. Nowhere is that more important than in church membership and unity.

What is the purpose of the Lord’s Supper?

The Lord’s Supper is about fellowship. The things we have in common — our salvation and our participation in the body of Christ — are the basis of that fellowship. When we connect the Lord’s Supper to the local church, not only do we elevate the meaning of membership, but we exalt Christ. Making everything about Him, and not about us. As we stated before the Lord commanded that we commemorate His sacrifice. But the Lord’s Supper has the purpose of maintaining unity, purity and fellowship.

First of all, we look at unity. Unity in faith, purpose and doctrine. And the Lord’s Supper doctrine is part of our doctrine of the church. Or also called ecclesiology. The word ecclesiology comes from the Greek ekklesia, which translates as gathering or assembly, called out for a purpose. So, a church is an assembly of believers, called out, or put together, for a purpose. And what is the purpose of the local church?

To fulfill that Great Commission the Lord gave us before ascending to heaven. To go out and preach the gospel, baptize those who receive it, and teach them to observe all the things that the Lord has commanded. Including the Lord’s Supper. Therefore, the Lord’s Supper is an ordinance instituted in the local church, for the local church to carry out. Unity in faith and doctrine can only be maintained in a local church of believers, who are united together in what they believe and what they seek to accomplish together. We cannot have unity of faith with those who are outside of the local church, as they have no reason to believe or submit to the doctrines and authority of the local church.

Also, the Lord’s Supper helps to maintain the purity and fellowship of the church. In 1 Corinthians 11:28 We are commanded to examine ourselves before we partake, so therefore to confess and forsake sin. It helps to maintain purity and fellowship because a person who is living in public sin will need to be placed under church discipline and excluded from fellowship for a time. Only to be re-added to the fellowship after repentance and public confession.

How is the Lord’s Supper observed?

The Lord’s Supper is a solemn event. We are commemorating the Lord’s death. 1 Corinthians 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till He come.

The verse doesn’t say we should partake often but rather says that when we do take it, as often as we do take it, we show or commemorate the Lord’s death until He comes. So it is a sombre event, a solemn event, to be taken as often as the church under their own pastoral leadership decides to take it. Some churches hold it every week, others every month, and some only once a year. While I believe every week is too much, also I think once a year is not often enough. But each church will determine under their own conviction how often to take the Lord’s Supper.

It is also a certain way that it has to be taken. First of all, we see in the context of the Lord establishing it, as well as 1 Corinthians 11, that it was taken in the church, as a church event, not a family taking it privately in a home, or a small group. It was the church taking the Lord’s Supper.

Secondly, we see an order, it was first the bread, representing His body, and then the cup, representing His blood. It is important we keep this in order, as first His body was broken, and consumed as He was scourged and beaten, and then His blood was poured out from all the wounds, and eventually from the spear.

Who can partake of the Lord’s Supper?

There are three views amongst Christians, in regards to who can partake.

• Open communion;
• Close communion;
• Closed communion.

First, we would like to talk about Open communion. It is and was rejected by many churches and theologians for some very important reasons.

Open communion would allow anyone to participate, regardless of being saved, baptized and in fellowship with a local church. Open communion recognizes any baptism or no baptism, any church membership or no church membership, and makes membership and participation in its responsibilities optional and immaterial. Meaningful church discipline is impossible in a church that practices open communion because the church cannot withdraw fellowship when it extends the privilege of communion to anyone who happens to be present. How can a church practice church discipline, as presented in the Scripture, if there are no requirements for the participants? A pastor may sound kind and nice by allowing everyone to participate, but he is in flagrant contradiction to the Scripture.

If baptism is indeed a prerequisite to the Lord’s Supper (as most Baptists straightforwardly state), then those who were sprinkled, baptized before conversion, or baptized with a sacramental purpose are not properly baptized and do not meet the qualifications for partaking. They do not have Scriptural baptism — which is always the immersion of a believer and is symbolic of one’s profession of faith. The observance of open communion suggests that the timing, means, purpose, and administrator of baptism are irrelevant to obedience to Christ or participation in the life of the church. While churches that claim to be Baptist in their doctrinal statement may practice either close or closed communion, open communion is impossible to reconcile with its definitions and doctrines.

CLOSE or CLOSED?

The teaching of Close communion is rooted in the teachings of Church Fellowships, Associations and Denominations, and as such it undermines the doctrine of church Independence.

The teaching of close communion teaches that a person, who is a member of another church of similar faith, can partake of the Lord’s Supper in any of the associated churches. We believe in church Independence, where no church is submitted to another church. Each church self-governs and it is not required submission to another, and has as its Sole Authority the Scripture. Each church has its own officers, as described in the Scripture, pastors and deacons, and therefore they are free to make their own decisions, as led by the Word of God and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, a church is not obligated to be in fellowship with another church. Churches can fellowship, for the purpose of fulfilling the Lord’s Great Commission, but there is no obligation or mandate to do so. Nor are other churches obligated in any way to recognize a person’s membership in another church. A local church has the right and obligation to investigate a person’s testimony of repentance and faith before considering a person for membership.

But the Lord’s Supper goes deeper than that. For a person to be able to partake of the Lord’s Supper, that person needs to be saved, scripturally baptized, and a member in good standing of a church. And we have no ability to know a person’s heart. We can only know what a person testifies, their statement of faith, and by their way of life. And if a person is just a visitor or member of another church, it is virtually impossible for us to know where they are spiritually. Are they saved, are they baptized scripturally, are they in good standing in their home church, or are they under church discipline, and therefore disqualified from partaking of the Lord’s Supper?

How can we know all these, except when we examine that person?

In the past, there have been churches who tried to implement a system to have a close communion, but still apply the principles of the word of God. One such example was Charles Spurgeon while pastoring the Metropolitan Tabernacle. Under his leadership, the church instituted a set of rules regarding visitors. If a person was visiting the church, and desired to partake of the Lord’s Supper, that person would need to meet with the pastor or one of the deacons. The person would then need to give a clear testimony of their repentance and faith, scriptural baptism and to also share who their pastor is, and what church they are a member of. The staff at Metropolitan Tabernacle would then make efforts to contact their respective pastor to ensure the person is not under any church discipline or for any reason they should not be allowed to partake of the Lord’s Supper. Then upon being satisfied that a person is meeting all qualifications, they would allow the visitor to attend services, and partake of the Lord’s Supper for up to 3 months. After 3 months the person would need to either become a member or return to their home church. It was abandoned later because of implementation challenges.

While that may be an option, I believe it is very difficult to implement, and it requires a person to satisfy all requirements for church membership, without becoming a member of the church.

If a person satisfies all requirements for becoming a member of the church, why not join the church? I would like to change the direction of the conversation and look at the reasons why a person would not join the church membership.

If a person is a saved, baptized, member of another church of similar faith and doctrine, and could potentially join the church, what is holding them from joining?

• 1. They are just visiting. – A person is just visiting temporarily be it for a few days or even a couple of months, they don’t join the church, because they will return to their home church.
• 2. They are “church shopping” – A person who has not decided if this church is the church they want to join. Still seeking God’s will for what church to attend. They have not made the decision to join, but are considering it.
• 3. They don’t want to join, because they maintain the membership at the previous church.

While all those may be valid reasons, we have to look deeper into the reasons and determine how we can best minister to them. First, if a person is only visiting temporarily, they don’t need to join. At the same time, they don’t need to partake in the Lord’s Supper. They can continue to attend, be fed spiritually by the sermons and lessons, and fellowship with the saints in the respective church until they return to their home church. As previously mentioned, the Lord’s Supper does not give them anything extra. Their membership commits them to the doctrine and practice of their church. In practical terms, they represent their church and church body. If we keep in mind that the reception of the Lord’s Supper is an expression of fellowship (1 Corinthians 10:17), we will present an accurate picture of fellowship. As they represent their home church, it would not be an accurate picture of fellowship if they were to receive the Lord’s Supper in our church. Scripture instructs us not to participate in spiritual activities like worship and the Lord’s Supper with those who are not united with us in faith (Romans 16:17).

Secondly, those who are “church shopping”, are what we would call “on the fence”. And we would better spend time with them, helping them understand our church, our doctrines, our teachings and our position in regard to the Lord’s Supper. Help them decide. One of the purposes of closed communion is the purpose of presenting, as far as humanly possible, an accurate picture of unity in the faith. A person who is undecided about church membership will not be in unity of faith with those who are already committed to the local church.

Thirdly, a person who is a member of another local church, and they intend to keep it. If a person attends our local church and is not willing to join so they remain members in another church, it is most likely that the person has misunderstood the local church. The Bible describes the local church as a body. It is impossible for a body to have members in another location. It is illogical to think of it that way. But also looking at how a body is nourished scripturally it says that a body is fed by what each member gives to the local church. Not referring to funds necessarily, but by what each member can do to support the local church. By being involved in the ministry, by teaching, by evangelizing, by singing, and so on. A person who wants to continue supporting their previous church is undoubtedly doing so due to a different doctrine. They are not in unity with our church.

But in closing I would like to also mention 1 Corinthians 11: 27. It was clear from Paul’s writing that some of the Christians in Corinth were sick or even died because they took the Lord’s Supper unworthily.

There are several ways to apply this.

First of all, a person who takes the Lord’s Supper by false pretense. They may have lied about their salvation, baptism, or church membership. Maybe that person is not even saved. And allowing anyone to participate will do them harm and not good. They are not saved, they don’t know, or understand what they are doing.

While some may say that a person needs to examine themselves, and then partake, we have to discern that a person who is not saved doesn’t have spiritual understanding. They don’t understand the spiritual things. And it would be our, responsibility to ensure they don’t harm themselves. This is why parents don’t allow their children to partake if their children are not meeting the qualifications. They don’t yet understand, but the parents as responsible adults must prevent their children from taking it unworthily. It is the responsibility of the person who has the understanding to make the decision.

Secondly, a person may be in rebellion, or under church discipline. And while it is true that a person will answer before God, we are instructed by the word of God in 1 Corinthians 5:11 to not eat (have fellowship) with such a person. And because they are not members, and we don’t know their spiritual condition, it is for the safety and purity of our own church and fellowship that we don’t allow Christians who are not members to partake.

In conclusion, the Lord’s Supper is an ordinance given to the church. It was first instituted by the Lord Himself on the last night He spent with His disciples before the crucifixion. He only had the 12 with Him and not the larger crowd that followed Him. Also, we see that the Lord’s Supper is taken in the context of the church, not with the world. The clear teaching of the Scripture, as we see it in 1 Corinthians 11 is that a person can take it in a way that will bring condemnation to them, physical harm or even death. Therefore, it is critical that we observe with the utmost somberness and in a solemn way.

We will also ensure that only people who are saved, scripturally baptized and members in good standing of the local church are invited to partake. Therefore, since there is no way for us to practically enforce the above for people who are not members of our local church, we will restrict participation to only the members of our local church. Our church will practice Closed Communion.

Supporting texts: Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:17-34