A CHURCH ORDINANCE

Jesus instituted the Supper with an assembled group composed of the first members of His Church. Paul clearly spoke to the church in Corinth of their having the Supper when they had come “together in the church” and “together . . . into one place” (1 Corinthians 11:18,20).

The New Testament records no experience of an individual observance of the Supper. Paul visited Troas on one occasion for 5 days, and on the first day of the week the disciples “came together to break bread” before Paul preached to them (Acts 20:6-7).

Although the Lord’s Supper does not appear by name, we may strongly infer that this experience provides a glimpse into the practice of the early church in worship and observance of the ordinance.

A RESTRICTED ORDINANCE

Since the church is to judge the conduct of those who participate in the Supper, the church should restrict participation to those over whose lives she has oversight, her own members (1 Corinthians 5:9-13).

The New Testament also reveals that only those who are born again, baptized, and living consistent with being a part of Christ’s body should partake of the Supper.

Generally, three views prevail concerning who may participate in the Lord’s Supper. The first position is Closed Communion, restricting the Supper to members of the local church that is observing the Supper.

The second position of Close Communion, restricting the Supper to members of the local church that is observing the Supper and visiting members of other churches of like faith and order.

The third position is Open Communion, restricting the Supper to believers in Christ who have been “baptized” by any standard and regardless of their church membership. In actual practice, many groups do not even make baptism an issue and open the Supper to anyone who professes faith in Christ.

Advocates of the open communion position who do not even require baptism as a prerequisite claim that since baptism is not an indispensable condition for salvation it cannot be an indispensable condition for observance of the Lord’s Supper. The erroneous nature of that argument is evident from the following observations suggested by Strong:

(a) It assumes that the Lord’s Supper is more important than baptism. The New Testament treats both baptism and the Lord’s Supper as equally important acts of obedience for the believer. Open communion says that baptism is optional, while the Lord’s Supper is essential.

(b) It tends to do away with baptism altogether. If the Lord’s Supper is one of the highest privileges of church membership and it can be enjoyed without baptism, then baptism loses its importance as an initiatory rite of church membership.

(c) It weakens the influence of church discipline. All of the New Testament teachings concerning the responsibility of the church to deal with those who walk disorderly become irrelevant if the Lord’s Supper is open to any person who regards himself as a Christian.

(d) It tends to reduce the significance of local church membership. Strong said, “Open communion logically leads to open church membership, and a church membership open to all, without reference to the qualifications required in Scripture, or without examination on the part of the church as to the existence of these qualifications in those who unite with it, is virtually an identification of the church with the world, and, without protest from Scriptural constituted bodies, would finally result in its actual extinction.”

A restricted view of the Supper causes a problem for some. Those who do not recognize the Supper as a church ordinance believe that any believer should be invited to the Supper. To be excluded from the observance in their view is to be questioned about their relationship with Christ. That, however, is not the issue necessarily,

The church, as a local body, conducts regular business, calls pastor, authorizes baptism, and engages in other activities in which none but her members participate.

That fact does not question the salvation of those who are not members of that particular church. It simply recognizes the nature of the church as a local body and the Lord’s Supper as a church ordinance.

One additional factor should be noted: the individual church member is to examine himself before participating in the Supper. We should seek to remove anything from our life that is displeasing to the Lord, and we should concentrate all of our thoughts upon the significance of the ordinance as a memorial that shows forth the Lord’s death until He returns.

To practice self-examination will spare a person from the chastisement of the Lord (1 Corinthians 11:28-32).