This post brought to you by caraboska, sort of. :)
The subject came up in some posts caraboska's made recently, so that's why it's brought to you by her, because it's made me think about it, which I normally don't, really.
See, I grew up in Missouri Synod Lutheranism, which is the 'high church' version of Lutheranism. Fairly similar to Roman Catholicism, in many ways, actually. So there's a lot there that's simply ingrained as the 'right way' to do things.
One of these things is closed communion. For those who don't exactly know what that is (I doubt there're any who don't, but I cover my bases), closed communion means that one may only receive communion in that church if one is a member of that faith. So a Missouri Synod Lutheran would only ever receive communion in a MS Lutheran Church (It's possible that some 'crossover' communion is possible with other Lutheran synods, but that's not how we were taught growing up. Those 'other' Lutherans were all wrong and degenerating into ecumenism anyway...), and anyone who is not a MS Lutheran is not allowed to receive communion at a MS Lutheran church. The same goes for Roman Catholicism. You're *only* to receive if you're Roman Catholic. Not that they check i.d. card's or anything, but that's the rule.
Now, Orthodoxy also has closed communion, to people who are not Orthodox (I'm not sure if there're any Orthodox churches that don't 'cross' commune. For instance, I believe that one can be Russian Orthodox and receive in a Greek Orthodox parish, etc. But I could be wrong here.), but they do sort of check i.d. cards, from what I understand. It's taken very seriously, is my point there.
Anyway, the concept has never really bugged me, in part because well, it's what I grew up with, and in part because it makes perfect sense. Communion, to me, is not merely about the act of receiving the Body and the Blood because I believe that they are, in fact, the Body and the Blood. When you receive communion, it's attesting to the fact that you believe, with the rest of the Church, in the Church - the theology, the doctrines, the history, everything. And not just with those present with you right then and there, but all over the world, and throughout time. In heaven as well. You are in *union* with all the other believers. And closed communion keeps that unity, and safeguards it.
I've never taken communion in a church that wasn't MS Lutheran or Roman Catholic. And I only received in those churches when I was in union with them. My parents attended a Mennonite church for several years, and I went with them for a while, but I would never, ever take communion with them. Because we don't believe the same things, and I would never want to imply union with them by communing with them, see?
So agreeing with the Missouri Lutheran or RC Church and being in unity with whatever denomination you are in is more important than unity with Christ and the Church Church (all believers)? I always thought of communion as between us and God...being in right relationship with Him.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, but it seems rather divisive, doesn't it?
There is that argument, but, it's a sort of fundamental and un-work-aroundable difference. Because, whether you're talking about the people in the MSL, or the RC, all believe that *they*, and only they are the true church. So, why would they want to commune with people they consider schismatics and heretics? And the Communion itself means different things. Is it between us and God? Yes. But is it also between us and the rest of the Church, living and dead? Yes. So... can you really be in unity with people who don't believe the same things that you do?
ReplyDelete"So, why would they want to commune with people they consider schismatics and heretics?"
ReplyDeleteI'll try not to take this as harshly as it sounds written. :)
This position seems very fundamentalist Baptist...those who are afraid of ecumenicalism. In the churches I've been in they only stress that you should not take communion if your relationship with the Lord isn't right. If you are harboring sin, for instance, that you won't repent of. Otherwise they've never made it seem you can only be Baptist to participate. Who knew the MSL and RCC were more fundamentalist than they? :-D
The older I get the more I see that God isn't in just ONE denomination (duh!) and I think communion is a way of remembering Christ's death on the cross. So anyone who accepts what He has done - Him as their Savior - should participate in remembering the sacrifice He made on our behalf. "Do this in remembrance of me" -- not "do this to remember me and agree with church doctrine."
Jesus never told us to go down to such and such church and we would be saved. He told us to believe in Him and follow Him. Church membership (in the "right" church) is not necessary for salvation.
Thanks for sharing your point of view!
"I'll try not to take this as harshly as it sounds written. :)"
ReplyDeleteSee, this is why I shouldn't be allowed out in public. I stand behind the concept of what I said, which is that the vast majority of denominations, at least the historic ones, view everyone who is not within their specific church as 'misguided' at best. Which does not mean that there is not love there. More that, because of the belief that they are theologically, doctrinally, spiritually mislead, that there is a duty to stand firm to the correct belief and to guide them there, or at least lay the groundwork for the Holy Spirit to do so.
'This position seems very fundamentalist Baptist...those who are afraid of ecumenicalism.'
I don't think it's so much a fear of ecumenism as it is that they see it for the compromising morass that it is, or at least that it can be, when taken too far.
'In the churches I've been in they only stress that you should not take communion if your relationship with the Lord isn't right. If you are harboring sin, for instance, that you won't repent of. Otherwise they've never made it seem you can only be Baptist to participate.'
Right, well, I don't think that Baptist's have closed communion, so it wouldn't ever be an issue that would come up with them. But, there's a fundamental difference with even the definition of what communion is between the Baptists (and other Protestants) and the MSL and the RCC and the Orthodox. Do you view it as a memorial? A remembrance of Christ's sacrifice using bread and wine/grape juice? Is there anything supernatural that occurs? Does it at any point become the Body and Blood of Christ, in fact? I believe the answer is no. It's just bread and wine/grape juice. But for us, it's not just grape juice. It literally becomes His Body and Blood. It's not just a time to get together and remember Christ, but to participate in the sacrifice. To be there at the Crucifixion, at the Resurrection, to join with the angels and the Saints in Heaven in worship and praise and thankfulness to God. Communion is a chance, a very direct way for the Grace of God to come and strengthen us. If we're tired, and faltering, it lifts us up. But again, it's not only about what we believe Communion is, and what happens during the Liturgy. Can you confess to a belief in the Saints? In Apostolic Succession? In the host of other theological definitions that differ from Baptist to even Lutheran, let alone RCC or Orthodox?
If you can't, then I would say that, from our perspective, your 'relationship with the Lord isn't right.'
'Who knew the MSL and RCC were more fundamentalist than they? :-D'
*raises hand* Fundamentalism isn't bad, per se, as long as you're clinging to the right fundamentals. :p
'Jesus never told us to go down to such and such church and we would be saved. He told us to believe in Him and follow Him. Church membership (in the "right" church) is not necessary for salvation.'
Natch. Because there were no churches like we have today in His day. There was only Him, and His disciples, and the Apostles, and His Church. There was only one. And He did say that He was the way and the truth and the life, yes? And that the only way to the Father was through Him? So, if we're to believe in Him, and follow Him, why would we not seek out and want to belong to and by in Communion with the Church that He left to help us?
Susanne, The problem is that I take a similar view to yours, and had been attending Communion from time to time where I am. But then I found out that canon law in the church I am going to prohibits people who don't believe in the Real Presence from taking Communion there. I mean, I had had doubts for some time about that, but finally I discovered (after 7 years of attendance) that they were not at all unfounded.
ReplyDeleteThat having been said, not every church requires you to believe in all the 'official' doctrines in order to become a member and be in communion with them. The Presbyterian/Calvinist type churches tend to insist that you believe in the gospel, and the rest is just gravy - unless you want a teaching position in the church or something.
Although then again, they do not believe in the Real Presence and probably would exclude from membership anyone who did, or who believed that water baptism is necessary for salvation. Either of these things would be regarded as a form of idolatry.
God only knows, then, how the Reformed Church here manages to be in communion with the Lutherans. Maybe because the official doctrine is that communion is 'something more than just a symbol', and they regard that as sufficient?
Amber, thanks for the lesson. :)
ReplyDeleteCaraboska, glad you chimed in on this topic since you inspired the post.
Enjoyed learning from you both! Interesting stuff! :)
This was very interesting!
ReplyDelete