Closed communion

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
Apen, you don't need to argue anything woth me, I understand the Catholic point of view and I BELIEVE IN THE REAL PRESENCE but while it is often a bone of contention between Catholics and protestants it actually need not be.

I believe in the real presence and yet there are members of my church congregation that don't. The 39 articles sees it as a spiritual presence rather than physical or just a symbol, but belief in the real presence is older than the 39 articles and I beleive that the presence of Christ in the Eucharist; BODY, BLOOD, SOUL AND DIVINITY is scriptural and right, it being the accepted norm prior to the reformation. For Anglicans it is too hard to only recieve communion in a church you are in agreemtn with because of the many different theological perspectives within the chrch, but I am glad to see people with different theological perpectives receving the sacrament and putting those theological differences aside with all reverance to the body and blood of Christ, wether it be present or not.

As I said before I'm not looking for an argument and I don't want to invite any Catholic bashing.
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.- 1 Cor 11:29-30

Many of the Corinthians were weak, sickly, and dead... And why was that? It was because they were not taking the Lord's communion appropriately. I was at a local Charismatic church when they announced that communion was available in some side room. I guess you were suppose to go there and help yourself to communion in a paper cup and bread laid out on the side. I didn't even go in the room. Though I am not Catholic I do respect their rituals on communion. Holy communion is something that had better be administered in the correct ritual. As you drink of the wine your mind needs to be on the blood of Jesus and as you eat of the bread your mind needs to be on the life he lived. So I am in support of closed communion as this is something very Holy in Christianity. I will take communion in a church if it is administered correctly. As I believe worship to the Holy Mother and saints as idolatry I wouldn't expect a Catholic church to administer communion to me as I am not in agreement with the church doctrine.
 

Selene

New Member
Apr 12, 2010
2,073
94
0
In my house
Christians who do not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist are not committing idoltry. They interpreted what Jesus said in the Scripture when He commanded to "do this in memory of me." They do it in remembrance of Christ. But for Catholics, it is much more than a remembrance. It is truely a communion to be one with God. Christ desired to be one with mankind and He did by becoming man. He became incarnated as a man so that He shared in our humanity. Christ also wanted man to be one with Him. So, when we drink His blood, the blood of Christ flows in our veins with our blood. We become one with Him not only in the spiritual sense, but also in the physical sense.
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Christians who do not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist are not committing idoltry. They interpreted what Jesus said in the Scripture when He commanded to "do this in memory of me." They do it in remembrance of Christ. But for Catholics, it is much more than a remembrance. It is truely a communion to be one with God. Christ desired to be one with mankind and He did by becoming man. He became incarnated as a man so that He shared in our humanity. Christ also wanted man to be one with Him. So, when we drink His blood, the blood of Christ flows in our veins with our blood. We become one with Him not only in the spiritual sense, but also in the physical sense.

Selene... Nobody does Eucharist like the Catholics... If the Catholic church is superior to the other churches it is in the rituals surrounding Easter, Eucharist, and Christmas.

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.- John 14:6

I personally pray to the Father in Jesus name. I also like the Methodist doctrine. But to tell the truth I can find good in all the churches.
 

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
I can agree with most things the RCC say's but all that nonsense about ecclesial communities makes my blood boil. It'sa stept backwarsd and if the RCC say's you ahve to be Catholic or go to hell then I'll take my cahnces. (I'm probably headed there anyway)
 

Selene

New Member
Apr 12, 2010
2,073
94
0
In my house
I can agree with most things the RCC say's but all that nonsense about ecclesial communities makes my blood boil. It'sa stept backwarsd and if the RCC say's you ahve to be Catholic or go to hell then I'll take my cahnces. (I'm probably headed there anyway)


Hi Templar,

Yes, I'm aware of how our Protestant brothers feel when the Pope refer to them as "ecclesial communities." Hey....we Catholics have been called worse names. In fact, we've been called the "whore of Babylon" and "idol worshippers" and all because of those statues in our Church!!!! :D
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I personally welcome Catholics to this board. If you feel God wants you in a Catholic church I have no issues with that.

1. Ephesus - Apostolic - Scripture still before us!.
2. Smyrna - Martyr - 10 days = 10 general Roman persecutions.
3. Pergomos - Orthodox
4. Thyatira - Catholic
5. Sardis - Protestant
6. Philadelphia - Methodist / Pentecostal - Saved / Sanctified / Filled with the Holy Ghost!
7. Laodicea - Materialistic / Charistmatic / Independent

There is only one group of people that I know of that is hard on the Catholics, and that is the Sardisians... But hey! They are hard on we Pentecostals too! As many years as I have attended Philadelphia / Laodicean churches I have never the first time heard a message against the Catholic church or any other church for that matter. In Pentecostal circles we have such a hard time keeping our feet inside the spiritual temple (keeping the true light of the baptism burning) we simply don't have time to put down other denominations. In searching the Guam church directory I would say you have a pleasant variety of churches there on the island.

One of the reasons why I like it here on ChristianityBoard.com is that there is a reasonable acceptance of denominations, and I applaud Hammerstone in trying to enforce this. In which we should have a love one another here on earth as we are destined to spend eternity with another.
 

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
Sorry, I reckon we've gone off topic a bit. I'm really interested to here opinions accross the board on this issue and I have nothing but respect for the RCC's position on closed communion but I also see the open communion as a great way bringing about greater cohesion between denominations and it is a good way of focussing on Christian unity, since we all have great reverance for the sacrament, despite our differing tehological standpoints.

Selene, I mean't no slight against the RCC but what the Pope said about "Ecclisial communities" is a bone of contention for certain churches that do RIGHTLY claim Aposdtallic succession. It is a real stumbling block for unity and I think the way the Pope is poaching our members is not right either.
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi Templar,

Yes, I'm aware of how our Protestant brothers feel when the Pope refer to them as "ecclesial communities."

Selene... I only consider elements of the Sardisean church age protestant. I do not feel that term applies to any of the other of the seven church's that I have listed earlier.
 

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
Hi Rockytopva!
I can see that theya re the churches inrevelation but how do you know that they correspond to modern day chruches? Did you draw this up yourself if not where have you got it from. I am intrigued by it and I'm unsure as to why Methodists aren't with the other Protestants and why Cathlic and orthodox are separate and there is no mention of Anglian or Lutheran, presumably they come udner Protetant,
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi Rockytopva!
I can see that theya re the churches inrevelation but how do you know that they correspond to modern day chruches? Did you draw this up yourself if not where have you got it from. I am intrigued by it and I'm unsure as to why Methodists aren't with the other Protestants and why Cathlic and orthodox are separate and there is no mention of Anglian or Lutheran, presumably they come udner Protetant,

Dear Sir:

Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old. - Matthew 13:52

I love the study of history, my dad once studied to be a Catholic priest, I was brought up Baptist, found the Spirit of God in a Pentecostal church, and take mild interest in the Charismatic / Independent church such as we have with Joel Osteen and Kenneth Copeland. I find in each of these groups of Christians both treasures and problems. I ran upon a William Branham in my studies who mentioned the churches as seven church ages, and it was like the lights came on. But poor William Branham! Like John Calvin he took his thinking to excessive extremes, even thinking that he was the 'angel' to the Laodicean church age. So Branhamites believe that their fearless leader is the angel of the Laodicean church age. In which I think that his initial vision as good, he got caught up in pride, and ended up like Jimmy Swaggert in which the ego ended up destroying what was initially good.

I have did a video on this. I have changed it several times since being on this board. Your input is valuable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7rTb4BJQsg

Hi Rockytopva!
I can see that theya re the churches inrevelation but how do you know that they correspond to modern day chruches? Did you draw this up yourself if not where have you got it from. I am intrigued by it and I'm unsure as to why Methodists aren't with the other Protestants and why Cathlic and orthodox are separate and there is no mention of Anglian or Lutheran, presumably they come udner Protetant,


Orthodox and Catholics are different. Remember that the Catholic church allowed Constantinople to fall to the Ottomans.

I would classify Anglican and Lutheran as protestants.

Methodist... True Methodism is a series of methods... Justification / Salvation / Sanctification / Witness of the Spirit

Laodicea - As this is the present church age its effects are spilling over into the church as a whole. It is an amazing thing to pass by protestant churches these days and find the words "Modern day worship at 10:00 AM"

As we are off the topic of closed communion you may want to start another thread.
 

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
But Methodists are jsut Anglican offshoots, the original Methodists were part tof the Church of England back when the Wesleys were alive, after that Methodists went their own way believing the Church of England to be corrupt. Admittedly it was corrupt at the time
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But Methodists are jsut Anglican offshoots, the original Methodists were part tof the Church of England back when the Wesleys were alive, after that Methodists went their own way believing the Church of England to be corrupt. Admittedly it was corrupt at the time

Unfortunately Methodism have lost the fires of awakening and spirituality and are little different these days from the Anglicans.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No offense rocktopva, but doesn't your theory end up confining churches and people into a fairly small box? It seems like the theory might be sacrificing freedom for safety or understanding if it is taken too far.....
 

rockytopva

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Dec 31, 2010
5,160
2,362
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No offense rocktopva, but doesn't your theory end up confining churches and people into a fairly small box? It seems like theory might be sacrificing freedom for safety or understanding if it is taken too far.....

As we are out of the scope of "Closed communion" I will start this in another thread.

Edit - I have started this thread in the debate forum.
 

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
yes, by all means I'd like to see another thread on these 7 chruches of Revelations.

But going back to Communion! Should it be given to children. Is the Catholic practice of first communion at 7 too early, is 12-14 (confirmation age) a better time?

Can children udnerstand the Eucharist? Do we need a full udnerstanding of it in order to recieve it ordo we grow through recieving it?
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Christ gave of himself freely for all of humanity. How could one get hurt by partaking in communion? I see no reason other than an attempt to create envy to close a communion. Christianity would fair best by listening to its teachers 1 Cor 1 : 10
If we are zealous for anything let us be zealous for unity and inclusion. As we allow for division amongst fellow Christians we allow room for the evil one to advance on our children. To me division by denomination is as silly as dividing by race or gender. Most all division is by reason of holding on to tradition.
BTW Where does scripture support the True Presence? Are we not ourselves the tabernacle and temples housing the Living God?
 

Templar81

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
854
17
0
UK
Noq Justaname!

You asked howc an communion be harmful?

I've already cited the referance in 1 Corinthians 11:17-33
You see when we go up to recieve, the eucharist, regardless of what we believe about it, we are entering a very special, close communion with God. If we come forward in penitance and faith, with the udnerstanding that what we are doing is obeying Christ's command ten we will recieve God's blessing and be filled with the Holy Spirit.

But should we take it flippantly, not realising what we are doing or even when we get into aroutine, the we will not recieve the benefits. Paul tells us that in these circumstances we recieve it to our doom and that those who were believers, that did not aprtake properly were injured and died as a result.

"This is why so many of you are weak and why so many of you sleep."

To restrict people from this is an act of love, not a way of controlling people or a way of excluding people.

When I was a child you had to not only understand the Eucahrist to recieve it but you had to be confirmed. As a result you weren't taught about it until you were being prepard for confirmation and when asked, "why can't I take?" we were told"because you don't udnerstand it." back then I think we were wrong, we could have had a programme for preparing kids for their first communion like we do now. We have become more inlusive in that way but we should not give the communion to people who are clearly not used to receving it.
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Noq Justaname!

You asked howc an communion be harmful?

I've already cited the referance in 1 Corinthians 11:17-33
You see when we go up to recieve, the eucharist, regardless of what we believe about it, we are entering a very special, close communion with God. If we come forward in penitance and faith, with the udnerstanding that what we are doing is obeying Christ's command ten we will recieve God's blessing and be filled with the Holy Spirit.

But should we take it flippantly, not realising what we are doing or even when we get into aroutine, the we will not recieve the benefits. Paul tells us that in these circumstances we recieve it to our doom and that those who were believers, that did not aprtake properly were injured and died as a result.

"This is why so many of you are weak and why so many of you sleep."

To restrict people from this is an act of love, not a way of controlling people or a way of excluding people.

When I was a child you had to not only understand the Eucahrist to recieve it but you had to be confirmed. As a result you weren't taught about it until you were being prepard for confirmation and when asked, "why can't I take?" we were told"because you don't udnerstand it." back then I think we were wrong, we could have had a programme for preparing kids for their first communion like we do now. We have become more inlusive in that way but we should not give the communion to people who are clearly not used to receving it.

Never in scripture does it say we need to take the eucharist to receive God's blessings or the Holy Spirit. Upon our faith the Holy Spirt is deposited into our bodies (temples). That deposit is given to us from Jesus Christ not some man in robes. No man can give us God's blessings either, we can pray on that behalf, but that is it. So many have been sleeping from the practices of the church, we are finally realizing from reading the bible what it is to be Christian.
 

Butch5

Butch5
Oct 24, 2009
1,146
32
48
62
Homer Ga.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgmIcm-o2oY

I'm interested to see what people think about closed communion. Is it right or wrong or is it neither? Should it be challenged?

My opinion is that I can udnerstand both sides of the argument as to wether communion should be open or closed and I'm not sure, but I do think they should know what they are doing.

So what do you guys think of this video?

The video is wrong on multiple levels. Firstly, he says the practice of closed communion goes back to the early church fathers, and that you should only have communion with those with whom you agree. What he doesn't tell you is that the early church had a universal belief. They did not have denominations, if you were a Christian then you were a part of the church. If you left Ephesus and went to Corinth, you simply got a letter from the bishop at Ephesus before you left showing that you were a Christian, and presented it to the bishop at Corinth when you arrived and you could partake of communion. The video suggests barring communion among Christians based on theological issues, this was "NOT" a practice of the early church. What this does is force division in the church which in my opinion is a sin. Paul rebuked the Corinthians for having divisions and When Jesus prayed for believers in John 17, the one thing He prayer for was that His followers would be one.

The video also brings up the issue of harm. This is taken out of context. It seems to me he doesn't understand what Paul is saying. He speaks of giving the communion and the recipient getting a blessing or being cursed. Jesus didn't teach that. Firstly, Paul is speaking to believers, so this issue doesn't even concern unbelievers. So, why is this man in the video concerned about the recipient being cursed. I wonder if he is intimately informed on the lives of those to whom he gives the communion. What Paul was speaking of in 1 Corinthians 11, is the issue of the divisions among them (which this video is promoting) and their conduct. They were coming to the communion meal and were abusing it. Some were coming with this big elaborate feast while others, such as the poor barely had anything. Paul is trying to bring unity to this church and he admonishes them to eat at home, not to bring this big feast when there are other who have nothing. That is the abuse that Paul is speaking of. As I said, Jesus' prayer was for unity and this church was not unified. Imagine how the poor felt at the communion. They come in and have practically nothing and they see the wealthy with this big feast and celebration, knowing that they cannot partake of it. This certainly would foster division among the members.

There is also the issue of the "Real Presence" that the video speaks of. The early church did believe in the "Real Presence", however, their communion was not closed to protect this understanding, it is simply something they believed. If you didn't believe that you weren't barred from communion. He says that if one doesn't believe in the "Real Presence" they are not welcome at his altar. Where did Jesus ever preach that one must believe in the "Real Presence"? Where did Peter, Paul, John, James, or any of the other writers of the New Testament ever preach that one must believe in the "Real Presence"? Did any on them ever preach about what Christians are to beleive regarding the communion? Jesus simply said "do this in rememberance of me", He didn't give any instructions on how often to do, how to do it, where to do it, what we must believe when we do it. Nothing, just " do this in rememberance of me"

You see, it is this kind of thinking that causes the divisions we have in the church today. Men creating their own doctrines and dividing Christ's church. The man in the video suggested that if he had communion with a Baptist he would be condoning the Baptist doctrine or if he had communion with a Roman Catholic he would be condoning the Catholic doctrine. Well, the communion at Jesus time was a meal, Let's apply this line of thinking to Jesus. I wonder if the man in the video would agree with the Pharisees, that if Jesus ate with sinners that he would be condoning their sin.You see, Jesus had communion with those who were siiners.

No, as Christians we should be doing things to bring the chruch together not to divide it. I can fellowship and have communion with a Protestant or Catholic or Eastern Orthodox because we are brothers in Christ. We may not agree on some things and we may be wrong,but we are Christian brothers. All of the denominations in he church today have basically rendered it ineffective. The world looks at the church and see all of this division and infighting and says why would I want to be a part of that? We tell them you need Jesus, and they say you guys can't even agree among yourselves what it means to have Jesus yet you are telling me I need Jesus. Some say you need to be baptized, some say you don't, some say you can lose salvation, some say you can't, some say you can only have communion with those who agree with your theology, some say you can't. How in the world is a lost world going to understand Chrsitianity if those who purport to be Chrsitians can't even agree?

No, we need to do away with all of this division and start a process of reconciliation. The American church needs to rid itself of "PRIDE" and seek the truth of God's word, we need to be willing to admit we could be wrong, rid ourselves of our pet doctrines, and seek to come to a true understnading of what the Scriptures really say. Remember, Jesus prayed that we would be one, what are we going to say when we face Him?

Let me finish by saying that communion is "Only" for believers, so the only ones that should be barred from communion are those who are not believers.