Is Close "Close-Communion" Justified?
By O. L. Rives
Professor of Religious Education
Carson-Newman College (TN)THE above title needs a word of explanation. "Communion" refers to the Lord's Supper. The second "close" refers to the practice among Baptists, as well as others, of limiting the participation in the Supper to those who have been Scripturally baptized and therefore members of churches of the same faith and order. The first "close" refers to the belief held by some Baptists, including the writer, that the Lord's Supper is best obsrved (because nearest to New Testament teachings) when ONLY the members of a given, local church "participate;" and that the individual member should participate ONLY in the church where membership is held. Can the view covered by this first "close" in the above title be justified? It seems that it can, and for the following reasons.
First, the Lord's Supper was given to a local church and not to the individuals as such that constituted this church. The same can be said about baptism, the other of the two ordinances. In the case of baptism many, if not most, Baptists have accepted and observed the ordinance with consistency and fidelity for a long time. For it is clearly seen and fully understood that one is received and baptized into a given church (local and visible) rather than into a denomination or grouping of churches. This church may or may not, given a letter of recomendation as a basis of transfer to another sister church. When such a letter is given and received and the individual's membership is transferred, he/she is a member of another local and visible church (the point being that one is not a member of more than one church at a given time). By vote of the church, in which membership is being sought, the person is accepted (or rejected, as the case may be). The first thing required, as the initial ordinance, is baptism at the hands of the CHURCH. The church administers this ordinance in obedience to Christ's commands and it does so as a function of the church, because baptism was given to the church as a church.
Does not the proper observance of the Lord's Supper follow the same line of reasoning? Is not this other ordinance also given to the church (local and visible) as a church? If so, how can this church administer the Lord's Supper to those who are not its members, even though they are members of sister churches? It should be remarked that our prevailing Baptist practice at least partially recognizes this principle: when, for instance, we do not observe the Lord's Supper at meetings of associations or conventions nor do we propose taking the elements of the Supper to a sick or shut-in member. Why not be consistent and logical and go all the way, and insist upon the observancee being by ONLY the actual members of the given church?
Second, the observance of the Lord's Supper by only the actual members of the church will (everything else being equal) make for a deeper spiritual experience upon the part of those participating. This seems to be what Paul had partially in mind in his classic statement in I Corinthians 11:17-30. Among other things, he positively says that it is impossible to take the Lord's supper even in a given church if there is strife and division among the members. They might meet and go through the form of observance but there would be no reality connected with it if division existed. There must be the "agreeing" among them that Jesus had mentioned (Matthew 18:19) where the Greek word used for "agree" suggests our English word "symphony." The proper observance of the Lord's Supper rests upon the basis of harmony and unanimity. Where these are present, participation in the Lord's Supper becomes a deep and moving experience; spiritual in nature because hearts are centered upon the Lord Jesus Christ, remembering His sacrifice and looking for his return.
If one participates with a church of which one is not a member, how can there be a maximum of harmony and unanimity on the part of all concerned? At best, there is a certain amount of ignorance of spiritual conditions and lack of warmth; due, it may be, to strangeness. The visitor from a sister church might conceiveably be out of fellowship with the church where membership is held, without the knowledge of the church being visited.
======================== [From a tract republished by the J.H. Spencer Historical Society of Kentucky. Transcribed and formatted by Jim Duvall.
More Baptist Biographies
Baptist History Homepage