Receiving communion before baptism

PaladinValer said:

They cannot receive if they have not yet accepted by the gift of grace in the form of faith. If a person is not in communion with Christ, then one cannot participate in the works of that Mystical Body.

A hand cannot do anything if it isn't attached. No part can exist on its own; it must be alive by being a part of the Body.

Furthermore, it isn't repentant to willingly commit sacrilege; it is a black, violent sin. If one is repentant, they would endeavor to not sin like that again, and the proof of that, in this case, would to get baptized. Otherwise, there is no true repentance because there is no visible sign of it.

Oh, and don't worry about my exchange with the other poster: I will NOT allow it to disrupt your thread and I hope my good faith has been shown. I would advise you, if I may, to report his posts if they continue to go out of topic, because you do have that happy power and it should be used if it continues.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Just so we're clear- I did not suggest willingly committing sacrilege because you intend to be baptised later. I asked If that judgment of past sacrilege is forgiven you in baptism.

I have since been baptised, but only recently realised what I was doing was considered sin.

To be honest I've not read his replies In depth so far. I appreciate your respect in regards to the thread.

GratiaCorpusChristi said:

None of these verses demonstrate that there ever ways any such thing as "Spirit baptism." The baptism of the Spirit is still water baptism, but it objectively gives the Spirit, in contrast to John's baptism, which did not.

That is how every single ancient Christian we know of interpreted the verse, how baptism was actually used and applied in the ancient church, and the only way to understand both the witness of John in the gospels and the witness of Paul and Peter in the epistles. Anything else is flat out refusing to actually take the text seriously. When it says God actually does something in baptism, it means God actually does something in baptism.

Click to expand...

Explain this then.

Acts 10:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: 15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

Or how one can receive the Holy Spirit before water baptism?

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

And why did Paul say this in how one is saved?

1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God....21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

I understand that you used historical references of early church fathers, but the ones that count and reproves are the NT.

Wisdom comes from the Lord and it is He that seeks to be our Good Shepherd. May we prove all things with His help.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

So please reconsider that stance on water baptism because scripture testifies that Jesus is able to save new believers without it as I do believe that Paul is talking about the baptism with the Holy Spirit in Galatians 3rd chapter and not water baptism at all.

If we receive the Spirit by water baptism as a commandment, then we do so by the work of the law as something a man has to do to obtain it, and thus would be misled that there are other sacraments necessary for him to do in order for God to His work in him which is not true.

Galatians 3:1O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? 4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. 5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham......

14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

That promise of the Spirit is received by faith as concluded below.

26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

So it is by promise by faith in Jesus Christ: not by water baptism.

Since there is no necessity for water baptism for salvation, then there is no necessity to be water baptized before having communion. There is no danger to having communion if a believer had not been water baptized yet.

godenver1 said:

Just so we're clear- I did not suggest willingly committing sacrilege because you intend to be baptised later. I asked If that judgment of past sacrilege is forgiven you in baptism.

Click to expand...

Ah; my apologies for my misunderstanding.

ALL sins, original and temporal, are forgiven at Holy Baptism.

I have since been baptised, but only recently realised what I was doing was considered sin.

Click to expand...

That's proof that God the Holy Spirit is at work in you. That's actually a GOOD THING.

If you feel uncomfortable going to Holy Communion because of it, I would heartily recommend meeting with your pastor and confess; that's part of a priest/pastor's job and to also give spiritual guidance and counsel. Believe me when I say your heart will be lightened and freer.

To be honest I've not read his replies In depth so far. I appreciate your respect in regards to the thread.

Click to expand...

No problem. I know this is an issue important to you, so that needs to be respected.

The Apostle John is arguably the most blatantly sacramental of all the new Testament authors. In 1 John 5 we come to this passage - "There are three that bear record (on earth): the spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one." One is baptized into Christ, one is sealed with the gift of the Holy Spirit, and one partakes of the Eucharist. The three are distinct, yet they are intrinsically inseparable.

I was given a lot of confusing messages as a child. I was told not to take communion because I had not been baptised, but was told not to get baptised because it was not really necessary. The truth was that my parents took a quaker-like position towards the sacraments, believing that they are spiritual. When I became an adult, I was still not baptised, but went along with the flow and took communion. It took years for me to get everything straightened out, beginning with getting baptised.

Sara Miles received the Eucharist several times before her baptism. Nothing happened except she became a Christian.

I've gone to a church that communed the unbaptized and never found it offensive to do so. This particular parish went on to baptize her, and it was one of the most beautiful baptisms I have ever witnessed.

I do think baptism is the normal rite of initiation, however.

FireDragon76 said:

Sara Miles received the Eucharist several times before her baptism. Nothing happened except she became a Christian.

Click to expand...

God's grace is quite amazing, isn't it?

I've gone to a church that communed the unbaptized and never found it offensive to do so. This particular parish went on to baptize her, and it was one of the most beautiful baptisms I have ever witnessed.

Click to expand...

Baptisms can be beautiful or quite plain, but what matters is the Word of God in and with the water. Communing the unbaptized, or communing those who have not been properly instructed and examined, is reckless and unloving given the clear scripture texts on the matter. Or perhaps scripture is not recognized as God's word in this church.

I do think baptism is the normal rite of initiation, however.

Click to expand...

It does matter what a particular church confesses regarding Holy Communion. Churches that do not confess the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament do not have the Sacrament anyway - just ask them - and therefore only receive the same blessings and/or curses associated with any other snack of juice and crackers, namely, a small contribution to their daily caloric intake.

Tangible... Jesus only shows up when a church believes he shows up? I'm not sure I buy that, but maybe you can explain further. Augustine tended to believe that sacraments were valid regardless of the orthodoxy of a religious group, however the validity was illicit and so people were potentially eating and drinking to their condemnation. That's how I tend to view it, people that teach memorialism are ultimately harming themselves, but mostly this harm comes through as a deprivation of the grace of faith in the sacrament.

Christians who confess that the words of institution do not mean what they say they mean get no more than what they say they do. Mormons may baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but since their doctrine renders God not as one triune entity but as two gods and a force, their baptism is not valid. Likewise, churches that only offer a symbolic, memorial meal only have that to offer. They do not have the true body and blood in their meal.

What if the denomination teaches one thing but the minister intends another?

Good question ... we want to avoid Donatism. I'd say that the confession of the church body would probably be the deciding factor. If there was a Lutheran pastor that denied RP contrary to the position of his congregation and synod, as long as he spoke the words of institution I'd say you would have the RP. If there was a Baptist pastor who believed in RP he would not have RP because of the confession of his church body.

It's not the beliefs of the pastor or the communicant that makes RP happen, it's the word of God rightly confessed in the Sacraments rightly administered.

It almost sounds like you are saying if a church denies the real presence, they are sub-Christian and have cut themselves off from that sacramental grace, that the RP is a core Christian belief?

And this is what happens when year-old threads are resurrected.

Tangible is right, and the ridiculous Straw Man towards his reply is outrageous.