Question about communion

[SeekerOfChrist94]

I had a question about communion. At the Lutheran church I visited, only those who were confirmed were allowed to receive communion. Is it like this in all Lutheran churches, or just certain ones? I believe the one I visited was LCMS. And how does one become confirmed?

 

[Tangible]

Yes, this is the case in almost all LCMS churches. The normal way for adults to be confirmed is to attend a series of classes in which the doctrines of the Lutheran church are briefly covered, and at the end you will have an opportunity to publicly affirm these doctrines and be confirmed.

You just need to have a chat with the pastor at the church you attended to get started.

 

[Erth]

How old is this custom of basically denying the non-confirmed communion? I have to wonder if it started as an influence from Baptist churches, in which a person must be old enough to understand the faith and say yes to be baptized. I see a similarity between the two practices, since baptism and (first) communion are closely connected things.

 

[LilLamb219]

It's not about those being confirmed but about those who agree with the Real Presence in, with and under the bread and wine. Communion isn't just about me. In Communion we receive the Lord's body and blood but not everyone believes this.

Those who are confirmed in a LCMS church have affirmed their belief publicly and agree with Lutheran teachings which is why the confirmed are admitted to the Lord's Table.

 

[DaRev]

How old is this custom of basically denying the non-confirmed communion? I have to wonder if it started as an influence from Baptist churches, in which a person must be old enough to understand the faith and say yes to be baptized. I see a similarity between the two practices, since baptism and (first) communion are closely connected things.

This practice is Biblical based upon the teachings of the Sacrament found in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11. It is not at all related to the Baptist misunderstanding of Baptism. Baptism does not have any Biblical conditions attached to it, such as an age of understanding. The Lord's Supper on the other hand does require the recipient to understand what they are receiving in order to receive it to their benefit. While it is not possible for one to sin by being baptized, one can indeed commit a sin by receiving the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner. In the LCMS we take the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and who can worthily receive it very seriously. We do not want someone to receive it to their spiritual harm, so we make sure that those who receive are able to do so worthily in order to receive the spiritual benefits of the sacrament and not commit a sin by receiving in an unworthy or unprepared state.

 

[Erth]

This practice is Biblical based upon the teachings of the Sacrament found in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11. It is not at all related to the Baptist misunderstanding of Baptism. Baptism does not have any Biblical conditions attached to it, such as an age of understanding. The Lord's Supper on the other hand does require the recipient to understand what they are receiving in order to receive it to their benefit. While it is not possible for one to sin by being baptized, one can indeed commit a sin by receiving the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner. In the LCMS we take the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and who can worthily receive it very seriously. We do not want someone to receive it to their spiritual harm, so we make sure that those who receive are able to do so worthily in order to receive the spiritual benefits of the sacrament and not commit a sin by receiving in an unworthy or unprepared state.

I guess that the more traditional churches that do not have any problems with children receiving the eucharist are not prone to thinking that children will easily commit a sin at that.

 

[DaRev]

I guess that the more traditional churches that do not have any problems with children receiving the eucharist are not prone to thinking that children will easily commit a sin at that.

That depends on what you mean by "children". Many churches instruct younger children in the basics of the faith and the Biblical teaching of the Lord's Supper in order for them to worthily receive it. If they have not been instructed they should not be receiving it.

If you are referring to churches that practice "open communion" (basically giving it to anyone who walks up to the rail), they don't teach or believe in the Biblical teaching of the Sacrament.

 

[Erth]

That depends on what you mean by "children". Many churches instruct younger children in the basics of the faith and the Biblical teaching of the Lord's Supper in order for them to worthily receive it. If they have not been instructed they should not be receiving it.

If you are referring to churches that practice "open communion" (basically giving it to anyone who walks up to the rail), they don't teach or believe in the Biblical teaching of the Sacrament.

I am very far from talking about open communion. I said nothing whatsoever about that and nothing that could be interpreted that way either for that matter. I was talking about what the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church do; graciously giving out the eucharist to infants. And there is nothing wrong with it, in my opinion. On the contrary, I think it is right.

Out of curiosity I wanted to know if anyone here knows how old is the Lutheran practice of denying infants communion. If you do not know, you do not need to reply to my question. I might find out later, or not. As I said: I was just curious.

 

[alexnbethmom]

I am very far from talking about open communion. I said nothing whatsoever about that and nothing that could be interpreted that way either for that matter. I was talking about what the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church do; graciously giving out the eucharist to infants. And there is nothing wrong with it, in my opinion. On the contrary, I think it is right.

Out of curiosity I wanted to know if anyone here knows how old is the Lutheran practice of denying infants communion. If you do not know, you do not need to reply to my question. I might find out later, or not. As I said: I was just curious.

he was clarifying to make sure he understood what you were asking, and there is no reason for you to be snotty. the Catholic Church does not give communion to infants, so you are wrong there. i would imagine that the Lutheran practice of "denying" communion to infants is as old as Lutheranism itself. to give communion to someone who has not been properly instructed and does not subscribe to the same beliefs that we believe would be biblically wrong and detrimental.

 

[redphantom]

The LMCS church I used to work at asked non-members to speak to an usher if they were interested in receiving communion. Since I only attended service a few times I never discussed with them what was needed. I don't know if I would have filled the prerequisites since I was ELCA at the time.

I must admit I'm not sure how being confirmed will guarantee one's belief in the true presence of of Christ or the worthiness of the person since many kids attend confirmation because Mom and Dad make them rather than because they want to be there.

In both the ELCA and the NALC and I think the LCMC (not to be confused with the LCMS) They allow open communion where anyone who believes in the real presence of Christ is allowed to receive communion and it is up to the individual to decide what they believe and whether they are worthy. They also have classes for children to help them understand. The age varies from church to church but it seems many have class for fifth graders although some might also wait for confirmation.

I do question whether an age should be placed on the start of communion as children develop differently and some kids might be able to understand much younger than 5th grade and others might need to wait a few extra years. But I suppose this will help avoid those parents who mistakenly think their child is a prodigy and push then into things they are not ready for and have no business doing.

 

[Moses Medina]

You are right that the Roman Catholic church does not commune infants. Here is a small quote from this website Who Can Receive Communion? | Catholic Answers

"Catholics and Communion:

The Church sets out specific guidelines regarding how we should prepare ourselves to receive the Lord’s body and blood in Communion. To receive Communion worthily, you must be in a state of grace, have made a good confession since your last mortal sin, believe in transubstantiation, observe the Eucharistic fast, and, finally, not be under an ecclesiastical censure such as excommunication.

First, you must be in a state of grace. "Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup" (1 Cor. 11:27–28). This is an absolute requirement which can never be dispensed. To receive the Eucharist without sanctifying grace in your soul profanes the Eucharist in the most grievous manner.

A mortal sin is any sin whose matter is grave and which has been committed willfully and with knowledge of its seriousness. Grave matter includes, but is not limited to, murder, receiving or participating in an abortion, homosexual acts, having sexual intercourse outside of marriage or in an invalid marriage, and deliberately engaging in impure thoughts (Matt. 5:28–29). Scripture contains lists of mortal sins (for example, 1 Cor. 6:9–10 and Gal. 5:19–21). For further information on what constitutes a mortal sin, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Out of habit and out of fear of what those around them will think if they do not receive Communion, some Catholics, in a state of mortal sin, choose to go forward and offend God rather than stay in the pew while others receive the Eucharist. The Church’s ancient teaching on this particular matter is expressed in the Didache, an early Christian document written around A.D. 70, which states: "Whosoever is holy [i.e., in a state of sanctifying grace], let him approach. Whosoever is not, let him repent" (Didache 10).

Second, you must have been to confession since your last mortal sin. The Didache witnesses to this practice of the early Church. "But first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one" (Didache 14).

The 1983 Code of Canon Law indicates that the same requirement applies today. "A person who is conscious of a grave sin is not to . . . receive the body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession unless a grave reason is present and there is no opportunity of confessing; in this case the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible" (CIC 916)."

It goes on and on but I think this covers it well.

 

[Cappadocious]

How old is this custom of basically denying the non-confirmed communion? I have to wonder if it started as an influence from Baptist churches

I was talking about what the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church do; graciously giving out the eucharist to infants.

The Orthodox Church communes infants because the Orthodox Church confirms infants.

 

[DaRev]

I am very far from talking about open communion. I said nothing whatsoever about that and nothing that could be interpreted that way either for that matter.

Churches that commune those who have not been instructed in the faith in order to receive the Sacrament worthily can indeed be interpreted as practicing "open communion".

I was talking about what the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church do; graciously giving out the eucharist to infants. And there is nothing wrong with it, in my opinion. On the contrary, I think it is right.

Then I suggest you read the Bible concerning the teaching of the Lord's Supper. You may rely on your own opinion, but the Lutheran Church relies on God's word on the matter. Besides, the Roman Catholic Church does not commune infants either. Giving the Sacrament to those who cannot receive in a worthy manner is in no way gracious. It's sinful and irresponsible.

Out of curiosity I wanted to know if anyone here knows how old is the Lutheran practice of denying infants communion. If you do not know, you do not need to reply to my question. I might find out later, or not. As I said: I was just curious.

As a visitor to the Lutheran forum you should display a little more respect. You'll catch more flies with honey....

To answer your question, since close communion is a Biblical doctrine, and the Confessional Lutheran Church follows Scripture alone in terms of our teaching and practice, the Lutheran Church has never communed infants. We don't refer to it as "denying infants communion". It's protecting those who cannot receive worthily from committing a sin and doing spiritual harm to themselves.

 

[Aibrean]

How old is this custom of basically denying the non-confirmed communion? I have to wonder if it started as an influence from Baptist churches, in which a person must be old enough to understand the faith and say yes to be baptized. I see a similarity between the two practices, since baptism and (first) communion are closely connected things.

The baptists a) use grape juice b) don't believe it's anything more than a symbol (like baptism) and c) allow any Christian to partake.

Completely different.

 

[Tangible]

As far as the Orthodox are concerned, I know that they commune an infant at the time it is baptized and chrismated. I don't know if they continue to commune them as they grow past infancy to toddler, small child, etc.

 

[Cappadocious]

As far as the Orthodox are concerned, I know that they commune an infant at the time it is baptized and chrismated. I don't know if they continue to commune them as they grow past infancy to toddler, small child, etc.

Chrismation is the eastern equivalent of Confirmation. Chrismation is laying on of hands for the reception of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In the west this was done typically by the bishop, which is why, as I understand it, in later periods it was postponed, because the bishops had large dioceses and would have to travel around for it; in the East, the Chrism (oil) sacramentally conveys the authority of the bishop and can be administered by a presbyter.

There is no period of age in which a growing child is not communed. When they become intellectually aware enough to go to confession (no set age), they start going to confession. And keep communing.

 

[tz620q]

The baptists a) use grape juice b) don't believe it's anything more than a symbol (like baptism) and c) allow any Christian to partake.

Completely different.

It dawned on me a while back that since the Baptists believe it is just grape juice, that God graciously allows it to remain just grape juice for them. You get what you pray for!

 

[Lizabth]

The baptists a) use grape juice b) don't believe it's anything more than a symbol (like baptism) and c) allow any Christian to partake.

Completely different.

Hmm..the Baptists I've spent time with would disagree with your take, Aib.

They certainly don't let "any Christian" partake. One must have been fully immersed in a believer's baptism.

And they would take issue with 'just a symbol'. Rather, they would say that they were obeying Jesus, word for word, as they "do this" in remembrance" of Him. To the, it is a solemn memorial, not to be taken lightly.

Here's a portion of their(the church I attended) confession of faith(New Hampshire):
14. Of Baptism and the Lord's Supper

e believe that Christian Baptism is the immersion in water of a believer,72 into the name of the Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost;73 to show forth, in a solemn and beautiful emblem, our faith in the crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, with its effect in our death to sin and resurrection to a new life;74 that it is prerequisite to the privileges of a Church relation; and to the Lord's Supper,75 in which the members of the Church, by the sacred use of bread and wine, are to commemorate together the dying love of Christ;76 preceded always by solemn self-examination.77"

 

[Lizabth]

"It dawned on me a while back that since the Baptists believe it is just grape juice, that God graciously allows it to remain just grape juice for them."

I think you'd find that many Baptists would feel that juice vs wine is a small matter. They 'remember' what the Lord has done for them, which is actually quite meaningful to our Baptist brethren, and the important aspect of their Supper.

Making fun of them is a touch uncharitable. Man, it really saddens me to see so many Lutherans with this belittling view of their brothers and sisters in Christ. It's really, really unfortunate.

 

[LilLamb219]

But it's okay that they deny the presence of Christ, right?

"It dawned on me a while back that since the Baptists believe it is just grape juice, that God graciously allows it to remain just grape juice for them."

I think you'd find that many Baptists would feel that juice vs wine is a small matter. They 'remember' what the Lord has done for them, which is actually quite meaningful to our Baptist brethren, and the important aspect of their Supper.

Making fun of them is a touch uncharitable. Man, it really saddens me to see so many Lutherans with this belittling view of their brothers and sisters in Christ. It's really, really unfortunate.