Communion Question

[QuiltAngel]

Confess, I can see you really what this young man to have his membership now. You have asked why he has to take the class and many here have explained it to you. You don't have to like it, but this is the way it is at that church and one needs to accept it.

You said he has had 4 months of class already. Who is teaching this class?

 

[djbcrawford]

But he understands and took a long time to learn the Lutheran faith before deciding to become a member. If the pastor would examine him then he would know that he understands the faith and does not simply "memorize". I am pretty shocked that when a person takes the time to memorize and learn the catechism, they are then discriminated against in this way.

The classes are set up to teach the unlearned so that they will be able to take the sacrament worthily as well as learn what the church believes, they are not to be used to block those who know, understand and desire the Lord's Supper and have learned what the church believes. Those few who are advanced in such understanding should not be treated like a simpleton.

Coming from a church where the table is open to anyone who professes faith in Jesus Christ, I am unfamiliar with the rules around the Lutheran denomination.

However, is discrimination not treating one person differently from someone else. It appears from the original post that the pastor is merely asking him to follow the same rules that everyone else has to follow. If he changed the rules for him, would he not be discriminating against everyone else who had to followed the rules. Perhaps the rules are there to show patience, dedication and humility, rather than just knowledge and understanding.

 

[Confess]

You see, what I just don't get is that if he says that the Lord's Supper is to be taken "deadly seriously", then why would he refuse to interview this person before coming to this judgement?

This is upsetting because in all appearances this person is under the minor ban without just cause.

For a pastor to assume you are not qualified to receive the sacrament is an abuse of his call. We do not give the sacraments based on jumping threw hoops, rather the Bible says that reception is based on our confession.

The church set up these classes for those who do not know or share our confession.

This person does not wish to stop taking the classes, but does acknowledge the inconsistancy and abuse in this practice.

To make confirmation a "hoop" one must go threw in order to receive communion is an abuse no matter what age you are.

Making it a requirement discourages parents from teaching their children at home, it discourages adults from learning at home and puts everything on the shoulders of the pastor to be the gate-keeper who keeps the door closed even when the person in question understands and desires to be interviewed.

Our Confessions do not require "X" amount of classes in order to receive the sacrament. It requires a confession of faith and an understanding of the Lord's Prayer, the sacraments and creed found in the catechism.

For a pastor to refuse to hear a man's confession of faith is an abuse.

 

[Confess]

I never stated anything about not wanting him to take the classes or wanting him to become a member immediately. I only stated that anyone who shares our confession of faith and is refused to be listened to which ends up with communion being withheld is being abused.

Our confessions do not teach that it is proper for a pastor to refuse to hear the confession of another person's faith and thereby refuse him the sacrament.

 

[Jim47]

You see, what I just don't get is that if he says that the Lord's Supper is to be taken "deadly seriously", then why would he refuse to interview this person before coming to this judgement?

This is upsetting because in all appearances this person is under the minor ban without just cause.

For a pastor to assume you are not qualified to receive the sacrament is an abuse of his call. We do not give the sacraments based on jumping threw hoops, rather the Bible says that reception is based on our confession.

The church set up these classes for those who do not know or share our confession.

This person does not wish to stop taking the classes, but does acknowledge the inconsistancy and abuse in this practice.

To make confirmation a "hoop" one must go threw in order to receive communion is an abuse no matter what age you are.

Making it a requirement discourages parents from teaching their children at home, it discourages adults from learning at home and puts everything on the shoulders of the pastor to be the gate-keeper who keeps the door closed even when the person in question understands and desires to be interviewed.

Our Confessions do not require "X" amount of classes in order to receive the sacrament. It requires a confession of faith and an understanding of the Lord's Prayer, the sacraments and creed found in the catechism.

For a pastor to refuse to hear a man's confession of faith is an abuse.

The problem is that until folks go completely through the classes they don't fully understand what they are confessing to. We have found this true in our adult bible class. It is important that they have a thourough understanding.

 

[Confess]

That would be true except that the reason why our church has classes is to instruct those who do not know the confessions so that they may learn them and be in unity with the rest of the congregation in the faith.

When a person comes to the pastor asking to be examined and is refused, then he is being discriminated against. The pastor says that just because he memorized, then he has no understanding. But that is not a correct analysis since the pastor has refused to hear his confession.

 

[Confess]

Jim,
That again is an assumption.

You cannot assume that classes = understanding. The classes are not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works where the Word is.

I have personally examined this person and I have known him all his life. I know that this person knows and understands more then all of the people who will be joining the congregation in May.

An assumption that we know a man's heart (understanding his faith) outside his confession is a sin.

 

[Jim47]

That would be true except that the reason why our church has classes is to instruct those who do not know the confessions so that they may learn them and be in unity with the rest of the congregation in the faith.

When a person comes to the pastor asking to be examined and is refused, then he is being discriminated against. The pastor says that just because he memorized, then he has no understanding. But that is not a correct analysis since the pastor has refused to hear his confession.

Hmm, if you are talking about learning the confessions as in the BoC that is a lot to ask of new member classes. In fact I haven't read them all. We are studing the Lutheran confessions in bible class. To me there is nothing more important then scripture, and of course having a good understanding of it, as in setting in church and bible classes for years.

But still I have a hard time believing that a Lutheran would insist on completition of the classes for anything but an honorable reason.

 

[LilLamb219]

As I heard it from another pastor on another board, the Lord's Supper isn't an emergency type of meal. The young man can rely on his baptism and look forward to the day when he can sit at the table with his fellow communicant members of the congregation. Finishing up the classes isn't a punishment.

I might have missed it someplace, but how old is this young man and did he receive communion at any other church yet?

 

[DaRev]

But he understands and took a long time to learn the Lutheran faith before deciding to become a member. If the pastor would examine him then he would know that he understands the faith and does not simply "memorize". I am pretty shocked that when a person takes the time to memorize and learn the catechism, they are then discriminated against in this way.

The classes are set up to teach the unlearned so that they will be able to take the sacrament worthily as well as learn what the church believes, they are not to be used to block those who know, understand and desire the Lord's Supper and have learned what the church believes. Those few who are advanced in such understanding should not be treated like a simpleton.

Again, it has to do with communicant membership.

The ELCA teaches from the same Catechism as does the LCMS, but we don't just accept them into membership because they have studied the Catechism. In fact, there are several church bodies that teach from Luther's Small Catechsim, including some UCC churches. There's a little more involved than just "knowing the Small Catechism."

It's not discrimination, and I am offended by such a remark. It is the pastors duty as the steward of the mysteries to do what he has to in order to assure that those whom he communes are indeed in fellowship with our altar.

In my parish, I will base the individuals instruction on their knowledge and prior experience. Folks coming in from the ELCA might not need as much instruction as someone from a Methodist or Catholic or Baptist background. But some instruction is necessary and required. Pastors will set their own criteria many times as to what instruction is necessary in the church.

I actually commend this pastor for sticking to his calling.

 

[DaRev]

I didn't know the LCMS allowed women to hold offices in the church

Man made offices can be held by anyone. Treasurer, secretary, financial secretary, Sunday School chair, etc.
But any office that holds authority over the ministry, or any office that has oversight of the ministry are to be held by men only. Our congregation president, vice president, and elders must be men since these offices either are directly involved with some aspect of the ministry (elders) or have oversight of some aspect of the ministry (the Pres and VP sit in positions over the Board of Elders).

 

[Jim47]

Man made offices can be held by anyone. Treasurer, secretary, financial secretary, Sunday School chair, etc.
But any office that holds authority over the ministry, or any office that has oversight of the ministry are to be held by men only. Our congregation president, vice president, and elders must be men since these offices either are directly involved with some aspect of the ministry (elders) or have oversight of some aspect of the ministry (the Pres and VP sit in positions over the Board of Elders).

Thanks for the explaination but if they vote at council meetings they are holding sway over men simply by voting.

 

[DaSeminarian]

Jim,
That again is an assumption.

You cannot assume that classes = understanding. The classes are not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works where the Word is.

I have personally examined this person and I have known him all his life. I know that this person knows and understands more then all of the people who will be joining the congregation in May.

An assumption that we know a man's heart (understanding his faith) outside his confession is a sin.

Confess,

You are correct in that we can not know a man's heart, but we are told that taking the sacrament when we are not understanding or agreeing with the confession of faith at the altar that we could be taking the sacrament to our judgment. Regardless of how much they think they know.

If you are his pastor and you think he has the knowledge and understanding of Christ's real presence in, with and under the bread and wine then by all means commune him, but otherwise I would do as DaRev says and make him go through the catechism classes.

 

[DaRev]

Thanks for the explaination but if they vote at council meetings they are holding sway over men simply by voting.

Not really, because issues of the ministry are the call of the pastor and the elders. We don't need council approval for such issues.

The women on the council were the ones who balked at our changing of the service time, but it is clearly an issue of ministry and under the authority of the pastor and elders, so they had no say in the matter. If such things are placed before the council or voters assembly, it is usually out of courtesy or to gain a consensus on a matter, but such issues are not binding outside the authority of the pastor and elders.

 

[Jim47]

Not really, because issues of the ministry are the call of the pastor and the elders. We don't need council approval for such issues.

The women on the council were the ones who balked at our changing of the service time, but it is clearly an issue of ministry and under the authority of the pastor and elders, so they had no say in the matter. If such things are placed before the council or voters assembly, it is usually out of courtesy or to gain a consensus on a matter, but such issues are not binding outside the authority of the pastor and elders.

I see, that makes sence

 

[DaRev]

If you are his pastor and you think he has the knowledge and understanding of Christ's real presence in, with and under the bread and wine then by all means commune him, but otherwise I would do as DaRev says and make him go through the catechism classes.

Again, it's a little more involved than just understanding the Real Presence. It involves doctrinal agreement and fellowship at the altar. Like I said before, the ELCA teaches out of the same catechism, but they are not in fellowship with our altar. Those who come to the LCMS from the ELCA are required to be instructed just as if they came from anywhere else. The content of their instruction may be altered, but instruction in the fellowship of the LCMS is necessary.

 

[porterross]

Jim,
That again is an assumption.

You cannot assume that classes = understanding. The classes are not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works where the Word is.

I have personally examined this person and I have known him all his life. I know that this person knows and understands more then all of the people who will be joining the congregation in May.

An assumption that we know a man's heart (understanding his faith) outside his confession is a sin.

Those are the requirements of the LCMS, though, and they apply to everyone or they should.

When I returned to my home church, the church where I was confirmed, I too had to attend catechism refresher courses before regaining my membership. This was never a request by my pastor, but a requirement. I fully accepted and welcomed it. The more we learn, the more we come to understand how little we know.

What's wrong with respecting and honoring the pastor's wishes? He is responsible for his flock, after all.

 

[Confess]

Hmm, if you are talking about learning the confessions as in the BoC that is a lot to ask of new member classes. In fact I haven't read them all. We are studing the Lutheran confessions in bible class. To me there is nothing more important then scripture, and of course having a good understanding of it, as in setting in church and bible classes for years.

But still I have a hard time believing that a Lutheran would insist on completition of the classes for anything but an honorable reason.

Jim,
I am talking about our confession of faith as well as what we learn from the catechism.

 

[Confess]

As I heard it from another pastor on another board, the Lord's Supper isn't an emergency type of meal. The young man can rely on his baptism and look forward to the day when he can sit at the table with his fellow communicant members of the congregation. Finishing up the classes isn't a punishment.

I might have missed it someplace, but how old is this young man and did he receive communion at any other church yet?

Yes, I realize this. While this is true, we also should never refuse someone the sacrament who desires it and will not take it to their harm. To refuse one the sacrament for no good reason does more harm then good to the person's faith.

 

[Confess]

Again, it has to do with communicant membership.

The ELCA teaches from the same Catechism as does the LCMS, but we don't just accept them into membership because they have studied the Catechism. In fact, there are several church bodies that teach from Luther's Small Catechsim, including some UCC churches. There's a little more involved than just "knowing the Small Catechism."

It's not discrimination, and I am offended by such a remark. It is the pastors duty as the steward of the mysteries to do what he has to in order to assure that those whom he communes are indeed in fellowship with our altar.

In my parish, I will base the individuals instruction on their knowledge and prior experience. Folks coming in from the ELCA might not need as much instruction as someone from a Methodist or Catholic or Baptist background. But some instruction is necessary and required. Pastors will set their own criteria many times as to what instruction is necessary in the church.

I actually commend this pastor for sticking to his calling.

To me I am offended that a pastor would refuse to examine a person who requests it. It is an abuse of power. It tells me a lot about a pastor who would reject to hear a man's confession of faith. It is not Christian.